NORTH AND THE DOUBLE "TOTE."

NZ Truth, Issue 123, 26 October 1907, Page 4

NORTH AND THE DOUBLE " TOTE."

When the Rev. J. J. North and his fellow fanatics waited oii the Premier and members of the Ministry some ago to protest against the^gambling evil and urge upon the Government the desirability of abolishing the totaljsator, a great deal of capital was made out of the fact that m addition to the ordinary straight-out "tote," many clubs were running a double "tote." It is very evident from arguments put forth by the members of the deputation that they have only a very vague idea of what the double totalisator is, certainly they do not understand its working or they would .not have clamored for its abolition. There may be a couple of thousand out of "Truth's" 40,000 odd readers who don't understand the principle of the double machine, and for the sake of those two thousand we will descrrble it : It is simply a machine whereby you couple two horses (one m each of two v given races) to win. As the chances of picking two winners . are many times less than of picking one, so are the odds many times greater. That is all there is to it. Why this form of gambling should be worse than straight-out betting it is very difficult to see. North pointed out that the double machine was a most iniquitous form of gambling, other members of the deputation heartily endorsed his opinion, and the Premier admitted that the double betting system was bad. But a singular circumstance was that not one of them gave a solitary reason for his condemnation. They condemned the thing without trial or hearing. Possibly somebody, who knew as much as himself, told North that the double ■ machine was bad and that was good enough for North, and North's lead was good enough for the others to follow. When Sir Joseph admitted that they were right, he possibly knew just as much about it as they did and never gave the matter a serious thought . "Truth" has often seen Sir Joe at •Trentham,- but has never seen him battling his way up to the double "tote" window, so the possibilities are that the double doesn't trouble him' at all. Or again, it may 'bfc that the same Joseph is thoroughly well acquainted with the principles of the double machine and knows perfectly well that betting that way involves less outlay than betting straight out, Uut he wants to give the wolves a bone to keep them busy m the meantime, so he promises them the double machine to go on .with. * • * Just to point out to North and Co. that they are either insincere m their desire to put down gamldling or else- they knew absolutely nothing of what they were talking about when they clamored for the abolition of the double machine, "Truth" will draw attention to one or two facts m connection with this system of betting. In the first place, let "it be observed that that wealthy body the C.J.C. have abolished the double machine of their own accord. Why ? They abolished it because they found it to be too popular. The public investments were too big and too much money was locked up. The more money the double machine held the less was available for the straight-out machine. The C.J.C. don't want money locked up ; they want it put through the straight-out machine at 10 per cent, as many times as possible. The very fact of the C.J.C. (and other ciubs have followed suit) shutting down on their double "tote" is proof that the double machine decreases bettine;, instead of increasing it. In the straight-out machine the bettor is charged. 2s m the pound for every horse he backs. On the double machine he can back two horses for the same price. He certainly has less chance of winning, but his dividend is proportionately greater. And, , moreover, hrs money is locked up dur- ! ing the greater part of the day, so 1 ikat h© fctofiot go on gambling with

it until the second leg of the double has been run, perhaps the fifth or sixth race. But the minimising effect of the 1 double machine does not stop here. Whereas on - the straight-out machine there are hundreds of win-ning-ticket holders, there are only ten on the double. This means that hundreds of straight-out bettors are supplied with more cash for further investments, as against ten of the double to/sttors. It is a well-known fact that more money is put through the totalisator on a day when favorites win. The reason is palpable to anyone with common sense. The more people drawing dividends on one race the more can "afford to invest on the next. The more the money is distributed the greater the volume of gambling. But when rank outsiders get home the money is divided among a few, and of course the totalisator -business decreases accordingly. Now the double machine lays very long odds, and consequently when it pays out a very much smaller percentage of investors are there to receive than at the straight-out machine. The bulk of the money invested, therefore, goes into the pockets of a few, and the others have their betting operations curtailed. • . * * It was a knowledge of this fact that prompted the C.J.C. to close their dou-Wle event 'totalisator. The clubs want plenty of gambling and 10 per cent, of the investments. There is another point, too, that Mr North would do well to ponder over. That is the great popularity of the double machine. The public like this form of gambling, and as totalisator permits are granted to racing clubs to please the public, the public surely have a right to be considered. But m this particular, the C.J.C. and North are m accord ; both say, "Damn the public and its wants." The club wants more money, and therefore will force the public to bet m the . most extravagant way. North wants to stop the 'public's pleasures somehow, and at any cost. His troubles whether the double machine saves the public money or not, or whether its abolition will increase betting and swell the coffers of the clubs ! His only trouble is to stop something ; anything the citizens take delight m. It is the old. old story of the Puritan, who protested against bear-baiting not because it hurt the bear, but because it gave pleasure to the populace. * * * It is to be hoped < North and his followers will ponder over this, and when next they open out on the gambling evil they will make themselves acquainted with what they are talking about and not raise Cain over a riuestion they have nod thought out reasonably and logically. "Truth" contends that the abolition of the double machine means increased betting on the straight-out machine, and if this is not aggravating the gambling evil, what is ? Can North point out why it is more wicked, more immoral, or more wasteful, to back two horses^ with £l than it is to back two horses with £2 ?. Maybe it is, but this paper cannot see it and would like enlightenment on thp point. The only possible argument is that of the bawbees. You have less chance of winning a double than a single. This might appeal to North and Co. ; they are mighty careful of. the bawbees. But the argument is illogical. Outside the gamble the only loss is 2s m the pound, which the club charges. According to the^ law of averages, if a given number of people put a eiven amount of money into a tote Hind no charges were made, it would only be a matter of time when each would be able to withdraw his own money back. But if every investment cost 2s m the pound, then it would only be a matter of time when the machine would have the. lot. The only real loss, therefore,- is the 2s deducted- by the club. The bettor therefore saves 2s by investing £1 instead of £2. Taking it all'round, Nortb and Co. seem to have a very bad case. They are asking for the abolition of a system the result of which will be increased betting, increased profit to the clubs and increased business with the bookmakers.