BETTING IN BRITAIN

Taranaki Daily News, 29 September 1930, Page 9

BETTING IN BRITAIN

TOTALISATOR SYSTEM. REVENUE LESS THAN THOUGHT. Is the totalisator system of betting in Great Britain doomed to financial failure? the Daily Express asks. Racing experts who have made a close study of the results achieved by the Racecourse Betting Control Board predict that, new methods will have to be adopted to bring much more money into the pools if the totalisator is.to be made a success.

The totalisator has now been in operation for more than a year, and the receipts been far below the sanguine expectations of most of the advocates of totalisator betting. The sum total of all the bets that have been made through the machines amounts to no more than £2,200,00'0, and the gross revenue of the Betting Control Board (which deducts 6 per cent.) has, therefore, been only £132,000. Heavy expenses have to be met by the board out of revenue, A large staff has to be maintained. The cost of operating the machines is considerable, and great sums ifcve been required for capital outlay, which will eventually run int< millions.

Totalisator receipts are remarkably sma in face of the estimates of such authorities as Lord D’Abernon that the total volume of betting is as much as £200,000,000 a year. Sir Clement Hindley, chairman of the Betting Control Board, does not agree that the totalisator has been a failure. In an interview he said that he was by no means perturbed over the situation, and he expressed his confidence that it would not 'be very long before the- totalizator is paying its way and showing a satisfactory profit. ..Three serious.problems face the Board of Control and have been the subject of anxioirf consideration. They are:—(l) The enormous capital outlay required for totalisator machines, because there are so many racecourses scattered all over the country. (2) The small amount (6 per cent.) deducted from the pools—which is the lowest percentage on which the totalisator is operated in any part of the world. (3) How to attract to the totalisator a fair proportion of “away” betting, which greatly exceeds in volume the wagering that is done on the course. It is the opinion of many authorities that the Control Board will sooner or later, find it essential to seek powers to deduct a percentage greater than that which Is now taken from the pools.

Sir Clement Hindley will not commit himself on this point. “I cannot say if we shall have to do this,” he said. “It is too early to give a definite answer. We shall have to wait and see how we got on.” Sir Clement also is not prepared to say whether the board will offer greater inducements to attract the “away” betting money to the totalisator. This is generally considered to be the crux of the problem with which the board is faced.

No official figures are obtainable of the amount of “away” money which has found its way to the racecourse machines, but reliable estimates are that the total figure is not more ihan £350,C’OG—which represents no more than onequarter of 1 per cent, of this class of betting.