Bookie v. Tote.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 638, 16 December 1932, Page 6

Bookie v. Tote.

To the Editor. Dear Sir, —The sporting public, including owners and trainers, are showing, by the* increasing patronage of bookmakers and their decreasing support of the tote and the gates, that they prefer the bookmakers. * 1 officials know that ow'ners and trainers prefer the bookmakers, a fact which was proved years ago, when a clause was added to the racing laws prohibiting owners, trainers and jockeys from betting with bookmakers. The officials know that law is defied by the owners and others. The small stakes would not worry owners so much if they were able to support their horses at remunerative, straight-out odds previous to and during a race meeting. In numerous cases the tote is no good to them at all. Most bookmakers started following horseracing as punters. Many, deciding to enter the ring, succeeded, and will succeed, while others failed. Bookmakers are more fond of a good horse than many other sports I have met. Bookmakers enjoy watching a race and like to see a fairly run race. I have known many cases of one bookmaker betting another quite a large sum during the race, and in many cases while finishing up the straight. I have, at various times, known the ring to become more excited over the finish of a race (not for their own result) than any same number of punters could be regarding shouting and hat waving. In substantiation of mv statement that bookmakers are as good sports as anv in the land, I mention the fact that even in New Zealand the bookmakers who have openly owned and raced horses, therebyassisting the sport, are numerous. So it is all over the world. Mr Sol Green, once the biggest bookie in Australia, later the owner of champions and a huge racing farm, is probably the greatest all-round racing man Australia has ever known—if not in the whole world—l am, etc., CURIOUS.