I was just going through my results for the day and noticed something strange about the 19:00 at Folk..I thought that betfair had made a mistake and paid me for both horses..but then subsequently found it was a dead heat?
Just how rare is a dead heat??
That was another first for me today, hope someone else was lucky too
regards
Peter
Folk 19:00 - dead Heat
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
IMO the course had an issue with the photo equipment as I agreed with the 1.01 backers (£108k matched) that the horse had got up.
When they showed the photo there was no reverse angle. ATR got Emily Jones on the case (
) and they came up with some rubbish that because they had finished stand side the reverse angle wasn't needed or didn't work. can't remember the exact wording but it was as clear as mud.
Had they used the reverse angle the near side would have been called the winner imo but without it they couldn't definitely call it the winner so just fudged the photo and used an extra thick line to hide the result and went for a DH as that was a catch all.
As for how often DH's happen I don't have clue. But this wasn't a DH in the true sense imo.
P.S. Made no difference to me financially.
When they showed the photo there was no reverse angle. ATR got Emily Jones on the case (
) and they came up with some rubbish that because they had finished stand side the reverse angle wasn't needed or didn't work. can't remember the exact wording but it was as clear as mud.Had they used the reverse angle the near side would have been called the winner imo but without it they couldn't definitely call it the winner so just fudged the photo and used an extra thick line to hide the result and went for a DH as that was a catch all.
As for how often DH's happen I don't have clue. But this wasn't a DH in the true sense imo.
P.S. Made no difference to me financially.
Ha ha thanks Andy; it's not quite an exact science is it?! 
Camera angles play a significant part of in running, not just at the finish line but in the run up to.
I expect a lot of money was lost/made on this particular race?
Would welcome any comments from anyone who has an inkling of how often this happens (just a rough idea will do; i.e. is it one a week, a month or year??)
Thanks
Peter
Camera angles play a significant part of in running, not just at the finish line but in the run up to.
I expect a lot of money was lost/made on this particular race?
Would welcome any comments from anyone who has an inkling of how often this happens (just a rough idea will do; i.e. is it one a week, a month or year??)
Thanks
Peter
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
The photo finish is done by a static fixed camera using a mirror on the far side as well to give the reverse photo. If you look at a finish line you can always see the mirror on the far side and the crowd is always kept away from the rail a little bit on the stands side.PeterLe wrote:Ha ha thanks Andy; it's not quite an exact science is it?!
Camera angles play a significant part of in running, not just at the finish line but in the run up to.
I expect a lot of money was lost/made on this particular race?
IMO there was some problem but the course wouldn't admit it - you should always have a reverse angle for the exact reasons of yesterday where a nearside horse blocks the view of the far side horse.
-
rubysglory
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:02 am
Just had two in 24 hours. The other in Belmont. Before that, they are so rare nowadays (if the cameras workPeterLe wrote:Just how rare is a dead heat??
Peter
), I can not remember.rg