
Bumper Royal Ascot payout reopens concerns about Tote betting into own pools
This was a brilliant advertisement for a bet that can be won without finding any of the six winners. But following a recent update to the Tote's website which offers more information about its Pool Guarantee Service (PGS) – a system by which the Tote itself places bets into its own pools – it also raised the interesting question of whether the operator took a share of the payout too.
And the answer, the Tote said on Monday, is no. It put 'in excess of £100k' into the Placepot pool that day and, like 99.9% of the other punters in the bet, it failed to draw (although it did, of course, take the standard 27% cut of the pool). As a result, there was a big uplift to the dividend for the punters who did find a winning line, of around £10k per unit.
'On Friday 20th June at Royal Ascot, the Tote guaranteed a Placepot of at least £400,000,' a spokesperson for the operator said on Monday.
'The final pool size was £479,524.80 with results across the six races leading to a dividend of £26,424.30 which was won by 18.15 units. The Tote held no winning units in that pool which meant all of the funds used by the Tote for seeding, amounting to in excess of £100,000 on that day, contributed to the dividends that were won by other customers. Without Pool Guarantee Service the total pool size pool would have been substantially less, with a corresponding reduction in the dividend to £16,383.80 instead of £26,424.30.'
The Tote, which was founded nearly a century ago to effectively allow punters to bet between themselves with no bookmaker involved, first started betting into its own pools during the Covid-19 pandemic, when there were no on-course punters for well over a year. The fact that the practice had continued once the racecourse crowds returned was first highlighted in this column in March 2022, while a study by a Tote customer which suggested the operator could be responsible for as much as 60% of some Placepot pools was sent to the Gambling Commission, which regulates gambling in the UK, in February. A month later, the Guardian reported an understanding that the Commission had launched a review of the Tote's activity.
The commission itself refuses to confirm or deny whether it is investigating an individual operator, so it is impossible to gauge whether the regulator played any role in the recent update to the Tote's website, which includes a statement that 'over time this exercise [PGS] typically leaves a net profit for the Tote, which is used to help promote the Tote business.'
The update also expanded on an earlier statement that PGS is designed 'to add layers of liquidity at predetermined times to make the pools deeper and more robust as they build,' by stating that 'the majority of seeding bets on multi-leg pools are placed four minutes before the scheduled off time of the first race'. It stated too that its system 'is pre-configured to contribute anything up to 50% of the estimated value of any Tote pool in which seeding takes place.'
The Tote remains robust in its defence of PGS. 'Over the last six years,' its statement on Monday added, 'we have transformed how the Tote operates creating a healthier and more sustainable ecosystem thanks to Pool Guarantee Service and initiatives such as the Tote's SP Guarantee and World Pool. We have done this by responding directly to feedback, with customers consistently stating they want bigger guaranteed pools. Pool Guarantee Service allows us to provide this service in-house without the reliance on third parties to provide any significant liquidity.'
Liquidity is all-important in pool betting, and it tends to flourish in jurisdictions where it has a monopoly on horse-race betting, which puts the UK Tote on the back foot from the off.
It is also the case that big syndicates using sophisticated computer models and algorithms to cream off the value in multi-leg bets are now a feature of pool betting systems around the world. In a sense, the Tote is simply doing what a syndicate would be doing if the operator was not doing it first.
But it is also some way from the popular idea of a strictly punter-to-punter betting product, in which the operator has no interest in the result. And while its activity in the Ascot Placepot on 20 June boosted the dividend by around £10k, the fact that PGS makes a net profit overall means that this is more than offset by reduced payouts to winners elsewhere, on other days and in other pools.
Pontefract 2.10 Sparkling Pink 2.40 Muhaajim 3.10 Royal Dress 3.40 Musical Touch 4.10 Analogical 4.40 Love Is The Law 5.10 Match Play
Lingfield 2.25 Penn Avenue (nap) 2.55 Monkmoor Pip (nb) 3.25 Captain Brett 3.55 Redditizio 4.25 Command The Stars 5.00 Amestris
Uttoxeter 6.00 Hope Rising 6.30 Isocrate 7.00 Ajp Kingdom 7.30 Wbee 8.00 Pescatorius 8.30 Turpin Gold 9.00 Sevarana
Brighton 6.12 Toussarok 6.42 Aeih 7.12 Kranjcar 7.42 Shady Bay 8.12 Lambournghini 8.42 Pietro
Many punters retain a deep, almost sentimental attachment to the Tote, which was famously founded by Sir Winston Churchill to return money to racing from on-course betting, and has been a fixture on the betting landscape for 97 years.
For many, there is a keen desire too for a competitive alternative to betting with bookmakers, not least as so many punters find their accounts closed or restricted if they show any sign of being an unprofitable customer for the layer.
Whether a Tote that regularly bets into its own pools and makes a net profit from its betting activity is a price worth paying for that alternative is a question for individual backers to decide.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
13 minutes ago
- BBC News
OpenAI and UK sign deal to use AI in public services
OpenAI, the firm behind ChatGPT, has signed a deal to use artificial intelligence to increase productivity in the UK's public services, the government has agreement signed by the firm and the science department could give OpenAI access to government data and see its software used in education, defence, security, and the justice Secretary Peter Kyle said that "AI will be fundamental in driving change" in the UK and "driving economic growth".The Labour government's eager adoption of AI has previously been criticised by campaigners, such as musicians' who oppose its unlicensed use of their music. The text of the memorandum of understanding says the UK and OpenAI will "improve understanding of capabilities and security risks, and to mitigate those risks".It also says that the UK and OpenAI may develop an "information sharing programme", adding that they will "develop safeguards that protect the public and uphold democratic values".OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman said the plan would "deliver prosperity for all"."AI is a core technology for nation building that will transform economies and deliver growth," he deal comes as the UK government looks for ways to improve the UK's stagnant economy, which is forecast to have grown at 0.1% to 0.2% for the April to June UK government has also made clear it is open to US AI investment, having struck similar deals with OpenAI's rivals Google and Anthropic earlier this said its OpenAI deal "could mean that world-changing AI tech is developed in the UK, driving discoveries that will deliver growth".Generative AI software like OpenAI's ChatGPT can produce text, images, videos, and music from prompts by technology does this based on data from books, photos, film footage, and songs, raising questions about potential copyright infringement or whether data has been used with technology has also come under fire for giving false information or bad advice based on prompts.


BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Blairs' discount designer clothes deal caused No 10 concern, files show
Ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair and his wife Cherie received tens of thousands of pounds in discounts on designer clothing while in Downing Street, documents July 2001 and December 2002, Mrs Blair bought clothes worth more than £75,000 – equivalent to £150,000 today – but paid just £31,000 for them, newly released papers from the National Archives Street officials were worried these benefits would have to be declared under a new ministerial code, which was then coming into effect, and advised the Blairs to repay thousands of is not clear from the papers if this happened. From fashion designer Nicole Farhi alone, Mrs Blair bought clothes worth nearly £21,000 for herself and the prime minister, paying just over £8, also had substantial discounts from Burberry, James Lakeland, Ungaro, Joseph, and Maria Grachvogel, amongst "wholesale" discounts had been negotiated by Carole Caplin, Mrs Blair's trainer and personal Tony, who was prime minister between 1997 and 2007, also benefited from a 25% discount from Paul Smith, famous for his freshly released documents reveal how the optics of the discounts and spending was a concern for Downing Street officials at the time."In terms of public perception," wrote No 10 private secretary Clare Sumner, "the amounts involved are quite large".Along with the cabinet secretary, she recommended that the Blairs should pay back part of the discount, though Cherie was entitled to divide her purchases into two, on the basis that half the clothes were required for her role as a "career woman".They would say the Blairs had "commercial terms" from the designers, which were usually a discount of about 10 or 15%.She suggested other options, including saying that Mrs Blair had the same treatment as other high profile individuals with a personal shopper, and that she needed the clothes for public engagements of her said Mrs Blair sometimes gave her outfits to charities or exhibitions after use: "So it is difficult to see how anyone could seriously allege she is acquiring a clear personal benefit out of your position as PM." According to the memo, the discounts had been in place for several years, and dated back to before Sir Tony was prime Tony himself scrawled "Speak to me" on the memo, dated 19 February 2003. Later that day, Mrs Blair spoke to Ms note to the cabinet secretary, dated 4 March 2003, says Mrs Blair agreed to speak to Paddy Campbell, Paul Smith and Nicole Farhi to "ask them to set out in writing their terms of trade, confirm that these terms are available to others (with personal shoppers or as individuals) and to provide an estimate of the numbers of people who bought their clothes in a similar way".She would also confirm that "confidentiality agreements" were in place with these intent was to "satisfy" Sir Andrew Turnbull, the cabinet secretary, that "no preferential treatment had been given".There is no mention of gifts of clothes discounts in the ministerial gift list in the file – which was published on 14 March behalf of the Blairs, the Tony Blair Institute said: " We have nothing to add to what has already been disclosed which shows that advice was sought and followed." As prime minister, Sir Tony received some extremely generous presents from famous people and world leaders.U2 lead singer Bono had given him a guitar – as had Bryan Berlusconi, the then Italian prime minister, offered multiple designer watches, including timepieces from Piaget, Corum, Jaeger-Coultre, and prime minister asked Ms Sumner to make the list "more boring" – so the published version did not include the type of watch, which can retail at many thousands of pounds wrote: "I have taken out details of individuals, removed the valuations for all items except those which have been purchased and minimised the descriptions of items."The concern over discounted clothes has similarities with criticism faced by Sir Keir Starmer and his wife. Last year he accepted more than £18,000 for spectacles and work clothing from the Labour peer Lord Alli, who also paid for some clothes for Sir Keir's wife Victoria worth just over £6,000.


Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
The wealth tax options Reeves could take to ease her fiscal bind
Faced with a challenging set of numbers, the chancellor is having to make difficult choices with political consequences. Tax rises and spending cuts are a hard sell. Now, some in her party are calling for a different approach: target the wealthy. Is there a way out of all of this for the chancellor? Economic growth is disappointing and spending pressures are mounting. The government was already examining ways to raise revenue when, earlier this month, Labour backbenchers forced the government to abandon welfare cuts and reinstate winter fuel payments - blowing a £6bn hole in the budget. The numbers are not adding up for Rachel Reeves, who is steadfastly committed to her fiscal rules. Short of more spending cuts, her only option is to raise taxes - taxes that are already at a generational high. For some in her party - including Lord Kinnock, the former Labour leader, the solution is simple: introduce a new tax. They say a flat wealth tax, targeting those with assets above £10m, could raise £12bn for the public purse. Yet, the government is reportedly reluctant to pursue such a path. It is not convinced that wealth taxes will work. The evidence base is shaky and the debate over the efficacy of these types of taxes has divided the economics community. 1:16 Why are we talking about wealth? Wealth taxes are in the headlines but calls for this type of reform have been growing for some time. Proponents of the change point to shifts in our economy that will be obvious to most people living in Britain: work does not pay in the way it used to. At the same time wealth inequality has risen. The stock of wealth - that is the total value of everything owned - is much larger than our income, that is the total amount of money earned in a year. That disparity has been growing, especially during that era of low interest rates after 2008 that fuelled asset prices, while wages stagnated. It means the average worker will have to work for more years to buy assets, say a house, for example. Left-wing politicians and economists argue that instead of putting more pressure on workers - marginal income tax rates are as high as 70% for some workers - the government should instead target some of this accumulated wealth in order to balance the books. 2:19 The Inheritocracy At the heart of it all is a very straightforward argument about fairness. Few will argue that there aren't problems with the way our economy is functioning: that it is unfair that young people are struggling to buy homes and raise families. Proponents of a wealth tax say that it would not only raise revenue but create a fairer tax system. They argue that the wealth distortions are creating a divided society, where people's outcomes are determined by their inheritances. The gap is large. A typical 50-year old born to the poorest 20% of parents in the UK is already worth just a quarter of what someone born to the richest 20% of parents is worth at that age. This is before they inherit anything when their parents die. A lot of money is passed on earlier; for example, people may have had help buying their first home. That gap widens when the inheritance is passed on. This is when inheritance tax, one of the existing wealth taxes we have in the UK, kicks in. However, its impact in addressing that imbalance is negligible. Most people don't meet the threshold to pay it. The government could bring more people into the tax but it is already a deeply unpopular policy. 1:51 Alternatives So what other options could they explore? Lord Kinnock recently suggested a new tax on the stock of wealth - one to two percent on assets over £10m. That could raise between £12bn and £24bn. When making the case for the tax, Lord Kinnock told Sky News: "That kind of levy does two things. One is to secure resources, which is very important in revenues. "But the second thing it does is to say to the country, 'we are the government of equity'. This is a country which is very substantially fed up with the fact that whatever happens in the world, whatever happens in the UK, the same interests come out on top unscathed all the time while everybody else is paying more for getting services." However, there is a lot of scepticism about some of these numbers. Wealthier people tend to be more mobile and adept at arranging their tax affairs. Determining the value of their assets can be a challenge. In Downing Street, the fear is that they will simply leave, rendering the policy a failure. Policymakers are already fretting that a recent crackdown on non-doms will do the same. Critics point to countries where wealth taxes have been tried and repealed. Proponents say we should learn from their mistakes and design something better. Some say the government could start by improving existing taxes, such as capital gains tax - which people pay when they sell a second property or shares, for example. The Labour government has already raised capital gains tax rates but bringing them in line with income tax could raise £12bn. Then there is the potential for National Insurance contributions on investment income - such as rent from property or dividends. Estimates suggest that could bring in another £11bn. This is nothing to sniff at for a chancellor who needs to find tens of billions of pounds in order to balance her books. By the same token, she is operating on such fine margins that she can't afford to get the calculation wrong. There is no easy way out of this fiscal bind for Rachel Reeves. Whether wealth taxes are the solution or not, hers is a government that has promised reform and creative thinking. The tax system would be a good place to start.