view raw text
ANSWERS TO QUERIES. M. M., Chicago. E. lost. Perry, Nashville, Tenn. It was a loser. L. E. F., St. Louis. Mo. The parlay lost. J. W., St. Louis, Mo. It was a losing bet. J. D. F., Chicago. The !ct on Fireball lost. L. M. M.. Chicago. Your wager was a draw. B. W., St. Louis. Mo. It was a losing wager. Grover !., Chicago. You are entitled to a draw. Stanley, Kansas City, Mo. Will investigate and report In tills department. A. B. C, Chicago. The quotations were correct as printed in tills newspaper. J. B. S., .Toilet, 111. In view of the limit it seems you were settled with fairly. W. B., St. Louis, Mo. Your liet won as a straight bet on King Cole and was void as to Jack Lory. C. I.. Chicago. Your wager on Brother Frank to show was a draw. No separate show betting having been laid. T., Cleveland, O. The wager went on Major Dain-gerlield. The matter was fully explained in Dally Racing Form of December HO. Stone, Memphis, Tenn. It is clearly n matter be--tween yourself and the bookmaker. No horse of the name you say you spelt over the telephone was entered at Ingleside that day. J. G. G., St. Louis, Mo. The straight and place bets were separate propositions and the bettor certainly had winnings from Ills place bet to the extent of .80 to apply on the second bet. E. 0., St. Louis, Mo. The horses should have been coupled In the entries, but that does not alter the fact that separate wagers on Fireball lost. Had Fireball been scratched his backer would have been entitled to a draw regardless of whether Alencon won or lost. .
