view raw text
ANSWERS TO QUERIES. E. J. T., St. Louis, Mo. Hot Springs. Ark., probably. .G. W. E., Chicago. To a place bet on Money Muss only. , F. J. S., Toronto, Out. The bet on Cousin Kate was a draw. R. V., Chicago. Chief Bush was 2 to 1 to show In race 59711. S. S., Chicago. Your parlay was void as to Retro-paw and is to be paid as a winner on the other three horses. W. A. A., Chicago. Your parlay won at the place odds "against Bob Ragon and Fireball and was void as to Cutter. v Cook, Chicago. Your straight bet on Retropaw lost; your show, bet was a draw because there was no sepcrate show betting. B. M., Chicago. The decision you inquired about N one that has frequently been printed In this newspaper. Your Graphite bet won and the other was a draw. F. B. Cincinnati, O., Penfield, Chicago and Others. That through inadvertance a newspaper falls to state that two or more horses in an entry list form a coupled entry does not alTect the fact. Backers of Retropaw singly lost In straight letting, and are entitled to draws in place and show betting, there havfiig iKen no separate place or show betting. This answers all queries concerning that race. M. J., Chicago. The reply to P. W. was based on a clear understanding of the case. The bet was a parlay, which calls for action on two or more races. Because it was a parlay it is obvious that when the Let was made the Intention was to back Harmakis to run second In the fourth race and Ruth W. to run second in the fifth race. Harmakis was scratched from the fourth race and the parlay was at once void as to htm. It then won as a single place bet on Ruth W. and should be paid accordingly.
