view raw text
ANSWERS TO QUERIES The sum due was 200 200N N G Y Kansas City Mo Sticli bets were draws See reply to J T B BT T F Cincinnati O The bet on Helmet lost The entry should have been backed backedJ J C Chicago The show bet on Personal was a draw there being no separate show price priceJack Jack S Toronto Ont If when the bet was made it was specifically made on Waterbury in the sixth race it was a draw If no race was named action was on the first race in which the horse started and it won wonFred Fred H Chicago 1 Disturbance by Chllicothe Marie C was a noted steeplechaser of twenty live years back 2 The return due backers of Sea Wolf after his dead heat with Bad News was 115 for each dollar invested investedWm Wm B Cincinnati O In that race there were two Henrys Henry of Sheimaiiiere and Henry O To inaccuracy in telegraphing results it was printed that the tirst named hail started whereas it was Henry of Shennamcre that was scratched and Henry O that started and ran unplaced unplacedJ J T I Chicago In coupling the horses it was overlooked that the bolting was under eastern rules where horses of different ownership but trained by the same trainer are bet on separately Since there was no coupled entry at the track it is plain enough that bets made on such an entry away from the track would be void whether it won or lost lostJ J A Jr and B W S Cincinnati O An entry is one or more horses but in betting it is almost invariably the case that when a bettor bucks an entry he means a coupled entry of two or more horses Bets should be so clearly umlerstiuxl that there would lie no ground for controversy after the event and the bookmaker is under as much obliga ¬ tion to sew that there is a definite understanding as is the bettor Where the intention of the backer is plain as in the case submitted it should be the determining factor when controversy does arise and the bet should be paid as claimed by the backer
