Not the first time this has happened at Louisiana Downs

[DaTruth]

A decade ago, a patron at Louisiana Downs hit a $100,000 Pick 6 at Hollywood. When he went to cash, he was informed by the track that his ticket was not valid because the bet had not been transmitted to the Hollywood pool.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/...WS01/706140336

Bettor stumped when winning ticket isn't cashed
June 14, 2007

By Roy Lang III
rflang@gannett.com

Betting the horses is hard enough. But when you win and still lose, it can become a bit distressing. Just ask Lee Maxie.

The Shreveporter thought he recently struck gold at Harrah's Louisiana Downs. His $34 Daily Double (bet on Golden Gate from the Bossier City race track) was to return a $1,251.20 payoff.


Unfortunately, when he went to the window to collect the loot, the teller had some bad news. At first, he was told the computers were temporarily down. Only when he returned to the track the following day did he discover he would not get his winnings — at least not immediately.

Louisiana Downs has one rule about wagering — "check your tickets." Maxie did that. He had the right horses, the right race, the right track, the right everything — except the amount of money coming back to him.

Louisiana Downs refunded the cost of all his bets for the race — a whopping $96.

"If I don't get my money, I hope they arrest me," said Maxie, who recalls machines going down at Louisiana Downs after the second race at Golden Gate had run May 23.

Amtote, the company in charge of mutuels at Louisiana Downs, had a communications breakdown with its hub in Ohio. Several tracks throughout the country were affected for a "couple of hours," according to Mark Midland, Louisiana Downs' vice president, who first learned of the incident Wednesday. He planned to call Maxie at home that day.

"We're in the business of taking bets," said Midland, who does not know if any announcement about the technical issue was made. "We want to honor it. As far as this individual, we have not received a formal complaint. We'll look into it and we'll be happy to pay him off."

Maxie unknowingly talked to a representative of Amtote, not Louisiana Downs.

Charles A. Gardiner III, executive director of the Louisiana Racing Commission, spoke with Louisiana Downs officials about Maxie's problems. There is a law that protects race tracks in the instance wagers do not reach the wagering pools.

"That's a goodwill thing that should be done more. But, ultimately, if (Louisiana Downs) wants to be hard about it — and there was a breakdown in communication — it would be hard to get him a remedy to get his money," Gardiner said. "I think as a PR move, it's a good thing to pay the bettor off.

"There is never a situation where everybody is happy. We're looking into it on his behalf," Gardiner said. "We're going to get some answers and we're going to get back to him. That was my promise. We'll try to get him a remedy."

All bettors are entitled to refunds — win or lose — if they purchased tickets affected by the breakdown.

"I might be broke and I'm not perfect, but my reputation is good around this town. Ask any of the people at the track," Maxie said

[Kasept]

That was the day of the HOL P6 I believe because there was a well-publicized oitage at the Ohio hub that affected Lone Star Park and that region.. Gary West told us about it on the show...

When Travis Stone (LA Downs track announcer) visits here later, maybe he'll have a comment or more info, but I imagine Harrah's will make good...

[AeWingnut]

so, is that where the $90k came from that was found in William Jefferson's freezer?

I wonder if an outage would allow losing tickets to get a refund. If the bet isn't technically made then you should technically still have your money. Somehow I think the bettor is the only one that gets screwed, again.

if I'm on the jury he would be awarded triple damages. They won't accidentally lose the hub again.

and if were to go postal

not guilty by reason of temporary sanity

[Left Bank]

They better pay him.If they don't,SUE THE BASTARDS!!!!

I'll be shocked if they pay him.

[Travis Stone]

The LSRC rules state that we were not required to pay him, but we did. He was paid this afternoon. The story unfairly portrays the situation, but in the end, it was made right.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by Kasept

That was the day of the HOL P6 I believe because there was a well-publicized oitage at the Ohio hub that affected Lone Star Park and that region.. Gary West told us about it on the show...

When Travis Stone (LA Downs track announcer) visits here later, maybe he'll have a comment or more info, but I imagine Harrah's will make good...

If you are betting through a wagering account, it would be easy for the track to refund the money, regardless of the outcome of the bet, once the track became aware that bets may not have been transmitted. But none of these incidents come to light until someone attempts to cash a winning ticket.

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The LSRC rules state that we were not required to pay him, but we did. He was paid this afternoon. The story unfairly portrays the situation, but in the end, it was made right.

If the rules do not require you to pay him, then that's wrong. It is basically impossible for player's to know all the rules governing wagering. I wonder how many rules like this are in effect unknown to horseplayers around the country.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The LSRC rules state that we were not required to pay him, but we did. He was paid this afternoon. The story unfairly portrays the situation, but in the end, it was made right.

If they didnt refund all the bets made during the outage, they didnt make it right.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by golfer

If the rules do not require you to pay him, then that's wrong. It is basically impossible for player's to know all the rules governing wagering. I wonder how many rules like this are in effect unknown to horseplayers around the country.

That particular La rule was enacted after LaD didn't pay a huge winning pick 6ticket when the bet wasn't transmitted to the Hollywood Park pools.

[golfer]

If the "right" thing to do is to pay the guy, then why does the rule say they don't have to? Is it unreasonable for a bettor to asssume when he walks away from a window or betting machine with a written record of a wager, that he has placed a bet? I sure hope not.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by golfer

If the "right" thing to do is to pay the guy, then why does the rule say they don't have to? Is it unreasonable for a bettor to asssume when he walks away from a window or betting machine with a written record of a wager, that he has placed a bet? I sure hope not.

What amazes me is all the legislation to protect the "HOUSE", but the lowlybettor is left out in the cold. It seems only fair if the "HOUSE" accepts a bet and the patron has proof of the acceptance, someone should be responsible for paying the winners. Im sure the "HOUSE" keeps the proceds of the losing tickets. If the current gambling establishments arent willing to accept these terms, Im sure others will line up to make application. How Travis can feel that Harrahs did the right thing only reflects that he works for them. The only thing that harrahs need to do was to verify the ticket wasnt a forgery. Harrahs only paid after the bad pub and not because the wanted to do the right thing. They probably took in more money for the affected races than the paid on the one ticket they ended up paying . They still probably made a profit on the affected races.

[Travis Stone]

Announcements are made, refunds are rewarded.

Bets not getting into host track pools is actually more common than most of us think.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Announcements are made, refunds are rewarded.

Bets not getting into host track pools is actually more common than most of us think.

The more you explain the more Harrahs LAD and other tracks look as if they are looking for an excuse. If these things happen often, looks like something needs to be done to straighten it out. The tracks surly arent inocent bystanders?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by jpops757

What amazes me is all the legislation to protect the "HOUSE", but the lowlybettor is left out in the cold. It seems only fair if the "HOUSE" accepts a bet and the patron has proof of the acceptance, someone should be responsible for paying the winners. Im sure the "HOUSE" keeps the proceds of the losing tickets. If the current gambling establishments arent willing to accept these terms, Im sure others will line up to make application. How Travis can feel that Harrahs did the right thing only reflects that he works for them. The only thing that harrahs need to do was to verify the ticket wasnt a forgery. Harrahs only paid after the bad pub and not because the wanted to do the right thing. They probably took in more money for the affected races than the paid on the one ticket they ended up paying . They still probably made a profit on the affected races.

It says plain as day in the article that the Lousiana Downs VP found out about it on Wednesday and then the guy got paid on Thursday, that is pretty quick. There has to be some sort of due-diligence in the situation and this seems more like an overzealous reporter looking to stir the pot in a locale with very little news. Whether LaD paid him the next day or the next week, the fact of the matter is they paid him and they cannot concern themselves with any other effected patrons until they come forward.

NT

[SuffolkGirl]

How on earth would one know if the funds transferred to the host pool? As a bettor, I am responsible for picking my horses, calling the bet, paying for the bet, checking my ticket to insur accuracy and then hopefully cashing a winning ticket. Why is it now my problem to determine whether or not funds were allocated properly once they were accepted from me? That is just absurd.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

It says plain as day in the article that the Lousiana Downs VP found out about it on Wednesday and then the guy got paid on Thursday, that is pretty quick. There has to be some sort of due-diligence in the situation and this seems more like an overzealous reporter looking to stir the pot in a locale with very little news. Whether LaD paid him the next day or the next week, the fact of the matter is they paid him and they cannot concern themselves with any other effected patrons until they come forward.

NT

Very good company line. Sounds like a reporter reporting the news. If this is a common occurance ,as Travis said, Ifeel that LaD should have a policy in force for such occurance. If they followed there policy it just proves they have no concern for doing the right thing. Just trying to deter the bettor from collecting a winner. It just proves my cynical way of looking at it. Legality and whats right have nothing in common.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by jpops757

If they followed there policy it just proves they have no concern for doing the right thing. Just trying to deter the bettor from collecting a winner.

You keep speaking as if they made no effort to return the money and in fact scoffed at the idea. The thing is, they did return the money. That has to carry some weight and I don't see how it's possible that they tried to deter the bettor from collecting a winner.

NT

[theiman]

Besides the winner being screwed, so was everyone who wagered on any race affected by the breakdown and lost.

Since none of the wagers went through, and it appears from the article there was no announcement made by La. Downs to "Hold All Tickets, WIN OR LOSE"
How does the track not have a responsibility to all of those who bet to refund their money? Uncashed tickets that were tossed or ripped up arent being paid out. Who benefits from that? I would gather there is some communication system to confirm a wager went through from a track to a hub, as their is a wager went through from a bettor to a clerk(in this case the betting ticket). As soon as there was a "breakdown" there should have been an announcement made and perhaps a message on tv screens of the problems.
Those who were at the track and are members of wager programs at the track might be in luck as they might be able to recap a wager made on the races in question.
This is why I always bring my losing tickets home, you never know!!

That day might have been a stoopers delight.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

You keep speaking as if they made no effort to return the money and in fact scoffed at the idea. The thing is, they did return the money. That has to carry some weight and I don't see how it's possible that they tried to deter the bettor from collecting a winner.

NT

Why didnt they imediately pay the wager. They tried to deter the bettor by refusing to pay when the ticket initally, hoping that the bettor would exeept the excuse. Kinda like a insurance policy that refuses to pay until they are backed into a corner. When did they offer to pay? After the ,so called over zealous reporter reporting the facts. Do you think anyone other than this guy with the winning ticket ever got refunded there money? If you do. I have the next Derby winner in my backyard and will sell him to you for 50 bucks.