G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 6 Non Members

New Handicapping System for the Trots

Harness & Greyhounds

Comments

  • RexRex    328 posts
    Thanks JJ - have written it down - dosen't mean I understand it as per the several comments after my enquiry. I really pity the poor punter and wonder what is going to happen to our sport now we rely on tote turnover after being steered away from croud attendance over many years.
  • MarkovinaMarkovina    1,083 posts
    Kane_26 said:

    Markovina said:

    After reading this thread - and the posters who have really analysed it - and factually shown the massive holes/unfairness of the new system - especially ones who race horses and want a level playing field

    I think it can be best summed up - by the elderly lady with her 2 white poodles who use to frequent the Five Ways TAB in Sydney - she said - "Im breaking thje golden rule tonight - im breaking the golden rule " - i said to her - whats that - she said " Im having a bet on the Red Hots "




    What are you on about???
    It was just light hearted way ( and actually true - because the lady  said it to me- i nearly fell over backwards laughing when she said it  ) alot of punters ( me not being one of them ) thought over decades  that the Trots wernt a level playing field - thus they wouldnt touch them - bet on them

    This new handicapping system - as outlined by posters - who have really evaluated it -it doesnt seem to be fair - simple as that

    Theve sacked -- or made redundant call it what you like - a long time handicapper who probably loved the industry - and they have brought in something - with plenty of holes in it

    aussiebattler likes this post.

  • savethegamesavethegame    1,373 posts
    JayJay said:

    Another area of concern is the effect it is having on Junior drivers....young Peterson was saying on Wenesday when we met with Richard Burt, that his opportunities have dried up, dropping from 13 to 15 drives a week to just 5, 3 of which were for his boss (Kristian Hawkins) and another for his Mum, so just one "outside" drive. Hopefully, an aberration as he is one of the leading junior lads and obviously we need a strong group going forward, so concessions  may be another area we can look at, I don't have all the stats but that concerns me.

    Kalgoorlie for 3-4 month period yearin yearout allowed 4-5 junior drivers on weekly basis to learn there craft that opportunity has disappeared... 
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    Our Virtuoso wins the first at Northam...a 3 year old in an open age race. Gets the "discount" on its win earnings, to go with its "discount" on its 2 year old win. It's HWOE is still under $6000 at $4403 so it can enter the same race type  next week and beat up on Maras Ace Man, Hilo Marcia etc and claim another discount should it win again.
    Upside is the HRA website seems to be updating win earnings straight after the race, the cumbersome "HWOE" prefix has been shortened to just "H" and Virtuoso is by Alta Christiano.

    curmudgeon likes this post.

  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    Firstly, heartiest congratulations to Reg and Tanaka Eagle on their win in Race 5 at Northam tonight. Secondly, constantly appearing negative about the new system is honestly wearing me down, really, it is very draining.... or maybe I am just really, really dumb, as thick as Nanna's gravy as my Dad used to say to me....but for the life of me, I can't follow how this stand was handicapped. It would seem that after handicaps were released, Tanaka was re-handicapped back 10m to start of 50m after originally copping 40m. I don't how or why that happened and probably never will, I am just following what was published on TABtouch. That said, Tanaka with over $220k in life time earnings transitioned into the new system with a HWOE of $57,500 by virtue of the "transition table" that was used as he was a M2 C9 and had "dropped back" in the past 12 months. I don't think that is right as stated ad nauseum before but it is what they used. So, he originally is handicapped off 40m, giving just 10m to horses with lifetime stakes of around $33k, a MO C2 R3 classification under the old system and HWOE's of $15k who were given 30m......there was no horse off the front and Win And Grin was the only horse off 10m. Win And Grin hadn't won for over 12 months and was a CO MO R1 under the old system, with a HWOE of just $1954.60. What on earth you had to do to get the scratch mark is beyond me, perhaps saw a leg off? Even going back to 50m, Tanaka is given a huge let up...I am guessing Mitchell  Miller was used to gain a junior concession but I am not sure whether his junior concession applies at Northam. Regardless, even off 60m and respectfully dismissing the chances of win And Grin, Tanaka is still only giving 30m to vastly inferior performed horses....and off just 20m behind them, it was a complete doddle for him, he bolted in coming from last and winning by 3 lengths. On face value, this was an absolute gift for Tanaka Eagle....I am sure someone will produce pages and pages of analysis and stats that will belittle my attempt at logic, dismiss me probably quite rightly as a negative old fool and tell me to crawl back under my rock, but if this is "like for like" racing and a fairer system, I am booking into one of those "Lifestyle Villages" for the partially bewildered. Sorry, I have tried but I just don't get it.

    VillageKid, Markovina, curmudgeon, Betonme likes this post.

  • ciscocisco    704 posts
    Hey Jay,

    You have had a decent crack at it and your opinions are valid. Owners like you keep the game alive - I have got no idea so I havent even tried to understand it. When I look at the fields I search up the horses form and see what c or m class it is and work from there.

    Cheers cisco


    VillageKid, savethegame, Betonme likes this post.

  • MarkovinaMarkovina    1,083 posts
    Hey Jay Jay - re Tanaka Eagle - getting an extra 10 metres

    It reminds me of a story many years ago concerning Wayne Honan ( had some nice horses like Doubter who won a Ballarat Cup - his father Jack - was a breeder - a bit of a legend in the sport )

    He had this pacer in one night at  Harold Park in a standing start - drew the front line most important - a horse by the name of New Mexico . He  is doing the prelim laps about 6 minutes before the jump - as he passed one steward - he said to him - you know my horse won during the week and i think it out to be off 10 metres ( or 12 yards ) . Stewards had a quick conference - and much to the irk of the punters - re handicapped it 10 metres - something about papers not received or lodged - that was the excuse
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    Tanaka ran 4th Friday night earning $800 odd dollars, took his win dollars last 5 to over the limit allowed, so he got an extra 10m (so I am told). Got a meeting at RWWA tomorrow to have input into handicap system, so no doubt will find out more then.
  • savethegamesavethegame    1,373 posts
    Since day dot 30-33%  favourites win at the trots. irrespective  of the hcp. conditions ..even the worst race on the program with the form that has been  exposed a 1.20 winner can still appear.as in my heart did, his trials indicated. he was a class  above.

    With the field sizes shrinking from  14--12- in-stands  then stands disappearing to  the odd one,  being the only true hcp system in my book. .favourites started to get to 40% of winners at g.p. the last big uproar with bookies  was 2002 a period when 172 first or second favourites won out of 234 races.

    Thought the whole idea of this new system was to stop the amount of odds on favourites..last night  at northam five winners started 1.60 or less.. Now they saying a favourite in  1.80-2.20 range provides best turnover  which  a half dozen big punters enjoy with a limited risk factor......the rank and file punter has long gone....Stands maybe the only thing that can save this game...As a good  thing as the new hcp. system allowed tananka eagle to be last night the ,caller tipped it, a lot punters are guided by the callers input that don't understand the game.... still 3.50 was available....(because the half dozen big players don't like the risk associated with stands)

    But not many in the industry like the stands......but as it sits without a in depth look  hall jnr  ryan warwick chis lewis  s. suvaljko,..will drive 300-400 winners out -- the next 1,000 races  at g.p.  as they have done for the last couple years...all the changes  in hcp. won't alter this....

    Maybe there is too many people trying to make a living  out of harness..No disrespect to any one that lost there jobs  at rwwa  as with  all redundancies  people are removed who shouldn't have been etc....But they  rwwa removed  25 odd , min. saving 1 million plus.  hope they put that to good use.


    curmudgeon likes this post.

  • MarkovinaMarkovina    1,083 posts
    There are alot of comments by several posters that alot of odds on short priced horses are winning in WA at present

    Its just not WA - the NSW Riverina ( where i punt alot ) and other parts of country NSW where i bet - it is basically the same situation

    My brutually honest assessment ( with many years experience ) of why that is occurring ( and you can forget all about handicapping ) is because Industry wide - right at the present time - i think the industry is drug free - and when that happens - you get the above happening - comes down to the individual horses natural ability

    You go back 3-5 years ago when Cobalt was swirling around - and there were a few others things happening - which they have really tightened up on - like horses being stomach tubed within 24 hours of the race - when that happens you get a totally different set of results

    And i might add as shocking as it sounds -it is so much easier to win on the punt - when there are drugs in the industry . You work it out very easily - you say to yourself - his or her horses - i like backing them - they race keen - they allways look sharp - they can do plenty of work in the run and still win

     Right at the present time - i think the industry is drug free - and the officials Aust wide should be congratulated on that
  • curmudgeoncurmudgeon    1,427 posts
    Bloke I know had a horse in the last at Northam last night. He bought two westbred fillies at the yearling sale in WA to race and ultimately breed from. Has taken them until 4 to get to the point where they may return a little of his outlay (approx 70 K  to this time). This money has been spread far and wide in the WA economy. He is prepared to cop that ....that's racing.
    BUT.....he is not going to buy or breed any more ....this is it for him. He isn't prepared to watch his horses get beaten by 3 year olds in open age maiden races that cop a lesser penalty than his horse would have if it had won the same race....especially as he says the result last night is the forerunner of things to come. Relatively cheap nz bred 3 y/o non winners who contribute zero dollars to the WA harness economy up until arriving to feast on the new WA handicapping largesse. "They can commercialize the industry to their hearts content with the handicapping were his words ....but I am not going to keep paying to effectively subsidize other owners whose horses have just beaten mine. It's madness"

    aussiebattler likes this post.

  • RexRex    328 posts
    JJ, have got some great info from you so I can fathom out the new handicapping system. I wonder if you can explain to me about the Bunbury meeting this friday. Race 4, how does numbers 2,3,and 4 get into this field. Race 6 - how does number 10 Western Drover get a start? And as far as I can tell from info from you and your site in race 7 numbers 1,2,3,5,6, are not eligible.
    Keep up the good work to explain the new system to your many followers. I hope your Perth trip and meeting was enlightening for you.
  • aussiebattleraussiebattler    75 posts
    Race 4 no 2,3,4 get in under the also eligible HWOE LT $25,000 with L5$ LT $1500 no concession needed any driver can be used
    Race 6 no 10 same deal HWOE LT $40,000 with L5$ LT $1500 no concession needed any driver can be used (they haven’t earnt more than $1500 in their last 5 starts) same goes in race 7 similar conditions on the race
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    Without looking closely....just back home from Perth meeting and totally knackered.....I think Aussiebattler has nailed it Rex.
    Will gather my thoughts over the weekend and try and put together some sort of summary of what went down but not a hope tonight...3 hour meeting, whole range of things discussed...but need time to digest. No speeding fine but did have to pay for parking!!!....after 3 trips to Perth for these consultations (in about 10 days) and about 24 hours on the road, I am well over trips to Perth....perhaps that's the plan ....bastardus carborundum (grind him down...joke Barry, joke!!)

    VillageKid, Gilgamesh, savethegame likes this post.

  • BetonmeBetonme    130 posts
    System is very confusing. Scratching my head looking at the handicaps for the stand at Pinjarra next monday.
  • RexRex    328 posts
    Betonme, with my new found knowledge, from this site, it seems to me that all horses are qualified for this race, so I'm assuming you are referring to the handicaps themselves. There seems to be an inbuilt system {although not advertised in conditions} that consideration is given to $ won last 5 starts when handicapping eg: #1=$745, #3=$1900 and #6=$2500. I am probably wrong  but that is my take on it and stand to be corrected by JJ or others with better knowledge.
  • aussiebattleraussiebattler    75 posts
    What I have heard so far is The new Business model aka Like for Like Handicapping System in RWWA view is in for 12 months regardless of industry opinion, tweaks and changes to it are being considered, mainly to do with barrier draws and band widths (in my opinion that will do little to make the fields like for like and are not happening in a timely enough fashion) haven't looked into stands so wont comment on that -.be interested to hear from JJ when he's recovered from his time and travels on the meeting that went down (would like to thank him for his passion Time and effort on this matter) I'm starting to wonder if this may be a smoke and mirrors system with an ulterior motive of further rationalisation of the industry to follow  
    this little engine has run out of coal for now no steam left  but I'll live to fight another Day 

    savethegame likes this post.

  • BetonmeBetonme    130 posts
    Rex said:

    Betonme, with my new found knowledge, from this site, it seems to me that all horses are qualified for this race, so I'm assuming you are referring to the handicaps themselves. There seems to be an inbuilt system {although not advertised in conditions} that consideration is given to $ won last 5 starts when handicapping eg: #1=$745, #3=$1900 and #6=$2500. I am probably wrong  but that is my take on it and stand to be corrected by JJ or others with better knowledge.

    Correct, I am more looking at the handicaps themselves. Maybe a common sense issue, but I look at a horse like Courage Tells, and he gets another real free hit. He has won way more money then the 4 horses on the front line put together....looking at it under old system, you have C4/5's on the front here, and then a C15 camped inside right behind them.
  • VillageKidVillageKid    1,512 posts
    edited December 2018
    What I have heard so far is The new Business model aka Like for Like Handicapping System in RWWA view is in for 12 months regardless of industry opinion, tweaks and changes to it are being considered, mainly to do with barrier draws and band widths (in my opinion that will do little to make the fields like for like and are not happening in a timely enough fashion) haven't looked into stands so wont comment on that -.be interested to hear from JJ when he's recovered from his time and travels on the meeting that went down (would like to thank him for his passion Time and effort on this matter) I'm starting to wonder if this may be a smoke and mirrors system with an ulterior motive of further rationalisation of the industry to follow  
    this little engine has run out of coal for now no steam left  but I'll live to fight another Day 




    They were my thoughts as well AB!
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    On Wednesday December 4, the Harness Industry Working Party (HWIP....everything sports an acronym these days!!) met at RWWA with the Racing Manager Barry Hamilton, Garry Torto and a host of others from RWWA to discuss Industry concerns with the HWOE based handicapping system introduced on November 16th.
    The genesis of the HIWP is briefly as follows (as I understand the sequence of events......these are just my recollections and I will readily stand corrected if I am wrong). Following the introduction of the new system, BOTRA had agreed to a 3 month trial before evaluation. Subsequent to that, there was considerable anxst amongst many Industry Participants and Warren Robinson was petitioned to call a meeting of concerned parties. After due consideration, this occurred at very short notice on Sunday November 25th at Byford and was attended by 105 persons who came from far and wide. Grievances were aired, minutes recorded and a group of some dozen representatives were chosen to meet with RWWA CEO Richard Burt and General Manager of Racing Charlotte Mills, if it could be arranged. It was able to be arranged around the enemies of distance and time and this meeting subsequently occurred on Wednesday November 28 and went for 2 hours. There was a wide range of interests represented covering drivers, trainers, owners, breeders, both metro based and provincial and was chaired by Warren. As a result of this meeting, which again covered a wide range of views and grievances, it was agreed that a working party of 4 persons would be formed to crystallise the objections to the new system and to present alternatives and modifications that might appease the industry, and this lead to last Wednesday's meeting at RWWA on December 4th at 1.30pm.The meeting went for 3 hours. The HWIP consisted of Warren, Denise Trobe, Matt Scott and myself. Following the formationof the group, time was short and our disparate locations meant that to come up with a coherent document in time, the email and text message services ran hot. Many other trainers and owners views were sort prior to finalising the submission and they willingly contributed their thoughts. As you can imagine, opinions were wide and varied on what could/could not be done but finally, in large part down to a mammoth effort from Denise with input from everyone, a 4 page document  with supporting links and documents, was produced. This was presented at some length to Barry, Garry and company, along with all the peaks and troughs that occur when discussing controversial proposals, nothing out of the ordinary, just run of the mill argy bargy stuff and conflicting views. Well, that is how I read it anyway.
    Basically, concerns presented covered:
    • the desire of those at the Industry Meeting at Byford to return to the previous system until September 2019 (voted in by a majority of 103 to 1) whilst further refinement occurred.
    • the user unfriendly nature and complicated nature of the system (for trainers, owners, everyone) and the associated conditions, and the confusing glossary of terms, and a lack of any education or publicity to the punters, and a lack of any communication to the industry as to how the system may evolve over time to cover concerns. Punters left completely in the dark and confused by the lack of (any) information.
    • Grave concerns over the achievement of the stated aim of "Like for like" racing.
    • The total dominance of RBD in the new model and the need for an immediate injection of 50% PBD and its role as a vital handicapping tool (acknowledged it seems by everyone bar a select few) and the use of a variety of PBD mechanisms to be considered ($ won last two starts, group preferential draws based on HWOE within a band etc)
    • The wide range of bands and levels and the prospect of alterations being to made to bands as the system progresses.
    • The complexities of Eligible/Not Eligible clauses/ stakes last 5 start band widths etc
    • Lack of Fillies and Mares races and the whole area of concessions for Junior drivers whose opportunities seem to be shrinking.
    • Juvenile field sizes with respect to races standing up, future programming for 2 and 3 year olds.
    • Handicapping in standing starts which seems both overtly generous and harsh depending on the horses ability with the perception of "free kicks" being awarded, alternative types of standing starts..
    • Selection of fields for community races (50% of races) revert to reverse order points races rather than the current 100% ascending order.
    • 3 year olds racing in open age events and receiving discounted HWOE
    • Conversion HWOE allocations for horses transferring to the new system with no penalty for previous high level juvenile success.
    • Country programmes and their suitability for the horse population (eg Busselton)
    Supporting documentation of revised programmes,conditions,examples etc was tabled by HIWP but too complicated to go into here.
    Where to from her? Well, no commitments were given at the meeting, I think there were some indications of some minor changes and tweaks and that the presented documents would be given consideration  but nothing major, I think it would be fair to say. It seems like it is fundamentally set in stone and my thoughts are that there was not an awful lot of common ground or much acceptance of what we had to say. I may be wrong there but having a 4 hour drive back home straight after the meeting to digest what occurred, that was my general feeling. There was a firm commitment to improve the communication side of things and an acknowledgement that this had been poorly done. Copies of the HWIP have been forwarded directly to both Richard Burt and Charlotte Mills, who was an apology at the meeting attending a previously locked in Greyhound Conference in Tasmania I believe.
    What happens next, well I am not sure. I would expect some sort of response to the submission and then the HIWP will reconvene. I think, without writing a novel, that that is a fair assessment of what occurred and if I have got anything wrong, Barry has my email address and I am sure he will point out the error of my ways. Should I put in one final gripe? Yeah, what the hell, Baz would feel let down if I didn't. After traveling up for 5 hours to get there, a unpaid parking spot close by would have been welcoming, the 5 bucks ain't the issue, the 200m walk was, especially after leaving my reading glasses in the car at the first attempt. A couple of witches hats may have been an easy thing to organise. And to meet for an energy sapping 3 hours and not be offered even so much as a glass of water, never mind a cuppa and a biscuit or sandwich, is far away from my idea of basic hospitality, insulting and disrespectful.  Come to Manjimup for a meeting and I guarantee you will be well and truly fed and watered. There you go Baz, didn't want to leave you disappointed!!!
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    Left out the issue of the number of Westbred races programmed (my mistake, was much talked about). Think this is one area where there was broad agreement to increase  the number of races. Race programmes currently being redone to incorporate them...I think.

    curmudgeon likes this post.

  • ciscocisco    704 posts
    Great work JayJay - many thanks.

    Cheers cisco
  • Kane_26Kane_26    88 posts
    @JayJay was there any mention of the vote of no confidence discussed at the botra meeting?
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    edited December 2018
    That wasn't raised at the meeting with either Richard Burt and Charlotte Mills, or at last Wednesdays meeting at RWWA but I believe it was moved at the meeting of industry participants at Byford on the previous Sunday, which wasn't really a BOTRA Meeting, it was just coordinated and called by them. What transpired at the official BOTRA AGM when the call was made to give the new system 3 months, I don't know because I wasn't there.

    Just a personal opinion, I don't think motions of no confidence achieve an awful lot other than make people feel good on the way home from a meeting. I am more of the view that to reach consensus and effect changes (which is a hard thing to achieve), you have to talk and talk and try to argue your case with logic and supporting evidence and hope that your concerns are treated respectfully and in good faith. That said, given the complexity of the system and the lack of information put out along with ongoing evaluation and feedback to people who traditionally don't read stuff posted on a website that is long and convoluted, I completely understand why such motions are moved. Having been involved numerous major changes being foisted upon my profession in my working life, I maintain very strongly that it is ineffective to say you have kept people informed simply by producing a glossy booklet or by posting information on a website or having hit run meetings all over the country side or by saying I am available to discuss things, ring me or whatever....Education has got the glossy booklet down to an artform.....think Outcomes Based Education (which was thankfully abandoned before it completely rooted assessment procedures in WA High Schools), think Unit Curriculum (another panacea that was abandoned after years of tinkering and "adjustment"), think Achievement Certificate.....and any other number of failed educational fixes that have been thrown at Schools over many decades....all of them accompanied by glossy booklets, industry communiques, endless podcasts and email mail outs and so called "professional development".
    Proper information and consultation should have, for example, consisted of dummy run programmes, sample fields using horses currently racing (at each level Metro, Provincial, Community) dummy results and the subsequent effects on horses levels, their progression and what races are available for them moving forward....and an education programme for the public and the average Joe punter in the TAB via TAB form or whatever....because at the moment, those that are betting on the product have no idea what a "<$70,000 HWOE L$5 less than $22,000, NE any horse starting in a Level 15 L5S,NE HWOE <$25,000 concessions available $81,000" race is .....and quite a few in the Industry would battle to explain it in simple terms that our customers would comprehend.The vacuum of informative material has resulted in the old adage coming true, that any vacuum so created will rapidly fill with misinformation, conspiracy theories and anything else that happens to be lying on the kitchen table. It is "Implementing Major Change 101" to make sure no such vacuum occurs. Just my view.
  • aussiebattleraussiebattler    75 posts
    https://www.facebook.com/608342787/posts/10156880571142788/
    Was interesting watching this again no mention of the massive concessions horses got with the transition
  • JayJayJayJay    5,248 posts
    The unusual "grouping" of horses with the same trainer drawing barriers next to each other, which was questioned at the meeting the other day, continues at both the Pinjarra and Narrogin meetings for Monday and Tuesday. We were assured that all was well, the computer was regularly audited etc etc but this is getting farcical and way beyond any chance of probability. Last Friday night had Padberg/Padberg from gate 4 and 5 race 1, Turvey/Turvey from gate 1 and 2 race 3, Hall/Hall/Hall from gate 6,7 and 8 race 4, Belton/Belton from gate 2 and 3 race 5, Hawkins/Hawkins from gate 4 and 5 in the same race, Bond/Bond/Bond from gate 3,4 and 5 race 6, Olivieri/Olivieri from gate 6 and 7 race 7, Saw/Saw from gate 2 and 3 race 8 and Hall/Hall from gate 2 and 3 race 10. Without going back and checking, I know of at least one from the previous Friday night with Scott/Scott in gate 1 and 2, same pattern emerging for Pinjarra with a Johnson/Johnson in both races 1 and 2 and Johns/Johns in race 9 and the Narrogin has an Anderson/Anderson and a George/George .....come on, something is seriously amiss, that is way, way beyond a statistical glitch.
  • curmudgeoncurmudgeon    1,427 posts
    Hayden Reeves 7 and 8 at Pinjarra R3 today...not adjacent but again consecutive.
  • Hayden Reeves 7 and 8 at Pinjarra R3 today...not adjacent but again consecutive.

    Surely RWWA has to get their heads out of their asses and check into this.
  • VillageKidVillageKid    1,512 posts
    JayJay said:

    The unusual "grouping" of horses with the same trainer drawing barriers next to each other, which was questioned at the meeting the other day, continues at both the Pinjarra and Narrogin meetings for Monday and Tuesday. We were assured that all was well, the computer was regularly audited etc etc but this is getting farcical and way beyond any chance of probability. Last Friday night had Padberg/Padberg from gate 4 and 5 race 1, Turvey/Turvey from gate 1 and 2 race 3, Hall/Hall/Hall from gate 6,7 and 8 race 4, Belton/Belton from gate 2 and 3 race 5, Hawkins/Hawkins from gate 4 and 5 in the same race, Bond/Bond/Bond from gate 3,4 and 5 race 6, Olivieri/Olivieri from gate 6 and 7 race 7, Saw/Saw from gate 2 and 3 race 8 and Hall/Hall from gate 2 and 3 race 10. Without going back and checking, I know of at least one from the previous Friday night with Scott/Scott in gate 1 and 2, same pattern emerging for Pinjarra with a Johnson/Johnson in both races 1 and 2 and Johns/Johns in race 9 and the Narrogin has an Anderson/Anderson and a George/George .....come on, something is seriously amiss, that is way, way beyond a statistical glitch.

    Well spotted JJ this is beyond "random" as they would have as all believe!
  • VillageKidVillageKid    1,512 posts
    I think the Golden Nugget barrier draws has taken this to a new level JJ!!  :-?

    Kane_26, jum likes this post.

Sign In or Register to comment.