Other Bets Props and Futures Some other fun bets that can be made on basketball include prop bets and futures. How To Bet News. Handicapping Your Basketball Bets When oddsmakers set the lines, they take many factors into consideration. If you have even one loss, you lose the entire bet. On the other hand the Magic must either win outright or lose by 3 or fewer points for a Magic spread bet to payout.
It had no turret and seems to have missed hostilities by a decade. The article that I think you have mostly quoted from, concerns the clever suspected nazi, inspecting B29s returning from bombing missions over Europe which would have been impossibke, shot to the proverbial shithouse swiss cheese no less, which likewise could not have been….
Do you really want me to continue mate?.. Got a grin on my face like a Cheshire cat just writing about your untenable position, if you really want to know. Cheers mate, js. Something to do with opium dens and 70 malays running amok at some oasis tent town called Taman Shudder, deep in Nahuatl country south of the border on route to Mexico gotcha. Of course all the headliners, along with the not so dearly departed bit players are mostly gone to their hardly eternal rest.
Usually not before your crafty angler decides to set his barb, would be my best guess. Why would you be asking two dogs f……? We could go on for yonks about the Dr. Even if the old duffer had provided some deportment detail or description of clothing or whether he was a cleanskin, but sadly nada on that front either…..
Yet our grand old dame from the Strathy, reckoned, in her tell all, tell f.. It could well have contained evidence of real importance, such as uranium oxide dust or spare trimmed Tamam Shud slips in aspic fir all we know, which is now sadly lost.
Not only to us, but also to abscentFeltus and the many other hard working Somerton Man contenders. Some Swede had, by or so, relocated his Federal match company to Grafton NSW in order to be nearer source materials grown in a forest area named for the large new enterprise….. Now what does that all have to do with Const. You may ask, and with sound reason too….. Australia's First Totalizators Siegfried Franck If Joseph Oller seems to been a larger-than-life character as much suited to a Hollywood script as any of his time, then his Australian counterpart Siegfried Franck wasn't far behind.
The first local mention of a totalizator came with a report in the Sydney Morning Herald on 3 October, "Mr. Siegfried Franck, the German Consul, has brought under our notice an exceedingly ingenious instrument he terms a "Totalisator. In the cavity are a number of registers, very similar to those used in marking a game of billiards, which are moved by the action of a lever similar to the key of a telegraphic instrument, the difference between the billiard Table register and this being that, in this case, the numbers follow the action of the lever only, from 1 to , which are consecutively marked upon three discs or rollers.
At the top of the plate is one general register which sums the totals taken upon the sub-ordinate ones, being moved by the independent action of the keys of the latter, and thus a general as well as individual total is kept. These individual scores would be represented in the respective compartments, and the total score kept in the general one at the top.
It will be seen from this that the instrument can be utilised in a variety of ways for keeping tallies and checks, and should be very valuable to theatrical managers, omnibus, railway, and steamboat companies, subject to trifling modifications as it is a complete check against fraud when tallying numbers.
Franck has already a great many orders to fulfil; indeed, at present, more than he is likely to execute for many months". One commentator described it as "quite simple, being nothing more or less than a revival of Professor Babbridge s calculating machine" Siegfried Franck appears to have arrived in Sydney around where he established an import and trading agency in conjunction with an unknown brother possibly Eduard, later noted as an immigration agent acting for the New South Wales colony in Germany.
By and possibly earlier according some later anecdotal experience , Franck was the Consul for the North German Confederation, the title changing to Consul for the German Empire in , although he continued his trading activities during these years. He resigned the Consulate early in and accepted a full-time position with the N. Colonial Government as their Immigration Agent in Germany. He returned in May, and was somewhat controversially granted for loss of income, a grant criticized by some who claimed Franck had not sent a single immigrant to Australia during his time back in Germany.
Others suggested that Franck was on Mission Impossible from day one given the stringent conditions laid down for non-british migrants by the local government, but either way, Franck seems to have hit on the totalizator as a potential gold mine back in Australia. After the Sydney Morning Herald report, Franck started advertising his totalizator "patented and in infallible for recording cricket scores, ballot votes and checking hotel bars". There still had been no mention of his totalizator being used for betting purposes, but Franck later revealed that while acting as Immigration Agent in Germany, he had visited several racecourses both there and in France and Italy where totalizators had been legalized.
Franck did not resume his previous Consulate position and obviously had intentions to make a killing with his device, but like in other Australian colonies, its legality was open to question. Despite one correspondent to the Sydney Morning Herald suggesting in advance "this will be a flagrant violation of the Betting Act", Franck gained permission from the Sydney Jockey Club to operate a totalizator at Randwick in January, at a two-day meeting in honour of the Colonial Governor, Sir Hercules Robinson who was returning to England.
The police were happy with the conduct of the machine, but questions were raised in the Legislative Assembly as they had been earlier in France as to whether the totalizator was being used as an aid to a "game of chance" and in April, Franck was charged with a breach of the Police Offences Act after operating his totalizator from an office in the grandstand on Randwick racecourse. The preliminary hearing at the Water Police Court aroused great interest with several magistrates and leading citizens among the spectators.
The primary evidence came from two detectives who admitted they attended the meeting with the sole objective of watching the totalizator, and that after observing a number of races where the public placed wagers with Franck and an assistant, the detectives "backed horses for the Champagne Stakes, and witnessed the whole modus operandi of the contrivance''.
After a postponement of a week, the four magistrates could not agree, but under the laws in place at the time, one magistrate was all it took to commit Franck to stand trial. Both the circumstances of the case and Franck's previous position in society lent the case considerable publicity, but before it went to trial, Franck submitted that he had received professional advice that his activities were, in fact, illegal and he agreed to cease operations, whereupon the Attorney-General to the 15 July, Page 5 of 80 Edition 2 10 chagrin of many that wanted a definite ruling on the legality of the totalizator allowed the case to be dropped.
Given that he was charged, it seems safe to bet pun intended that he had not resumed his role as the German consul and was concentrating on the marketing of his machine. Franck around the time of the case had also turned his attention to South Australia where some experiments at the Newmarket and Cheltenham courses had been carried out using a totalizator operated by a Mr.
The South Australian Advertiser revealed that Franck had approached an Adelaide businessman with an offer to let him buy into his totalizator operations, the newspaper lampooning the price asked and then printing the details of the offer [Appendix C, p99] It was around this time that Franck was credited with producing an page pamphlet entitled The Totalizator : The Instrument Can't Lie. Web searches reveal that copies of the pamphlet survive at a couple of State Libraries, but in fact, Franck was not the author, the publication written on his behalf by a prominent social commentator of the time under the name of The Vagabond.
The Vagabond was an alias of a former English merchant seaman, Julian Thomas he was born John Stanley James, his true identity not known until , some 16 years after his death in Fitzroy , who wrote extensively for The Argus under that pen-name. He specialized in attending various institutions of the day - hospitals, charitable homes, church services, asylums and an occasional football match and reported his findings with a highly cynical outlook.
Just what the relationship between Franck and Thomas was remains unknown, but it was in fact Thomas who operated the first totalizator at a race meeting in Queensland in May, , using equipment borrowed from Franck and seemingly highly successfully, one report suggesting a turnover on one race of at a meeting where just 1, attended. Vehemently anti-bookmaker, Thomas continued to support the totalizator at every opportunity despite a number of critics suggesting that he had a vested financial interest in seeing the machine legalized.
The instrument will tend to ruin the betting ring - the greatest curse of modern sport. It will return to the pockets of the public thousands of pounds yearly, which now go to keep in wanton luxury and riot those kings of the bagnio and the pothouse who are members of that ring.
It will put a stop to plunging and heavy betting, and it is a legal method of acquiring an interest in the race. For, according to the testimony of gentlemen in high position, who have recently returned from England, the totalizators are allowed on racecourses there.
They are legalised on the Continent and in America, and it is not supposed that the totalizator will be condemned here". Barnard was a prominent auctioneer in Adelaide, primarily in the bloodstock arena but also in real estate and early in , he leased the track at Morphettville from the South Australian Jockey Club with the intention of establishing a secondtier course similar to that established by W.
Cox at Kensington Park in Melbourne with meetings to be held on a two-monthly basis. Barnard's meetings were advertised as at Newmarket and it is here that he operated the first totalizator in June after agreeing to donate 10 guineas to a charity run by the Lord Mayor of Adelaide in return for the experiment with the early machines. The trial in September saw much legal argument as whether "totalizator" and "lottery" were one and the same - eventually Barnard was acquitted of the major charge, although the prosecution had a minor victory when it convinced the Bench that Barnard had operated from temporary rather than fixed premises, the former then an offence.
Barnard had erected "a small wooden structure" on the course and was fined 2, but not without comment from the South Australian Advertiser "This decision, although undoubtedly according to law, is regretted even by persons who do not approve of either horseracing or betting, as they believe the totalizator would do much to lessen gambling in worse forms".
Shortly after the conviction, Barnard was elected secretary of the South Australian Jockey Club and discontinued his private meetings in lieu of an expanded schedule of events under the Jockey Club's umbrella. The debate on the totalizator was typically for and against; many of the speakers deplored the concept of a private individual having the privilege of operating the tote, others expressing disappointment that Barnard had "been hard done by".
The bookmakers were loud in denouncing the machine at Randwick and they were instrumental in having the proprietor prosecuted here in South Australia. Barnard also his own stable of racehorses, the most successful of which won the Adelaide Cup - appropriately called Totalizator, but perhaps unfortunately out of a mare named Deceptive! Will Mr. Franck please return to the stand? After being somewhat frustrated in his attempts to have his machine accepted in Sydney and Adelaide, it appears Franck turned his attention to New Zealand where he was granted a patent on 4 April, a correspondent to the Australian Town and Country Journal reported on a meeting at Dunedin in late May, "The totalisator, which is rapidly increasing in favour throughout New Zealand was on the ground under the auspices of the indefatigable Mr.
Franck, who was endeavouring to introduce his instrument at the meetings of the various New Zealand Clubs. We are, however, threatened during tho forthcoming season with a Lottery and Gaming Bill which, should it pass, will put a stop to totalisators, consultations, et hoc genus omne "and everything of this kind".
A note on spelling - New Zealand and England use the form "totalisator" compared to "totalizator" adopted in most Australian legislation. The Greater Oxford Dictionary decrees "totalizator" as the defined spelling, the word believed to be derived from the French "totalisateur". Rather strangely, it does not mention "totalisator" as an alternative, but it does use this spelling in a couple of examples.
For the sake of this volume, "totalizator" has been use except where the alternative is used in a company or organization name. The same correspondent also suggested that Franck had offered his totalizator to the Auckland Racing Club, who refused his terms he offered half of the commission to the club, claiming he needed 1, to cover costs, the club offered to sell Franck the sole right to operate for Franck instead ran his machine in opposition to club's tote in an adjacent enclosure.
The report went on to suggest both totalizators were poorly patronised "and on the second day for some reason were seized by police". Siegfried Franck has been traversing New Zealand in the interest of his totalisator. For this instrument, he has obtained a New Zealand patent, and he announces his intention of proceeding against the clubs who have authorised Pari-mutuels at their respective meetings. As the totalisator is not legalised at present in New Zealand, I am afraid Mr.
Franck will experience trouble in the legal processes he is about to initiate". Franck, the patentee of the totalisator, is now in Dunedin, and will remain till after the races. He is making extensive preparations for a warfare at law with Jockey Clubs and private parties who have infringed his patent, as he alleges, throughout New Zealand.
His warnings and threats have hitherto been regarded by the Clubs and others as mere vapouring, but evidently Mr Franck is in earnest". Otago Daily Times, 17 February, Franck issued writs against a number of clubs, Wellington, Dunedin and Canterbury among others, their committees, and the operators of the machines that had been used. Despite the earlier mention of an April sitting, the first hearing did not go before the Supreme Court until October 24 and lasted for several days.
In what appears to have been a test case for the other complaints, Franck demanded injunctions to prevent the Canterbury Jockey Club from using the alternative machine, G. Stead, the secretary of the club, and George Hobbs and William Goodwin, the two men who had designed and operated the machine used several times on the Christchurch course.
Details of the case revealed that Franck had been granted Letters of Registration for a patent on his totalizator for fourteen years in Victoria on 28 August, , and in New Zealand on 4 March, Hobbs and Goodwin in their defence claimed they had never seen Franck's machine, and much of the evidence taken from engineers suggested that there was nothing new in the design, one expressing surprise that Franck had been granted a patent given that machines for registering progressive numbers on separate dials were in use in Christchurch prior to the date of granting the registration letters.
The general thrust of the evidence was that while there were great difference in the details, the principles were equivalent with each other and that a qualified engineer presented with the problem would almost certainly come up with a similar device an American bell-punch machine was produced to support the latter evidence. Both Franck and the defendants gave notice that they would take an adverse decision to the Appeals Court, and on the morning of the third day, the judge dismissed the jury and heard later evidence in private.
The evidence goes to show that the latter's is a far superior machine, whatever the merits of the infringement of the patent may be. Franck's machine, it was demonstrated, could be tampered with, which was impossible with the other, because every time it was touched, a bell rang out an alarm. Most of the previous evidence was gone over; "Hobbs and Goodwin allege that the so-called invention is nothing new at all, but merely an adaptation of an instrument of the kind used in France for many years, and styled the pari-mutuel".
Judgement was given for the defendants with costs. The Court held that Hobbs and Goodwin's machine; while in some respects similar to Franck's, was not an infringement of his patent. Franck made application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council; the Court ruling that they had no power either to grant or to refuse leave.
Franck was ultimately given leave to appeal on 22 December, but there is no evidence that the appeal was ever heard. Hobbs and Goodwin supplied many of the totalizators to racing clubs in the South Island of New Zealand for more than a decade, especially in Christchurch where they were based. Much of the credit for the success of their machine was accredited to a Mr Eckberg, a machinist who was also a defendant in one of Franck's actions.
They had some minor success in the Australian market with the Tasmanian Racing Club installing one of their totes in conjunction with an existing machine in With New Zealand also dismissing his totalizator, Franck turned to the one colony where no firm decision had been made on the use of the machine - Victoria.
There had been a couple of unsuccessful attempts to legalize the totalizator. The turning point seemed to come in January, when it was deemed to be legal for a bona fide private club to operate the machine, but it eventually proved to be a false dawn 15 July, Page 8 of 80 Edition 2 13 A ruling by the Attorney-General of the short lived and minority O'Loghlen government July, to March, permitted totalizator clubs to register as ordinary trading companies under the Companies Statute , on a general, but indefinite, understanding that they should be conducted in a legitimate and straightforward manner.
He stated that there was no doubt that the totalisator was an instrument of gaming within the meaning of the act No , but that, if it was used in a reserve to which only members of a club had access, and if the betting was exclusively confined to such members, and the totalisator was their property, the police would not be justified in interfering.
But, added the Crown solicitor, the club must be a bona fide one; and, if persons other than members of the club resorted to the reserve, and were permitted to bet, then such reserve would be a common gaming house.
A club has been being formed in Melbourne by a person who has long been trying to secure the admission of the totalisator here. The Argus, 5 June, There are no prizes forthcoming for guessing the person who had "long been trying to secure the admission of the totalisator here" was Siegfried Franck, who took advantage of the legal decision by forming "The Sportsman s Club" with premises on the upper level of Eastern Arcade in Bourke Street, adjoining the Eastern Market, later the site of the Southern Cross, one of Melbourne s better known accommodations for visitors in the second half of the twentieth century.
The club came into being in July, under the auspices of The Victorian Patent Totalizator Company which was officially incorporated on 15 June, Frank was noted as pro tempore manager, strongly suggesting he was the sole driving force behind the enterprise, titling himself "patentee of the genuine Totalizator for Victoria" transferred "my Victorian patent right, title and interest" to a company "to be incorporated under the Companies Statute, A limited amount of 1 paid-up shares without any further liability will be disposed of to the first applicants at the rate of four shillings"..
In February, , Franck was in the news again, being arrested along with eight of his clerks on charges of running a common gaming house and eleven patrons for being on the premises in an enclosure at Geelong racecourse where he was operating his totalizator. The arrests caused uproar amongst the crowd; the twelve police present were loudly hooted and an angry mob of around following the wagonettes in which the "prisoners" were bundled back to the Moorabool Street lockup.
The Geelong Racing Club had agreed to a request from Franck to lease and fence off an enclosure where he would operate a totalizator as an agent of the Turf Club with entry to the area restricted to the members of the Sportsman s Club conveniently including a number of the more prominent citizens of Geelong.
Franck s move was publicised several days before the meeting he had presented a series of lectures on the advantages of the totalizator at the Athenaeum Club around the same time and the arrests were widely criticized in the press as heavy-handed - the officer in charge of the squad, Detective Duncan claimed that he had gone to Geelong to observe the operation of the tote, but had been forced to act when a bookmaker complained that the enclosure formed a common gaming house.
It appears several of the local dignitaries were amongst those charged and a protest meeting on the eve of the hearing attracted a large crowd, as did the proceedings themselves. Franck s defence was that he had formed a registered company called The Sportsman s Club, and that the men had paid the minimum one shilling per annum fee to join the club membership "The Totalizator" of the club was advertised at the same time at five shillings per halfyear and could legally bet through the totalizator - the Bench agreed with his argument 5 to 3, the decision "greeted with a loud manifestation of applause".
The Australasian Sketcher, 5 July, Franck following the acquittal of all charges following the Geelong trial took an aggressive approach by addressing a letter dated 24 February, to police authorities pointing out that he had simply utilised the totalizator after the Attorney General's statement in Parliament and in terms of his patent as a registering machine, for the purpose of preventing fraud and mistake and with a view to recording the invested money received by him as the agent and shareholder of The Sportsmen's Club.
Despite the Geelong Court dismissing the charges against him, and so declaring his activities to be legal, Franck refused to utilise his invention under the same rules on other racecourses, preferring to 15 July, Page 9 of 80 Edition 2 14 wait until he was officially informed by the Police that a club carried on under the same rules as the that managed by him at Geelong was within the law, and that no policeman would interfere as long he adhered to the club's rules, and carried on the business in a fair and honest manner.
Duncan nor any other gentleman has accepted my challenge of to nothing to prove that my instrument can be tampered with, there can be no doubt that it is infallible. Kindly inform me at your earliest convenience whether you will instruct the police not to further molest me in the use of my invention as carried on by me at Geelong". Brisbane Courier Mail, 11 April, Franck went on to quote the opinion of Judge Pring, who, when Attorney General for Queensland in declared the legality of the totalisator under the Queensland statute 14th Vic, No.
In reply to the above, Mr. Franck received the following letter from Superintendent Winch : "Police Department, Superintendent's Office, Melbourne, 7th March, Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 24th ultimo, in which you request that in the event of your using the instrument called the totalizator, I will give instructions to the police not to further molest you.
In reply, I must inform you I first submitted your letter to the head of my department for advice and instruction. It will be my duty to see that the law is not evaded, and that any club which you may propose to form for the purpose of working this instrument amongst the members of such club is of a bona fide character. On being satisfied on this point you need not dread police interference. Franck intends, on behalf of the club which he is forming, to utilise his machine at future race meetings.
He has submitted to us the list of members who have already joined the club, which comprises some names well known in sporting circles". Whether Frank really believed The Sportsman's Club was bona fide under the Act at the time of the Geelong meeting is problematical. Despite references to a "registered company", the first mention of The Victorian Patent Totalisator Company did not come until 15 June when advertisements place by Frank calling for nominations for directorships because the tenure of provisional directors had ceased as he was going to register the company the following day confirmed by the Victorian Government Gazette.
He claimed 11, shares had already been issued - later revealed to be 1 face value paid to four shillings - and Sportsman's Club members ha priority in the allocation further shares. A further meeting two weeks later revealed the company gave Franck as the patentee 20, in paid up shares for his right, title, and interest in the totalisator.
Remarkably, after receiving acknowledgment of the legality of the totalizator operating within the confines of a private club and seemingly on a private reserve within a racecourse by the Superintendent of the Police department, there is not a scrap of remaining evidence of Franck or his German compatriot and competitor, Friedrich Augustus Schinnerling ever attempting to utilise a totalizator on a Victorian racecourse, instead preferring to operate their machines within the confines of a private club in central Melbourne.
By May, , The Sportsman's Club was in financial strife under somewhat dubious circumstances - the general minute book had disappeared, the books of account had not been audited for over six months. On the instigation of the Sheriff s Office, the totalizators operating at the club were seized and several of the directors ordered the company s safe to be opened and the Sheriff confiscated Franck s patent.
Franck later appealed unsuccessfully that the totalizators and the precious patent were his personal property and not of the company, despite him being assigned shares worth supposedly 20, in the Patent Totalizator Company for his right, title, and interest in the machine. Later reports suggest that the patent, seemingly now outdated, sold for just 12, one of the company's directors suggesting "it is no value to anyone". Little more was ever heard of Siegfried Franck.
The Eastern Market. The arcade was the three-storey section on the centre right. At the time of his demise, he was living with his son, Julius, who was for around six years the licensee of the West Bourke Hotel on the corner of Queen and La Trobe Street West. Strangely, other Franck attracted most of the publicity surrounding the totalizator and its legality, it was never totally clear whether he in fact he ever played any part in designing the machine, although perhaps his mention of a European agent in his letter of offer to potential investors in Adelaide [see Appendix B, p98] suggests he was simply the local patentee and agent for an inventor on the continent, possibly even Joseph Oller!
Schinnerling, of 21 Capel-street, Hotham, cabinet maker, for an improved registering machine to be called "Schinnerling 's Totalizator, which is said to be of distinctly different construction from and greatly superior to machines of a similar character already in use. This application was opposed Mr. Franck, the patentee of another totalizator. The Attorney-General disallowed anything in Mr. Schinnerling's machine that was covered by Mr. Franck's patent". The Argus, 14 September, Although less is remembered of Schinnerling, just a few weeks later a report revealed that his design had been purchased by the Queensland Turf Club with a strong suggestion that an earlier machine produced by him was already in use.
A totalizator patented by Schinnerling in conjunction with James Hill of the Bell Foundry was installed at Morphettville in December, , in what appears to be the first instance of a tote being legally used on an Australian racecourse.
The usage of "imported" may seem a little strange; given what we think of as "states" were then self-governing colonies, a machine brought from Melbourne may well have been thought of as "imported". That it was Schinnerling's original design appears to be borne out by a later report: " It will be remembered that at the last meeting slight mistakes now and then occurred, owing to the indicators skipping a number. Dawbarn wrote to Mr. Schinnerling, informing him of this, and he has added a spring to the totalisator which renders these mistakes impossibility.
He also sent instructions by which tho old machine might be made equally accurate Just when he moved to Melbourne is not certain, but by , he is known to have operating as a pipe maker at Queen Street in Melbourne - directories give his first given name as the anglicised Frederick, but in virtually all references, he is shown as August Schinnerling, occasionally referred to as "Herr Schinnerling". Schinnerling's totalizators were among the first to be used in Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania as discussed in relevant sections , but he like Franck also attempted to penetrate the New Zealand market, although with nothing like the same drama.
Artist's impression of the Cesar and Helene, two masted brig, tons, constructed by J. Godeffroy, Reiherstieg, Germany. Schinnerling, of Hotham, which is well worthy of inspection by persons taking an interest in these machines. Mr Schinnerling has devoted two years to the construction and improvement of totalisators, and by the experience gained by him during that time he has been enabled to devise a machine of a most compact nature, and one which should give every satisfaction.
It is of a very portable size; being only 3ft long and 2ft high, and will register the bets on 10 horses. If a race has more than 10 starters, a second machine will of course have to be used. The materials used in its construction are cast copper and iron, and the mechanism is of a neat, simple and substantial character. Each ticket given to backers is embossed with its number, and the act of embossing at once indicates the number of tickets taken on that horse, and also registers the total.
Altogether we consider Mr Schinnerling's machine the most simple and satisfactory contrivance of its kind yet invented. Mr Schinnerling has left two machines in this city, and has sent three others to Wellington. The machines are in charge of Mr Smith, of the City Hotel billiard-room".
Otago Daily Times, 29 January, A couple of weeks later comes some evidence that Schinnerling and Franck went head-to-head in New Zealand and perhaps for the first time, Franck was not quite so certain about the merits of the two machines as previously. Schinnerling, during the Wellington meeting challenged.
Franck to exhibit their totalisators against each other before a committee of gentlemen, the stakes to go to the patentee of what was considered the better machine. Mr Franck, however, declined". The club advertised membership at five shillings per annum with club rooms at 10 Bourke Street West - just west of Elizabeth Street - "where members may back their horses on the patent totalizator on all tho principal races".
The belief of both Franck and Schinnerling that the statement supporting the legality of totalizator run a bona fide private club proved false. In November, , Schinnerling and two directors of the Electric Totalisator and Sporting Club were charged with being the occupiers of a gaming house.
Two of Franck's fellow directors of The Sportsman's Club were charged at the same time - after a long legal argument, the Bench found that the Electric Totalisator and Sporting Club was not a bona fide club, although they admitted that Schinnerling may have been misled by the Crown Solicitor's statement in January and believed the club was operating within the law.
A similar verdict was reached in the case of The Sportsman's Club, one defendant fined the same amount, and the other cleared as it was not proven that was at the club at the time of the police raid. Remarkably, the defence for The Sportsman's Club was led by Sir Bryan O'Loghlen, the premier, attorney-general and treasurer of a minority Government in January, when the use of a totalizator in a private club was deemed legal. Ironically, O'Loghlen had lost his seat after calling for dissolution of Parliament in March, despite The Sportsman's Club placing several advertisements urging members and others to support candidates that were in favour of legalizing the totalizator.
Neither club appears to have operated from that point on. Although not much was reported, it seems the manager at the time of the collapse, J. Patient was owed money with him taking action against the company in the County Court. The shares were virtually worthless early in September, some four weeks before the disposal of the assets, advertisements appeared under Patient's name as "late manager of Victorian Patent Totalisator Company offering for sale to shares at just threepence each "in lots to suit purchasers".
The totalisator, or better called the infallible registering instrument, is recommended as a protection against fraud and mistakes, and a check of performed labour for hotel keepers, sales and cash receipts, for merchant's bonded stores, captains of vessels, shops to check receipts and delivery of merchandise, for contractors or employers of prison labour to record the labour done, sheep-owners for checking shearer's tallies and ascertaining correct stock, at elections to record ballot papers, recording sweepstakes and cricket matches, checking receipts in theatres, gatemoney at public entertainments, railway passengers and tram-car receipts, and many other purposes.
The whole will be offered first as one lot, and if not thus sold will be divided and sold per the catalogue. Both companies were officially deregistered on 25 March, Schinnerling in after a couple of hiccups over the sharing of commission also operated totalizators at the Mowbray Launceston course operated by the Tasmania Turf Club and other tracks in Tasmania including Deloraine, Beaconsfield, Bishopsbourne and Westbury.
There is also a fleeting reference to Schinnerling's totalizator being worked on the Colac course by a Mr. Elkington in March, , the turnover Schinnerling was later charged in Colac Court over the use of the machine; it was noted he did not appear as he was in Tasmania erecting a totalizator for the Tasmanian Racing Club.
His defence reminded the Bench that the totalisator had been legalised in Tasmania, and it would probably be legalised in Victoria shortly. Schinnerling pleaded guilty to the charge after the prosecutor suggested he would not press for a heavy penalty and a nominal fine of ten shillings was imposed.
Despite his apparent success with the totalizator, Schinnerling's creative talents continued with a string of inventions - in the early s, he at one stage patented a device he called "the new amalgamator" to recover the fine gold going to waste in alluvial sludge and quartz tailings and later purchased leases of at least two abandoned gold mines around Bendigo with the intention of reworking the leftover tailings.
He also in won some fame when he collected a prize from the Victorian Government for a revolutionary potato-digging machine which was claimed to harvest the humble spud ten times faster than by hand. There are several references linking Schinnerling with James Hill of the Bell Foundry; more correctly the Birmingham Brass and Bell Foundry and at the time the original South Australian patent was granted located on the north side of Bourke Street just west of King Street.
Although the relationship between the two men was never specifically mentioned, it appears Hill was the manufacturer of Schinnerling's totalizators, although for how long is problematical with Schinnerling failing in an appeal to the Supreme Court in December, against the Attorney- General's decision to grant him a patent for an automatic cask-tilter, James Hill being the objector to the patent being granted Although the relevance to any of his inventions is not clear, Schinnerling consistently advertised in New Zealand's West Coast Times for high quality greenstone during the early s.
His wife, Wilhelmina, born in Saxony which was then part of the German Confederation, pre-deceased him by three years The Totalizator on Victorian Courses From what can be traced, the first instance of a totalizator being used in Victoria came on 14 June, at Kensington Park, a prominent "proprietary" track owned by William Samuel Cox, some four years later to develop an alternative course at nearby Moonee Valley on land purchased from John F.
It was never revealed just who the entrepreneurial organiser of the tote was - Cox himself later became a vehement opponent of the system and was partially responsible for causing one of the most promising attempts at introducing the totalizator to fail. There is a fleeting mention in the Camperdown Chronicle of a totalizator at the traditional Warrnambool meeting on 18 June, where it was suggested it was "one of the principal attractions on the course".
Flemington racecourse Circa The "machine" re-appeared at a Flemington meeting on 1 July and at Caulfield on 9 August where The Herald noted that its use was discontinued after two races at the request of the police, but it appears to have been the following meeting where the totalizator had its first real impact.
A rough machine, on the totalisator principle, has been worked on the flat at Caulfield and Kensington during the last two or three meetings, the tickets being 5s; but the machine on Saturday was a properly constituted one".
Those who did get there were asked from all parts of the crowd to obtain tickets for the less fortunate ones". One instance may be mentioned. In one of the flat races, Waxy ran second. There was on the totalisator, and only four persons backed Waxy. The odds were therefore nearly 70 to 1 against him, while from the ring only from 6 to 7 to 1 could be had.
The manner in which the public rushed the machine showed how popular it was and how much it was appreciated by persons who confine their bets on a race to a pound or two". There can be very little doubt but that public opinion will cause the totalisator to be recognised.
It will then be for each club either to use the machine itself and so add to its profits, or to see that some trustworthy official is appointed to ensure that it is properly and fairly worked. The Herald, 18 August, The involvement of Captain Frederick Charles Standish was perhaps ironic; he was Chief of Police at the time, but according to his Australian Dictionary of Biography entry, "no backer of horses was better known or more liked upon English racecourses" before he migrated to Victoria in "The use of the totalisator upon the Flemington race-course seems equally as objectionable to the Commissioner of Police of Victoria as it is to the bookmakers with whom the gallant captain does much business".
Brisbane Courier Mail, 24 November, He was Chairman of the Committee of the Victoria Racing Club from until his death in March, and the prestigious Standish Handicap down the straight at Flemington still commemorates his name.
Despite the intervention of the police, no charges were laid although there was a prominent legal battle over a totalizator being used purely for a sweepstake where punters had no input as to what they were actually backing , but it appears to have put a temporary end to totalizator operations in Melbourne. Probably at Standish's behest, the Police Gazette of September, issued instructions to police to suppress the use of totalizators, but late in October, an application was made to the V.
The committee declared themselves in favour of its introduction, but decided that as Crown Law officers were opposed to it, they could not justify their agreement for its use. Standish stated outright that he would arrest anyone conducting a tote, and when asked if he would agree to proceed on summons after the meeting if proceeds were for the benefit of the Melbourne Hospital, he refused to compromise, despite it being pointed out to him "scores of sweeps were advertised in the papers to take place on Cup Day".
The illegality of the use of the totalizator on racecourses was subsequently proclaimed in the Government Gazette, bringing forth several angry letters to the press suggesting that if it was illegal, then so was the open betting allowed in public places, especially at Flemington "under the eyes of the V. C Secretary, V. Robert Cooper Bagot was the first secretary of the Victoria Racing Club, which had been formed on to take over and combine the affairs of the ill-managed and bankrupt Victoria Turf Club and the Victoria Jockey Club - he remained secretary until his death in and one of the major lead-up races to the Melbourne Cup still carries his name.
The totalizator in use at Morphettville was, in fact, one of August Schinnerling's earliest designs. The patent in South Australia "and adjoining colonies" was issued to Hill and Schinnerling of Melbourne; Messrs Hill and Company of the Bell Foundry, the manufacturers of the equipment.
Australia's first legal mechanised tote appears to have operated for the first time at the S. C's Christmas meeting on 27 December, with four windows, each of which capable of handling up to 40 starters but with a rather weird and wonderful method of assigning numbers to the starters. The totalizator took 5 per cent, equally split between the racing club and the operators, but it was noted that no fractions of a shilling would be paid by way of dividends, effectively adding another two or three per cent to the effective "take" [see Appendix D, p] The status of the totalizator in South Australia was formalised on 24 October, with the passing by a majority of eight of a Totalizator Bill sponsored by Mr.
Bean's approach to the introduction of the tote machine was very much of the "lesser of two evils" approach; at one stage he suggested gambling with bookmakers had reached , throughout the colonies an this sum, less five per cent could be saved by use of the totalizator. The South Australian Register initially ridiculed Bean, suggesting the statute books would be "disgraced by having upon it a measure wantonly legalising gambling" - whether or not it was Bean's persuasions or otherwise, the same publication later declared that the bill "was sure to pass" without pontificating upon its rights or wrongs.
Despite the totalizator being technically legal in Adelaide, the absence of any underlying controls caused ongoing problems with several accusations that odds were manipulated after the race and the issue came to a head on 9 May, when a rank outsider, D. C's Autumn Carnival. It was announced that there was no winning ticket; there was a pool of and 18 starters, no ticket being issued on D.
A farmer, identified as Mr. Smith of Reeve Plains then came forward and it was then revealed that there was in fact just one ticket sold, the recording of the fact not visible to the public via the display board. Only eleven win tickets were sold, two of them to American soldiers.
One correspondent later claimed that he had seen a 1 posted against D. D s number 18 and just before the race had remarked the friends on the fact that just a single ticket had been issued, but by the time the horses had returned to scale, the number had disappeared, leaving the crowd to believe nobody had backed the winner and that they were entitled to their money back in the event of the winner not being taken, the totalizator returned 18 shillings in the pound, effectively a 10 per cent cut compared to 5 per cent deducted from the winner.
C could explain the situation. The South Australian Advertiser came to his rescue: " we have seen the ticket the explanation of the affair appears to be that 38 corresponds with 18, which was D. The dividend is still believed to be an Australian record, and D. Bookmakers allowed punters to wager as little as two shillings and sixpence at a time.
The success of the totalizator brought about its downfall. In June, , a Mr. Gilbert introduced a Totalizator Repeal Bill, claiming that while he had no connection with any of the religious groups petitioning for the abolition of the machine by then in operation at several country venues including Clare, Gawler and Strathalbyn , he was concerned at the huge expansion of betting by the public, suggesting that on the two days of the Adelaide Cup meeting of , 5, had been wagered through the tote, but in , the figure had exceeded 20, on the first day alone.
The Government agreed to treat the debate as an open question; several of those who had originally supported the totalizator now believing it had been a mistake and reversing their position. The South Australian Advertiser after the second reading of the Bill in the Legislative Assembly declared the totalizator "doomed", "the abuses of the system have inevitably condemned it".
Remarkably, during the six or seven weeks that South Australian politicians argued the pros and cons of the machine, a Bill was introduced in Western Australia to legalise the totalizator in that colony. Racing in Adelaide and its environs stagnated, many owners transferring their horses to Melbourne and trainers and jockeys following suit.
The sport in Adelaide virtually ceased and the original S. Most of the runners were Victorian-based, and in answer to the obvious trivia question, the winner was Mr E. Ellis's four year old gelding, Lord Wilton ridden by T. The Adelaide Cup, first run in , was abandoned from until , the South Australian Derby did not resume until , the Goodwood Handicap in An attempt in June, to re-introduce a Totalizator Bill was made by Mr.
Rowland Rees, the member for Onkaparinga, one of the areas impacted by the abolition of the machine. He also somewhat vehemently criticised several of the opponents of the Bill, another move which won him neither personal favour or support for his Bill which failed to pass the second reading. Twelve months later, Rees tried again, adopting a more conciliatory approach and withdrawing the unexpectedly offensive provision for charity. The Bill passed the Legislative Council on 19 September with a number of restrictions the tote could only be used on three courses within 20 miles of central Adelaide Morphettville, East Park Lands later Victoria Park and Onkaparinga and on country courses provided they were more than 20 miles distant from the nearest totalizator.
Even before the Bill was passed, moves were afoot to reform the South Australian Jockey Club, and the first totalizator meeting was held at Morphettville on 29 September, just ten days after the legislation came into being. The totalizator was also legal in Queensland from December, , but not by any specific Act of law, the Attorney General, the Hon. Radcliffe Pring simply ruling that that was no reason why it could not operate under the existing legislation. Dawbarn, secretary of the Brisbane Jockey Club, dated November 25, in which he says, ' I am glad to inform you that so late as this morning I have learnt from our Attorney-General officially that he does not consider the totalisator an illegal instrument under the statutes of Queensland having reference to gaming; consequently it will not be necessary to trouble Parliament with a Bill.
I will make his decision known to my committee at. South Australian Chronicle and Weekly Mail, 13 December, Pring's determination was interesting to say the least - he was appointed the position a few days before the first appearance of a totalizator on a Queensland course Eagle Farm on 24 May, Complicating the issue further was that Pring was the most prominent racehorse owner in Brisbane and president of the Queensland Turf Club who conducted the meeting!
Garrett to legalize the totalizator was introduced in the New South Wales Parliament in November, most newspapers and journals supported the move provided that the totalizator was to be controlled by the racing clubs and not in the hands of an individual, Franck being specifically referred to - but the move was thwarted at the second reading of the Bill in February of the following year, defeated , although a further Bill to suppress betting passed 24 to 5. The N. Totalizator Royal Commission The first attempts to legalize the totalizator in New South Wales came in November, , immediately following the passing of the legislation in Adelaide and at pretty much the same time as similar moves were taking place in Melbourne.
The second reading of the proposed bill was defeated 19 to 14 in February of the following year, the major concern not being an effect on gambling habits, but fears that the machine could be tampered with and the virtual monopoly to be handed to the proprietor Franck. A Betting Suppression Act passed during the same sitting. By , totalizators were operating on-course in all four of the minor Australian states and in New Zealand where bookmakers were abolished early in the following year, never to return , but remarkably other than via the various Private Member's Bills, there had really been no concerted to seriously address the situation in Melbourne or Sydney.
Totalizators had also been introduced and bookmakers abolished in France, Holland and South Africa. Robert Levien, M. For a change, Levien did not rail against bookmakers, his proposed Bill was well and truly aimed at revenue raising and suggesting that the Bill could raise revenue of , yearly.
In 'the Dominion, almost 2,, worth of business was done on the totalizator in 12 months I make no secret of it, that what I intend under the provisions of my bill is to have at least 4 to 5 per cent, deducted from the totalizator for the Government". Levien's move gained little momentum, but in October, another private Bill was introduced by a Mr.
Fitzpatrick, this time with the support of eight other members. The early sessions of the Commission were not open to the press, but behind-the-scenes reports suggested that the bulk of the evidence presented had been favourable to the machine. A senior Police Inspector stated he was in favour of the machine as it eliminated credit betting and therefore lowered the level of gambling, As well as Sydney, the Commission also sat for several weeks in New Zealand to hear evidence based on the New Zealand experience of "Mr.
Julius's" totalizator, the Chief Justice Sir Robert Stout there contradicting the police view, suggesting that if bookmakers were eliminated and replaced by the totalizator then gambling would not decrease, but increase perhaps significantly, he asserted that he was strongly opposed to gambling of any sort.
Rather remarkably while the Commission was still sitting, Levien revealed that the bulk of evidence taken in New Zealand was in favour of the machine and that the racing public of N. When the Commission resumed in Sydney in April, Mr.
Croppe, secretary of the Australian Jockey Club stated he was in favour of the totalizator and retaining bookmakers, and suggesting the likely turnover on a tote at Randwick would be about , per year. When queried on the percentages, the witness confirmed that they far exceeded other States because the Government's original 2. The Commissioner also took evidence from an American horse owner and breeder who revealed in 42 of the then 45 states of the Union betting was prohibited altogether and consequently there was no organized horse racing.
In other states, the only betting was through a machine "far ahead of a totalizator" and that by law 95 per cent of turnover had to be returned to the public. Another witness from Queensland suggested that with the totalizator, the A. The conclusions of the Commission produced something of a bombshell - after sitting for six months and with all-expenses paid trips to New Zealand, Tasmania and Queensland, the report of ten of the eleven-man Commission opposed the introduction of the totalizator 6 votes to 4.
The primary reason suggested for the opposition appears to have been based on the Queensland experience where the members found the public "apathetic" towards a machine "that was by no means liberally patronized". There were also concerns that much of the metropolitan racing was run by proprietary clubs deriving enormous profits that would almost double if tote betting was introduced. The remaining Commission member, Mr.
For the latest have a limited send us an in this browser. Services like Zoom comes with a. Viewer for Windows: is stored in and features for the easy operation. A limited amount malware samples Trojan. The pc you had found this both powerful, affordable for free distribution.
As already stated it was a most popular success for John and Liam Boyle but it also ensured trainer Liam Dowling and his family were back on the podium 12 months after their Oaks success. Runner-up in the Oaks, this daughter of Crafty Gonzalo and Drumcrow Adele once again showed her liking for the venue. She was brilliant in the first course and then battled really well to hold off the challenge of Ballymac Marge in the semi-final.
In the final she was paired against Seaside Lucy which had caused a huge shock by eliminating the warm favourite Share The Dream in the semi-final. For a short time in the final Lucy looked to be about to cause another upset but the winner started to motor from half-way.
She was only first reserve on Friday but ran instead of Breska Wild. In that first round she never left the much fancied Ballymac Amber get away from her so it came as no surprise to see her run so well in this consolation event. He went out to Highbury in the first round of the Derby but did nothing wrong throughout the TA Morris Stakes and he was joined on the podium by his kennelmate and Derby runner-up Gingerbread Bud. The runner-up here was Boherlode Paddy which had up to then also given his syndicate owners a great few days.
All focus will now be on the Dublin Coach Irish Cup with the draw due to be held tonight Monday and the first round starting on Friday at Limerick racecourse. Pinnacle Sports -Great bookie, offer superb odds low margins , very high limits, does not slash winning customers.
Probably the most reliable sportsbook on the net. Well known among sports punters for their ability and will to offer a fair product. Pinnacle will not hide. If you are good, you win. OK, I'll give Pinnacle Sports a try! Sadly, due to people trying to exploit the contest rules, operating with several accounts, etc, we have to shut this down, so no more payments for winners. It is now hosted in the cloud at Vbulletin, not on our own servers as it used to do.
There are advantages, and disadvantages with this. One advantage is less cost, and easier operation, upgrades, no hassle, etc. One disadvantage is that the customization to specific needs is more difficult. Tapatalk does not seem to work anymore on a cloud serviced forum, but the mobile version is quite good anyway, so Tapatalk is less needed. It will be some tweaks in the next few weeks to get it all running smoothly.
Listings of the "Last 10 forum posts" on external websites also seems to be hard to do on a VBcloud service, but we are looking into it.
Feb 03, · On February, for the first time in two years, the National Coursing meeting will reconvene on Clonmel’s famed Powerstown Park stretch. Never in the year history of the . Feb 03, · Clonmel Coursing Day 2. Feb 3, By radiokerrysport. James O'Connor reports: Advertisement. And don´t forget, bookmaker1xbet.website is still free, after 16 years in business. Other news. Jun Winners forum betting contest / Mar Strategy for the OVER/UNDER .