Home » Racing & Sport » Hollywoodbets Punter Scoops Massive Pick 6

Hollywoodbets Punter Scoops Massive Pick 6

Joyful player joins Millionaires' Club

A very astute Hollywoodbets Horseracing punter has pocketed an incredible R1 463 741 when taking a Pick 6 open bet at Greyville on Sunday.

He won the equivalent of the entire pool!

Had the skilful punter placed his bet directly on the tote, he would have reduced his payout from R1 463 741 to R904 675.

This massive payout comes just weeks after Hollywoodbets increased its’ maximum Pick 6 dividend from R5 million to R10 million.

A Hollywoodbets spokesman said that SA’s leading bookmakers look forward to welcoming many more of their loyal punters to the Millionaires’ Club.

Have Your Say

Comments Policy
The Sporting Post encourages allcomers to feel free to have their say in the spirit of enlightening the topic, the participants and the originator of the thread. However, if it is deemed to be either offensive, insulting, personal, false or possibly unsubstantiated, the Sporting Post shall, on it's own assessment, alter or remove comments.

41 comments on “Hollywoodbets Punter Scoops Massive Pick 6

  1. Jimmy says:

    Well done to the punter however bookmakers and their open bet have Zero to be proud of,in actual fact this punter got done in, had the open bet been ban which it should be an average P6 pool would be on average 2.5 times larger but typical bookmakers paint a picture perfect scenario, you getting my drift?? What I would love to have heard was that 5 punters each caught a single ticket wonder if Hollywood would have paid out a total of 7 million Rand,I doubt it!!!!

  2. Anthony says:

    ED…Please explain the statement above…………”Had the skilful punter placed his bet directly on the tote, he would have reduced his payout from R1 463 741 to R904 675.”

    1. Editor says:

      There were 1.24 winners of the Greyville Pick 6 on Sunday.
      The pool was R1 463 741 with a dividend of R1 182 185 – the Hollywood punter took a perm for 99%. He doubled up in one leg, so effectively won the bext 1.98 times – his payout with Hollywood was limited to the total pool.
      If he had played on the tote there would have been 3.22 winners ( the pool would have increased by a net R7500 to R1471241 ) with a new declared dividend of R456 907 – his payout would have been that sum times 1.98, which equates to R904 675.
      The 1,24 punters who caught the Pick 6 on the tote also benefitted – as their end dividend would have been diluted by about 60%.

  3. Steve Reid says:

    Jimmy there are none so blind as those that cannot see. The operators lose out and continue to lose to the bookmakers because quite simply, they do not cater for the needs of their customers.

    I visited Hollywood Springfield on Sunday to avoid the shopping sprees being undertaken by family members at a nearby retail establishment and was blown away by what was on offer. There was a lavish, spacious clean punting environment with great pubs, plenty of televisions showing the action going down and believe it or not, a food offering so good that it attracted non-racing/sports betting punters to sample. Coupled to this there were FRIENDLY, knowledgeable staff members who understood the betting market and efficiently took verbal bets as called accurately. It was a buzzing environment that made you want to be a part of and I could happily have spent the day there if I had so wanted.

    Now compare this to the dross offered at the totes and stop defending the indefensible. The operators are clueless and deserve the punishment that they are getting by way of the open bet. Long may bookmakers prosper.

  4. Jimmy says:

    My Mate if I was out for an outing I would visit at resturant at Gateway . Steve dont be blinded by what bookmakers offer in essence do the math and then comment on who is the loser end of the day and i I can assure you its not the bookmaker my mate. I am not defending the indefensible I am purely stating facts which you clearly take offence too.

    BOOKMAKERS in SA give nothing back to the industry they pigback off the operator on many different levels.

  5. Jimmy says:

    Ed the day will arrive when 5 different punters arrive at Hollywood each with a single winning ticket I want you please comment on how Hoillywood gracefully paid out the total sum of R7 318 705 I await this day with great anticiaption?!! R1 463 741 to each single holder.

    1. Editor says:

      Winners can surely never be bad for racing, Jimmy

  6. Jimmy says:

    Ed you not getting my drift my friend please just think about what I saying when I mention the 5 punters?

    Had there not been an open bet the P6 pools would be 2.5x larger than they currently are because this is what all open bet facilitator hold on a single meeting, now if 5 punters caught a P6 they would divide the dividend of assuming 2.5 million irrespective of their location,500k each.Now let’s assume 5 Hollywood punters unknown too each other each caught a single ticket of 1.4 million are Hollywood going to pay each individual 1.4 million are they expected to chop up the 1.4 amongst themselves?

    Ed winning is great for the game this is not my dispute my dispute is with the open bet?

    1. Editor says:

      The fact is that Hollywood would have paid out your hypothetical five punters

  7. I play the open bet with Hollywood because I despise Phumelela.

    It is my guess that Hollywoodbets holds more money on soccer, numbers and horseracing on weekends that the tote… and possibly a lot more.

  8. Jimmy says:

    Point well taken William however one needs to understand that holllywoodbets will unfortunately not keep horse racing alive if one has an issue it needs to be presented to Phumelela even though I hear your frustration.

  9. Jimmy says:

    Are you absolutely sure or is this your assumption?

  10. Steve Reid says:

    Jimmy you fighting a losing battle trying to convince me that the operators are good for racing.

  11. Jimmy says:

    Health debate Steve thats all for me its purley about the return through ownership and punting and this I dont see happening with the open bet, owners of racehorses are the life blood of this sport and the more money that disappears in the coffers of bookmakers through the open bet the worse off the industry will be….all the best.

  12. Trevor says:

    Load of nonsense. I went to hollywood tote in Springfield to cash my winnings at they tote. It was only R18800 and they had no cash to give me. They gave me R5000 and a voucher to go else where. What service is this.

    1. Editor says:

      Cash is high risk for both staff and customers, so like many businesses, HW have a policy of doing EFT payments for larger amounts. All in the interest of safety!

  13. Sandhiran says:

    Jimmy I fully agree with you . We operate tab agencies in the KZN area and fully understand the impact of the open bet . Bookies allowed to take tote bets and tote betting is limited . The sad reality is that the tab/ tote outlets will soon be a thing of the past.

  14. Tony Mincione says:

    With all due respect to Jimmy, perhaps you are a Phumelela shareholder or an owner or something, but you are misguided. Bookmakers have every right to look after their customers, and they have every right to have customers. As a punter, that is what I want.

    It’s not for the grocery shopper to agonize about the “welfare” of his shop, or for the gambler at the Casino to worry about Sun, or the beer drinker to worry about SAB. Punters need to worry about themselves because believe me, no one else is, and especially not owners and the rest, including the operators.

    If the P6 pays R1 million (say the whole pool), then every bookmaker is expanding that pool in theory and making many millions ‘available’ to be won. Maybe the pool would be bigger is everyone played on the tote, but they don’t. I wouldn’t. So the reality is that the open bet is good for the punter. It’s a fact that I would have to be ignorant to play a tote bet on the tote.

    Phumelela has lots of interested parties to look after. I’m pretty sure that the punter is either very low on the list, or not on it at all. Their shareholders are on the list, their tenants are, their wage earners are, their sponsors are, and mostly their (our) international subscribers and overseas punters are.

    Competition is good for the punter. The more the better. Punters can start worrying about what money owners race their very expensive horses for…the day owners worry about toilets for punters.

    The tote doesn’t ‘deserve’ anything. Punters ‘owe’ racing nothing. Everyone in racing looks after themselves, and punters need to look after themselves. Go where they prefer, spend their money how they want. If gambling on horses was banned, racing would end there and then so it’s clear how the income flows.

    The tote was ‘given’ to racing to fund the sport, seperate from bookmakers who were there first. It’s the greatest gift, never loses and makes billions wherever a licence is granted. The percentages a tote takes makes a casino look like a bank.

    It’s bizarre to move the onus of racings’ survival to it’s customer, rather than onto it’s beneficiaries.

    My last comment is I still know lots of people in racing from up to 30 years back now. Everyone has plenty to say, and why not. But hardly any of them have had a bet in recent memory, only a couple own any horses now. They live on memories. You certainly can’t blame bookmakers for that, or punters. So Jimmy, who?

  15. Jimmy, many years ago I would have worn the Tote t-shirt i.e bet with the Tote. I have seen a multitude of repeated mistakes and poor service dished up to the betting public by Phumelela and its ‘buddies’. So much so, that I only bet with Hollywood locally, and most of my betting with overseas sites.

    On Saturday, my minute % Pick 6 win was in my account by 9pm. Hollywoodbets make mistakes, but nothing close to those like Phumelela. When I have a problem, glitch or moan with Hollywood, I can now direct it at those at Hollywood that count and then we move on.

    The tote website is a constant joke…. the sightliest hint of increased volume and it crashes. Mr Stuart admitted years ago, on his TV channel, that the computer system had Flintstone technological capabilities.

    That’s just an example of 1 or 2 issues of a 100 to mention. In the very early 80’s, I can guarantee you that only a staff of 60 people ran a raceday at Kenilworth (payouts, rules, offtimes, parade ring, display, catering, betting windows and staff know how). I worked with the Tote manager then as a junior. That out perform this current lot by miles.

    Those people liked racing, they understood what the punters expected from them, on the day. Even the casuals were proud to work for R15.

    So, so, I have placed by own trade embargo on those Phumelela clowns 🙄

    Maybe I’m wrong with the open bet, I don’t know anymore. (´>_●)メ(●_<`)


  16. Jimmy says:

    Turn it up please mr Ed !! You guessing, actullay sounds like u may have shares in HW! Punters bring cash because HW won’t allow credit bets however when a punter wins he must go elsewhere with credit vouchers turn it up mate!!

    1. Editor says:

      No guessing Jimmy – we give all entities a fair chance to provide a response and comment

  17. Jimmy says:

    Trevor , Steve Reid would be most qualified to answer you lol !!

  18. Anthony says:

    I wish to remind all the commentators above that, whether you like the operator or not, no bets on the tote equals no income to the stakes pot. No income to the stakes pot equals no stakes. No stakes equals no owners. No owners equals no horses, no trainers, no grooms etc and eventually no horse racing. I would rather rack my brain with my skill and computaform trying to workout a P6 than sit like a dummy at any roulette wheel

  19. Jimmy says:

    Tony please tell me what bookmakers give back to the industry? And please exclude the bottle of whiskey you may enjoy from them on the House?

  20. Jimmy says:

    Point taken .

  21. Jimmy says:


  22. Loraine Karam says:

    Hello Ed

    Quick question , is there any link between Sporting Post and Hollywood Bets ?

    1. karel says:

      They are separate entities. There is no working relationship on editorial matter.

  23. Sean says:

    100% agree, Anthony but this is due to how Phumelela & B/World service their clients. Many complaints fall on deaf ears. Staff play on their cellphones while you are standing in front of them and when you ask for a bet, they are not even aware of what venue is next, race etc. At exotic bet times, you find one person on the till. We could go on and on but the point is made. Unfortunately, customer/client experience has evaporated and if you don’t provide the bare minimum of a service, the punter can bet soccer or whatever else that is available. People move on. What will Management do to rectify this problem. Cannibalisation of businesses happen when you don’t remain ahead of the trend! The self destruct button has been on for sometime!

  24. Shaun says:

    Hollywood is robbing most of us.
    On Friday I caught a trifecta 10times. It paid 309. Payout was suppose to be 3091.
    They only paid me 2638. Because apparently the tote pool was only 2638.
    If they payout like that. Why are not adding our bets to tote pool.
    Although it’s just 500. But it’s money

    1. karel says:

      If you don’t know the Rules, you should not bet.
      Tigers don’t cry.

  25. Tony Mincione says:

    This is worse than “Tigers don’t cry.” If you don’t understand why there are pool limits, you either haven’t thought it through or you are not able to. You really need to up your game Shaun.

  26. Roderick Mattheyse says:

    I should have learned not to try and debate against the Hollywood Police!!

    It is not customer-centric to bash people who might not have the same understanding of the rules, the Hollywood ambassadors should maybe get that. Maybe enlighten the man not to bet into R2700 pools in the first place – surely there is no upside.

    1. karel says:

      All bookmakers have rules.
      Why pick on Hollywood.
      We had a post from someone who bashed another bookmaker, which was thrashed (language).

      By the way we are not Hollywood ambassadors. You got that very wrong. But hey, assumptions are what makes the comments roll.

  27. Roderick Mattheyse says:

    OK, my bad. But this community does seem very pro Hollywood, and maybe because I am not I should just wind my neck in.

  28. Mr Mattheyse, there is no bashing of Shaun. In actual fact, this is the only site that educates punters about been streetwise. Shaun brought his issue to the table, not SP. The Editor gave him the best possible advice… know the rules and limits and be aware when The Tote pays out, on open bets, using the UK tote dividends or purely local pools held.

    Kindly remember, Hollywood strictly follows what Phumelela post as a dividend. If you phone Customer Service at Phumelela, they say ‘ Why you phoning us to explain’.

    SP responses to the simplest of questions regarding day-to-day betting… other than those that aren’t looking for an answer but just want to incite ugliness.

    I don’t have any shares in SP, but I’ve read noted their comments from DAY ONE.

    SP don’t take sides.

    Footnote/general question : Can a fish suffer from influenza or have a headache ?

  29. Roderick Mattheyse says:

    We will agree to disagree on whether the comments were derogatory or not.

    I’m not a hollywood fan – i think they are best suited to being on the braai next to the other chops – but not too close to the Woolies chops – those are real quality

  30. Tony Mincione says:

    Roderick Mattheyse (and Shaun)

    Perhaps I can try to enlighten Shaun.

    I disclose I like bookies and I’m not neutral on the tote…I don’t like the tote. Don’t like them or how they do things or how they behave as if they are owed a living. Worked for the tote during high school and student days when the computers came in and IGN started. Don’t like the maximum takeouts, and got more furious when I heard there are apparently kickbacks off our pools to international players that happen from the Isle Of Man and would very much like to hear a denial.

    Having said all that, playing open bets in a small pool makes perfect sense and I applaud Shaun for winning a 300/1 trifecta multiple times. So because he played the at a bookmaker off the tote he won the whole pool that was on the tote, separately. More he cannot do. Well done.

    The dividend (R309) from a pool (R2,638) meant the was 8.5 winning tickets on the tote. Had Shaun played his 10 winning tickets on the tote there would have been 18.5 tickets, and lets say Shaun’s stake took the pool up to R3,000, the dividend would be R162 and Shaun would have won R1,620.

    So he did the exact right thing to maximize his play.

    But to accuse the bookmaker of stealing from him (and most people) because of pool limits is wrong. There are many inefficiencies on pool betting where the pool is small. Or any market for that matter. So the bookmaker can let massively incorrect odds go by, if they can have a stop loss at the size of the pool. It stands to reason you can’t allow for huge incorrect odds AND no limit.

    Shaun instead of saying “look how clever I am” is pointing exactly the opposite direction going “I’ve been robbed.” He wasn’t. In fact, he played them!

    Ok, I tried.

  31. Steve Reid says:

    I’m loving this debate and at the same time amazed at how ignorant some people are as to the workings of the tote machine.

    One thing that everyone pro the tote conveniently forget is that the tote carries exactly ZERO risk and skim from pools so they are always a winner, be it a 1/10 or a 50/1 result. Compare this to the bookies laying the open bet and the situation is vastly different. Jimmy seems to think if there were 5 winning tickets on the pick six, then payment would not have taken place. The fact is that the bookie would have had to pot the entire 5 winning tickets which would have meant a 5 x the tote dividend, whereas if the bets were put on the tote then the dividend would have been divided by the additional 5. This is a vastly different result and clearly indicates why the mug money pays for the dividends. Any thinking punter should steer clear from the tote unless they prefer smaller dividends.

    We now have the whining about how the tote pays for the show. This is true and not disputed. What is disputed however is what percentage of the tote profits are allocated to stakes. The Original Stakes agreement has been changed to the operators benefit due to the limp wristed actions of Wainstein and company, the shares the Racing Trust have held in Phumelela have been diluted for the same reason. Owners interests have been steamrolled by the corporate juggernaut that worries about returns to shareholders and nothing else. Phumelela are responsible for putting on the racing show. They are responsible for providing the tracks the horses race on. Tell me, how well do you think that they have done? The idiots are reaping exactly what they have sown with the shutting down of the tracks that they have. They scenario that they find themselves in was predicted many years ago by myself and others. It’s not rocket science. I raced horses for many years and was rewarded by sub inflation increases in stakes. The dividends paid to shareholders on the other hand was nothing less than spectacular. A comparison of stakes increases vs dividends paid over the last 15 years will shut up even the most ardent Phumelela supporting racehorse owner. They have raped and pillaged this game at owners expense. It is indisputable.

  32. Jimmy says:

    Hi Steve I simply posed the question would HW Ho our 5 ticket holders of which I have my doubts, SP seems to think they will. I must conclude Steve by saying that Bookmakers in general give very little back to industry yet we scratch out heads wondering why stakes are dwindling and why we continuously lose our top blood stock to international markets.Steve the open bet contributes significantly to these challenges regardless of what you may think…..enjoy your next day out at HW my mate.

  33. Roderick Mattheyse says:

    Thank you Tony.

    You have failed to explain to Shaun why pool limits are in place as you have indicated that he is a retard if he does not understand this.

    I too believe the tote takeout is to big. But whether you play the open bet or not this will not change that fact. It also irks me that international players get a better deal than I do, and there may well come a time that I vote with my feet and not support Horseracing like
    I did to Hollywood who in my opinion are of no use to man or beast.

Comments are closed.

‹ Previous

WSB Grand Series Is Born!

Next ›

Eight On The Turffontein Inside Today

Popular Posts