Deductions remain one of the most confusing and inconsistent parts of betting on Australian racing. They’ve been part of the wagering landscape for decades, but for many punters they’re a mystery – and worse, they can be misleading.
For those not familiar, a deduction is the reduction in the odds (and therefore the payout) on a fixed-odds bet when a horse is scratched after the market has opened. While the principle makes sense – removing a competitor changes the probability of the remaining runners – the way deductions are handled is riddled with problems.
Two Major Issues
From a punter’s perspective, the issues are clear:
- Inconsistency – Outside Victoria, there is no single standard for calculating deductions. They can vary depending on the state or even the bookmaker.
- Emergencies – Some wagering service providers (WSPs) apply deductions when emergencies are scratched, others don’t. Punters are left guessing unless they’ve read the fine print.
This isn’t a criticism of bookmakers. Each is simply applying deductions within the framework they’re allowed. The problem lies with how Principal Racing Authorities regulate – or fail to regulate – the system.
Victoria Shows the Way (to some degree…)
On 30 August 2022, Racing Victoria (RV) introduced a Victorian Official Deductions (VOD) policy under its race fields legislation. This reform requires all WSPs to use the same deduction schedule on Victorian thoroughbred races.
The change delivered two big wins for punters:
- Consistency – No matter where you place your bet, the deduction for a given scratching is the same.
- Transparency – The official VOD rates are published and available to everyone. Bookmakers can apply a lower deduction if they wish, but not a higher one.
In short, punters in Victoria are protected from what many elsewhere call “deductions lotto”.
However, Victoria hasn’t yet standardised how bookmakers treat emergencies.
What’s Still Broken
- Two punters can back the same horse, at the same time, in the same race – but receive vastly different deductions depending on their bookmaker.
- Emergencies are treated differently depending on the operator. Some deduct, others don’t. The result is a market that can appear misleading to the naked eye.
- For casual punters, it’s confusing. For racing as an industry, it’s damaging to trust, and it has to be costly to turnover.
Take a recent example: On Saturday night, markets were up for Sunday’s Flemington meeting.
Sportsbet appeared to be top price across the board on race four. The catch? They deduct for emergencies – and one of those emergencies was the short-priced favourite Chest of Gold.
That’s not a criticism of Sportsbet; they’re operating within the rules; in fact, I think the method they use is the most equitable. But it illustrates how two punters shopping across operators can easily be misled.
Depending on who is scratched, anyone who bets early is going to receive a different outcome.
A No-Brainer for Racing
Australian racing needs every customer it can get. Confidence and trust are vital, especially in an era where punters have endless alternatives for where to spend their money.
Victoria took the first step to sorting out the deductions mess, but stopped short of solving the whole problem.
Quite simply, a national standard, applied across all jurisdictions, would eliminate confusion and ensure fairness. It seems a no-brainer to me.
In the end, this isn’t about bookmakers or regulators protecting themselves – it’s about protecting punters. And if the industry is serious about growing wagering and sustaining the sport, fixing deductions should be the easiest decision of all.
