 | little cox
2005-06-08 16:39:34 | Hurrah, shares trading returns - Thanku!! :-D
|
|---|
 | Trader@Dow
2005-06-08 14:04:06 | Ex King's Captain wrote:
# Tell you what, I will sort this before i leave the
# lab at about 4:30 today.
Thanks. It just needs a decision so we can get on with the game :-)
Good work.
|
|---|
 | Wallis
2005-06-08 12:05:23 | Bet you wish you never volunteered now. :) We do appreciate it, really.
|
|---|
 | Ex King's Captain
2005-06-08 11:51:17 | Tell you what, I will sort this before i leave the lab at about 4:30 today.
|
|---|
| Trader@Dow
2005-06-08 11:13:22 | This needs sorting out today. Some of us want to trade the suspended shares before Friday's GoR
|
|---|
| Ex King's Captain
2005-06-08 00:14:12 | I might be able to get a full set, otherwise if I haven't by tomorrow evening, I will award what is there in terms of winners.
|
|---|
 | Maverick
2005-06-07 23:41:16 | smeagol wrote:
# it wouldn't be fair to award some dividends (i.e.
# just the winners) and not the rest. im with Tev -
# let's just get on with the game
I agree we should get on with the game, but I can't see any good arguments against first awarding dividends and honouring bets as far as the available results allow. But then we're inevitably all biased one way or the other so I reckon ex-KC should just ignore all of us and make his own decision...
|
|---|
 | muppet
2005-06-07 23:19:44 | No money? :(
I got it in the neck for mentioning I had FaT shares at Peterborough.
|
|---|
 | snowman99
2005-06-07 22:29:28 | I'm not, i want my money...
|
|---|
 | smeagol
2005-06-07 21:25:28 | it wouldn't be fair to award some dividends (i.e. just the winners) and not the rest. im with Tev - let's just get on with the game
|
|---|
| Wallis
2005-06-07 17:15:21 | The results were out well before 24 hours were up. Not that I have a shedload of downing shares or anything...
|
|---|
 | Tevildo
2005-06-07 16:56:01 | Not that I haven't got any Downing/FaT/Pembroke shares or anything ...
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-07 16:55:19 | It's way over 24h now; let's just go by the rulebook ...
|
|---|
| Maverick
2005-06-07 16:04:28 | Awarding the winners' dividends and voiding the rest would seem to be a reasonable compromise...
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-07 15:57:24 | Last year's were voided long before the Tuesday. Let's just get on with the game.
|
|---|
| Wallis
2005-06-07 15:20:24 | You can't really rely on second hand results though.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-07 15:18:50 | And surely official results *were* released at the regatta itself, just haven't made it as far as the internet yet. People who were at the regatta have been able to relay some of the relevant results onto the messageboard here.
|
|---|
| Wallis
2005-06-07 15:14:42 | Makes a bit of a mockery of the whole thing if that's the case. A list of winners is clearly official results, just not complete. Surely you award whatever dividends can be awarded based on whatever official results are released...
|
|---|
| Ex King's Captain
2005-06-07 15:10:42 | The help says:
"If no official results are forthcoming within 24 hours after the event, no dividends will be paid and all bets declared void."
Now a list of winners isn't the same thing, as some people are going to lose out. Looks like void to me.
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-07 15:00:44 | Peterborough Sunday dividends ought to be awarded for winning crs at least.
|
|---|
 | Chuckles
2005-06-07 12:55:57 | I had started to write some of the sunday results down, but didn't manage to get them all as I didn't want to miss my lift back to Cambridge.
Guess the dividends given out for Peterborough won't reflect what they should be.
|
|---|
| Ex King's Captain
2005-06-07 11:11:08 | I have emailed and asked for full results, but I doubt they will actually bother to send them to me.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-07 09:48:18 | That is a shame, as the results given on the day gave times for everyone racing in all heats
http://www.firstandthird.org/frames/photos/mcppicture.phtml?year=2005&term=3&eventid=437&pic=1726.4389
|
|---|
 | Festa
2005-06-06 23:00:44 | Shame its winners only on PCRC site. CCAT were going to bring me in some decent divis.
Still better than last year though I guess.
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-06 22:56:03 | Peterborough Sunday winners up only. Met now has both days up.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-06 09:46:02 | Muppet, yes it was the same crew that won City Sprints.
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-06 09:16:24 | Wallis wrote:
# Now the question is whether PCRC will bother
# putting results on the web, or whether all
# dividends will be declared void like last year.
My money's on voided dividends.
|
|---|
| Wallis
2005-06-06 09:00:53 | Now the question is whether PCRC will bother putting results on the web, or whether all dividends will be declared void like last year.
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-06 02:37:37 | Was the FaT women's four that won on Sunday the same as the one that won at City Sprints at novice?
Just curious.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-06 00:29:47 | Perhaps, but Wolfson are looking pretty snappy too, and starting directly behind Downing M2.
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-05 23:59:36 | Finish order was Pembroke, Downing, Derby, Nines for that one.
They were also first out of four in the heat.
Downing M2 are pretty quick. You have to feel sorry for Sidney with two quick second crews behind each of their first eights.
|
|---|
| Chuckles
2005-06-05 23:41:39 | The places for crews during the heats and finals were (as far as I can remember):
S2 8+ Dow M1 heat 2/2, final 4/4
S3 8+ Dow M1 heat 1/3, final 1/4. M2 heat 1/2, final 2/4.
S4 8+ CCAT heat 2/3, final 2/4. Dow M2 heat 1/3, final 1/4.
WS2 8+ Pem final 1/(3?). Dow 2/(3?).
Pem won WS3 8+ as well, but don't know any details.
|
|---|
| snowman99
2005-06-05 22:32:17 | think downing won mens s4 8+
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-05 22:08:27 | FaT website results are right except for the fact that we only lost to them by a foot in WS34+ ;-)
Good racing though! Was worth the investment I think.
|
|---|
 | Jacket de Splash
2005-06-05 21:02:40 | Pembroke W1 won S2 and won S3.
Downing W1 were in the S2 and S3 final, and their men seemed to be winning some things too.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-05 20:41:41 | It was WS4.8+ that the women won (after winning their heat) yesterday. In WS3.8+, they won their heat, but were 3rd in the final.
Today, the women were joint fastest in the heat of WS3.4+, and won the final (as they all had points from yesterday, they couldn't enter WN4+ or WS4.4+).
In the single, Tom fell in in N1x, came 2nd in the heat of S4.1x and 3rd in the repechage (according to the FaT website)
Dunno how Pembroke, Downing or CCAT did.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-04 21:44:37 | I can tell you the FaT results from Peterborough.
In N4+, we won our heat comfortably - came 2nd by about 3 feet in the semi-final, but came 4th in the final, 5 seconds behind the winner (St. Cuth's Society Freshmen's crew).
In S4.8+, they won their heat comfortably, and came 2nd in the final - not sure of margin.
In S3.8+, they missed the early train, and failed to get to the start on time!
The Women won WS3.8+ (I think), and got to the final of WS4.8+, but came 3rd I think (or it might have been the other way round with S3 and S4.)
|
|---|
| Chuckles
2005-06-04 17:38:24 | Any results yet from either regatta? I know some of the finals haven't happended yet, but how did people get on in the heats/semis?
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-03 18:54:06 | Yeah our boys are shivering at that thought. ;-)
My predictions - Clare and Queens' to pull in the cash on Dorney, FaT and Pembroke to pull in the cash at Peterborough.
This will all go totally wrong obviously so sell your shares in these colleges.
To me. For not much money.
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-03 17:37:33 | muppet wrote:
# How do the crews compare to what went to
# Twickenham? Peterborough ought to at least provide
# opposition of similar strength.
#
But Peterborough is prestigious enough to contain crews such as "Nottingham BC - Cracknell" in E2-
Who said all the good crews went to the Met ... ?
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-03 16:38:38 | How do the crews compare to what went to Twickenham? Peterborough ought to at least provide opposition of similar strength.
|
|---|
| Chuckles
2005-06-03 14:33:06 | I'm hoping Downing will do well, but then I am probably biased as I will be rowing in one of the crews and want to win a pot.
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-03 13:52:37 | muppet wrote:
# Only a handful of these really have a chance of
# decent dividends.
True, but which ones ?
I reckon FaT, Pembroke & Queens' have good chances.
|
|---|
| FaT LBC
2005-06-03 10:59:08 | But unless they're all going to come last in their first heats, then there'll probably be *some* dividends for most of them.
|
|---|
| muppet
2005-06-03 10:23:51 | Only a handful of these really have a chance of decent dividends.
|
|---|
| Tevildo
2005-06-01 10:01:22 | So, I think we have the following crews :
Met Sat:
LMBC A: S28, S38
LMBC B: S28, S38
Christs: S38
Emma: S14+, S24+
Clare: WS24+, WS34+
Met Sun:
Emma: S28, S38
Clare/Robs: S24+, S34+
Queens', Coventry: E1x, S11x
LMBC: WS38
Pet Sat:
FaT: S38, S48, N4+, WS38, WS48
CCAT: WS48, WN8
Churchill: WS32x
Christs (Haw): WN1x
Pet Sun:
Downing A: S28, S38, WS38, WS48
Downing B: S38, S48
CCAT S48, WS48, WN8
Pembroke: WS28, WS38
FaT: WS44+, WN4+
Fat Coker: S41x, N1x
|
|---|
