WHO SETS THE MARKET? 203 



previous ' form,' should bring Misery ' to the front,' or 

 so improve its position in the betting that it will afford 

 good hedging — it has become a proverb of the turf 

 that 'no bet is good till it is well hedged.' If, for in- 

 stance, Sin wins the Lincoln Handicap, then the bettor 

 stands to win £800 by the success of Miser}^ in the 

 City and Suburban ; and as Misery has twice before 

 beaten Sin, Misery, in consequence of the success of 

 Sin, comes to be quoted in the betting at 100 to 6, so 

 that the bet can be hedged at about that price to 

 any extent under £8C0. The holder of the bet, to use 

 the phraseology of the turf, can in such case ' stand 

 on velvet,' and win either way. He can lay, if he 

 ])!eases, £400 to £20, and so win £19 if the horse loses, 

 or £400 if it wins. If the horse loses tlie race, that is, 

 he has £20 to receive of hedging-raon'r^y and his stake 

 of £1 to pay ; if the hor.se wins he receives £800, out of 

 which he has to pay the £400 he laid. It may be 

 said that it would be better to back the horses singly, 

 because the stake won over the first horse could then 

 either be reinvested or saved. There are, however, 

 two sides to that way of putting the case. One side is 

 that odds of £800 to £1 are obtained against the 

 double event being realized. Ju>t so ; but if Sin had 

 been backed singly at 20 to 1, Misery, when the first 

 event came olf, as has been explained, may have risen 

 in the price current to IG to 1, so that if both winnings 

 and stake of £1 were to be reinvested, all that could 

 be realized in the event of the second win coming off 

 would be a sum of £8.')G. On the other hand, the 

 second horse may have gone back in the betting to 

 50 to 1 against its chance ; and in that case, if tlio 



