Birdwatching is often viewed as a hobby geared towards an older audience, but Broomfield Bird Club members said the club gains plenty of interest from younger kids. Subscribe to continue reading this article. Already subscribed? To login in, click here.Trump voices support for Hegseth, says he's "doing very well"
Tributes to Walker's patriarch who ‘brought Scotland to the world’
RUSSIA’S AVANT-GUARDIANS: RT PRESENTS NEW DOCUMENTARY REVISITING TRADITIONAL CULTURESPassing in 2024, impactful professors, coaches, leaders and artists left legacies in DentonNone
A Lotto player is celebrating after winning a life-changing jackpot of €5.9m on Saturday evening. The winning numbers were 2, 4, 5, 10, 16, 17. The Bonus number was 23. In total, over 77,000 players won prizes in the Lotto and Lotto Plus draws Two players won the Match 5 plus bonus, which saw them walk away with a hefty €40,341. Thirty-five Match 5 players won €688. There was no winner of the Lotto Plus 1 draw, which was worth €1m. The winning numbers were 8, 18, 20, 21, 34, 41. The Bonus was 40. The biggest winner in the Plus 1 were seven players who matched five numbers and won €500 each. There was also no winner of the Lotto Plus 2 top prize. The winning numbers were 19, 23, 26, 27, 33, 44. The Bonus was 2. The latest Lotto millionaire will be joining the other 33 Lotto millionaires that were made in 2024. A National Lottery spokesman said: ‘The National Lottery has created a massive 33 brand new millionaires in 2024 with over 161 players sharing over €103million alone in high-tier prizes across all draw-based games.’ Dublin, Cork, Kerry and Limerick emerged as the ‘big winners’ of 2024 with the most millionaires being made in those three counties. Dublin topped the charts for National Lottery wins with more than €21million paid out to 32 players, seven of whom won prizes in excess of €1million. One of the Limerick winners claimed the second-largest prize of 2024, a Lotto jackpot worth an astounding €8.9million.
The leaders of the Greater Idaho movement have asked President-elect Donald Trump to support their efforts to have counties in eastern Oregon join Idaho – a state they say is more in tune with them politically, economically and culturally. “Unlike typical politicians, you have a unique ability as a practical problem-solver to get things done, and your support can bring a peaceful resolution to Oregon’s long-standing east-west divide,” the three leaders said in a Dec. 4 letter to Trump. Matt McCaw, the executive director of Citizens for Greater Idaho, said Thursday morning that the group has not yet received a response from Trump. “It takes time for these things to filter through, but we are hopeful that somebody from the administration will reach out to us and pick this up,” McCaw said. “This is an idea whose time has come.” The letter also was signed by Mike McCarter, president of Citizens for Greater Idaho, and Sandie Gilson, the vice president. Trump’s background in business and not politics is an advantage, McCaw said: “He’s a businessperson, he’s a problem-solver. He’s shown that he’s been open to outside-the-box thinking. And we think that this is a perfect fit.” During the last four years, voters in 13 eastern Oregon counties have passed initiatives requiring county commissioners to meet regularly to discuss the merits of moving the Oregon-Idaho border so that the counties are part of Idaho. McCaw said a meeting with Trump or a surrogate would allow the Greater Idaho officials to bring the administration up to speed on the movement. And after that, he said, “what we would hope is that the administration could help get the state of Oregon to the negotiating table.” “The people of eastern Oregon want this to happen,” McCaw said. “The people of Idaho want this to happen.” “However,” the letter to Trump said, “Oregon’s Legislature and governor remain sullen, preferring to ignore the results of these citizens’ initiatives while continuing to march the state ever more left.” The letter added that “eastern Oregon residents recognize that representative government will never come from Oregon because we are outvoted on every issue the progressives put forth, leaving us completely disenfranchised.” While Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris easily won in Oregon, outpolling Trump by more than 320,000 votes, it was a different story in the 13 eastern Oregon counties in the Greater Idaho effort: Trump beat Harris by more than 50,000 votes in the region. The border change would require the approval of the Oregon and Idaho legislatures and, eventually, the U.S. Congress. A measure urging leaders of the two states to discuss the change passed the Idaho House of Representatives in 2023 but languished in the state Senate. A similar measure was introduced in the 2023 Oregon Legislature but went nowhere. McCaw said he expects Greater Idaho measures will be introduced again in the Oregon and Idaho legislatures in 2025. In July, Greater Idaho leaders sent a letter to Gov. Tina Kotek asking for a meeting. Kotek has not responded, McCaw said, but the offer stands: “We would love to sit down with the governor and start that conversation and advocate for the people of eastern Oregon and see where it would go from there.” In a September conversation with eastern Oregon journalists, Kotek said she had received the invitation but had not yet decided how to respond. “I’m still considering whether that makes sense to go,” she said at the time. “I very much respect all the Oregonians who made their voices heard and said ‘we’re frustrated’ when they voted for the measures in their counties. .... I think what I’m trying to figure out is, what’s the best way to continue that conversation with Oregonians?” The governor’s office did not immediately respond to a Capital Chronicle request for comment on Thursday.Just about everyone dreams about cars they wish they could own, and there’s no better time than the holidays to make a list of vehicles you’d love to have in your driveway. The car pros at Edmunds rounded up five of their favorite dream-worthy vehicles. But rather than just list the most outlandish and expensive exotics, they focused on highlighting models that are expensive but not so pricey that it’d be completely unrealistic for you to own one one day. The vehicles are ordered in ascending order of price and include destination fees. Off-road trucks look fantastic and are extremely capable. What truck enthusiast wouldn’t have one topping their wish list? The king of the hill for 2025 is the F-150 Raptor R. The regular Raptor is already impressive, and the R takes it to the next level with a bonkers 720-horsepower supercharged 5.2-liter V8 engine, upgraded Fox dual-value shock absorbers, and massive 37-inch all-terrain tires. An R-specific grille and hood are also part of the R’s upgrades. Thankfully, the Raptor R isn’t all bark and bite. It also has plenty of features to make it a livable truck for daily driving. Standard features include leather upholstery, cooling front seats, a premium sound system, and a surround-view camera to help make this big truck easier to park. Starting Price: $112,825 Few sedans can match the Mercedes-Benz S-Class for opulence, luxury and prestige. This grand sedan showcases nearly every luxury, technology and performance innovation that Mercedes-Benz has concocted. Everything you touch inside is likely covered in leather, heated, or bathed in disco-worthy ambient light. A novel could be written about all of the S-Class’ luxury and comfort features, but one of the most notable is the E-Active Body Control system. It scans the road surface ahead and adjusts the suspension to deliver the best ride possible. The S-Class also boasts an extensive list of advanced safety features and has an augmented reality head-up display that projects images that appear to float in front of the car. For the ultimate S-Class, get the 791-horsepower AMG S 63 E Performance model. Starting Price: $118,900 Who needs a European exotic car when the Corvette ZR1 is just as capable? A sports car fanatic’s wish list wouldn’t be right without the ZR1. The new Corvette hit a record-setting top speed of 233 mph, making it the fastest car ever built by an American automaker and the fastest current production car priced under $1 million, according to Chevrolet. The top speed record was possible thanks to the ZR1’s turbocharged 5.5-liter V8 engine that cranks out a staggering 1,064 horsepower. Its carbon-fiber aero package kept it glued to the track by generating over 1,200 pounds of downforce at top speed. Chevrolet also says the ZR1 can accelerate through the quarter mile in less than 10 seconds. We expect the Corvette ZR1 to go on sale in early 2025. Estimated starting price: $150,000 Does your wish list include a big and powerful SUV? If it does, the Escalade-V should top it. The big Caddy roars like a muscle car thanks to its supercharged 6.2-liter V8 that churns out 682 horsepower and helps it hit 60 mph in just 4.4 seconds. The Escalade-V also boasts enormous 24-inch wheels and large Brembo brakes that help bring the three-ton SUV to a stop. But the Escalade-V isn’t only about brute power. It also has three rows of seating, plenty of cargo space and offers impressive tech like Super Cruise, a hands-free highway driving system, and an enormous 55-inch curved display that spans the dashboard. Starting Price: $161,990 What if we told you there was a car that could outpace almost anything on a drag strip, keep up with high-end sports cars on a racetrack, and be comfortable enough for daily errands? Well, if that sounds amazing, add the Air Sapphire to your dream list. The Air Sapphire is a high-performance electric luxury sedan made by Lucid, an electric vehicle startup. It’s one of the most powerful production cars in the world, producing an astonishing 1,234 horsepower from its three electric motors. Lucid says it has a top speed of 205 mph and can rocket to 60 mph in a mind-numbing 1.9 seconds. You can adjust the vehicle’s setting for exceptional track performance or simply provide a comfortable ride around town. Starting price: $250,500 Edmunds says Even if you can’t afford any of these vehicles, you can still picture one sitting in your driveway or imagine yourself cruising around town in it. And who knows, maybe holiday magic will give you the opportunity to own one in the future.Trump taps forceful ally of hard-line immigration policies to head Customs and Border Protection
Voters in Ireland were more than usually busy in 2024, casting their ballot in five different polls – for two referenda in March, local and European ballots in June and a general election in November. The country’s political comings and goings were further punctuated by an emotional announcement in March from former premier Leo Varadkar that he was resigning as taoiseach and Fine Gael leader. He was succeeded the following month in both roles by Simon Harris. But the year had so much more to offer than just politics, and PA news agency photographers were on hand to capture some of the highlights.
Barely hours after the fairytale finish to this year’s Melbourne Cup, corporate bookmaker Ladbrokes launched a PR blitz to trumpet the fortunes of a lucky punter who had won $3.2 million for a $100 bet. For the married mother of two, it was a life-changing event. She had cobbled together four numbers for a first four and, against the odds, they landed – Knight’s Choice (No.11), Warp Speed (No.4), Okita Soushi (No.12) and Zardozi (No.14). Robbie Dolan rides Knight’s Choice to victory in this year’s Melbourne Cup. Credit: Getty Images The first four dividend paid $728,015.70 and she had it four times. It was like winning the lotto. “When Ladbrokes called to confirm I’d won over three million, my husband literally fell to the floor. He was just sobbing,” the woman said, revealing the windfall would pay off their previously daunting mortgage. Ladbrokes was equally chuffed. “We always strive to give our customers unforgettable experiences,” a spokesman for the bookmaker said. “This is a life-changing win and we’re thrilled to be part of this incredible story and to have played a role in helping this family secure their future.” But this is not the sort of “unforgettable” experience that everyone has with a corporate bookmaker when their luck runs hot. Instead, there is a growing group of disgruntled professional punters who say the betting companies have closed down their accounts simply because they win too often. Others have had big payouts capped – reduced to a smaller amount under the small print of the bookmaker’s terms and conditions – while others’ betting activities have been severely restricted. It was a point made on a pro punting podcast two days after the Melbourne Cup. “I think if one of us on this show had got the [$3.2 million first four] collect, I don’t think it would have made the news, and we might have got caught up in the T&Cs of a maximum payout of $500,000,” one of the pros said. Another agreed: “They made sure they got their PR’s worth ... being a once-in-a-year Melbourne Cup punter, I think they [Ladbrokes] got their mileage out of the extra payment through good will and mileage in the press. That would have been a per-customer decision.” ‘The amount of winners who are voided is insane’ Luke MacDonald is a pro punter who has become so tired of waging an online war with the corporates that he has all but given up. “The amount of winners who are voided is insane,” he says. “And it shows how predatory in nature these big companies are, that they only have losers on their books.” MacDonald claims the “corporates” have a number of strategies for cutting punters off. He claims they accuse punters of working for a rival bookmaker, say your betting does not suit their operation, or use anti-money laundering or counter-terrorism funding laws. MacDonald says he knows of examples of bookmakers shutting down an account after a client has had a win and then demanding payslips and unredacted bank accounts as proof of identity before they agree to pay out winnings. That process that can take months, even years. MacDonald says he has previously shared six months of bank statements with online bookmakers, only for his private information to be leaked on social media. “A piece of information about where we shopped got leaked on Twitter,” he says. “It was too hard for me to pinpoint which operator it was and try to hunt down the staff member. But that information was used against me to try to publicly shame me, which I didn’t care about, but I just thought, ‘geez, that’s pretty bad’. “People can find out a lot about you by having six months of your bank statements. My kids’ daycare stuff is on there.” Frank Pangallo, an independent member of South Australia’s Legislative Council, wants to stop corporate bookmakers from banning or restricting punters simply because they win. South Australian politician Frank Pangallo. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen He has introduced a bill to the South Australian parliament calling for the strategy to be outlawed. Under Pangallo’s Authorised Betting Operations (User Bans) Amendment Bill 2024, betting companies would: “They enter the market willingly, and pocket billions of dollars from losers willingly – so they cannot cry poor when it comes time to pay out a winner,” Pangallo said. Pangallo believes other states will follow suit if the bill is supported in South Australia when he brings it to a vote in February. “But my concern is that governments are intoxicated by gambling taxes that they receive, and seem to be reluctant to move on issues that are trying to protect gamblers,” he said. ‘They play dumb’ Ronny* has not been able to bet with big online bookmakers for the past three years after he and a friend tapped into a successful betting system in which they outlaid about $10,000 to win $40,000 across two months. While living in Sydney, the pair had a link to a private equity firm that focused on racing algorithms that would suggest bets on “roughies”. At the time, Ronny had a separate mobile phone and SIM card that was solely connected to a 3G or 4G network so that the bookmakers could not track him to a specific IP address. “If you connect to Wi-Fi, they can immediately track it and they restrict anything that comes from that IP address,” he said. Ronny said the algorithm would feed you a message that said, “in 40 seconds this race is about to start and this horse is likely to win, or place – it is currently at 10-1 and it should be at 4-1”. “So you would put $50 to $100, sometimes $150, on the horse, and you end up with probably four bets where you lose – so, you lose $400 in four races – and then suddenly the fifth horse wins at 12-1 and you get back $1200,” he said. He said they would go through two new betting companies every “week or two”. “They are all linked, and once one betting agency realises they don’t like the way you are betting, they will ban you or restrict you betting at all,” he said. Ronny said their gambling was not without risk – “I could have lost it all” – but he was still shut down for good. Now he can’t bet with mates. “I have got a screenshot here from Sportsbet from this year after trying to join a $50 buy-in bet-with-mates group and the response is ‘you are unable to join a group, please call us to help resolve the issue’, and then you call them and they play dumb and they say, ‘sorry, we don’t have an answer for you’. “So if I want to have a bet, it is either going into a TAB or I might have to use my partner’s account occasionally to put a $50 bet on.” Laying a bet on someone else’s account, a practice called using a “bowler account”, is banned by online bookmakers under their terms and conditions. If bookmakers discover you are betting on behalf of a third party, they will refuse to pay out winnings. Punter bowled over Last month, a punter failed in his quest to have Ladbrokes release $30,000 in winnings from his account because the betting giant claimed he was operating a “bowler account”. Ladbrokes’ terms and conditions state “You must not permit another person to access your account and you must not use your account on behalf of or for the benefit of another person.” The betting giant used “variations in speech patterns” from phone calls to support its case before the Northern Territory Racing and Wagering Commission – Ladbrokes.com.au is registered in the NT. During the October hearing, the gambling giant said it had refused to release the cash in December 2022 because the account holder was unable to complete its “two-factor authentication” – a process triggered by a text message. The punter claimed he could not access the text because he was overseas and did not have the right phone number. He later tried to register a new phone number with the bookmaker, but it was found to be connected to another Ladbrokes account. Ladbrokes told the commission that during several follow-up phone conversations “it was most likely not the complainant who engaged with Ladbrokes, but a person identifying himself as the complainant instead”. That is why it closed his account. The commission found in Ladbrokes’ favour, agreeing that on the “balance of probabilities” a third party had been involved, but it said it could “not be confirmed with absolute certainty” that the voice on the phone did not belong to the account holder. MacDonald said there would not be an issue with bowler accounts if winning punters were allowed to continue betting under their own names. “There is no reason for anyone to have to come in the back door, if they are allowed to go in and bet under their own name,” he said. “A lot of issues in the industry that have been created are on the back of restrictions.” He said if authorities really cared about anti-money laundering or counter-terrorism financing laws, they would stop online bookmakers restricting or banning winning punters, which would eliminate the need for bowler accounts. ‘Totally amoral’ Another pro-punter, Brandon*, says he restricts himself to betting in person with on-course bookmakers at city race meetings on Wednesdays and Saturdays. “It’s better value, I can get on quickly and it’s a more sociably enjoyable environment than sitting in a room with a computer screen in front of you all day,” he said. Some punters say they are unable to bet online after winning big. Credit: Jenny Evans “I find the corporates are just a blight on the industry. They’re leeches, and their business model is amoral. “You are encouraged to lose, you are promoted to lose, and you are discouraged and restricted from winning. “If you are a registered loser, and you consistently lose, they will bet you any amount. They give you free bets, they give you deposit matches, all sorts of things. To me that’s totally amoral.” Ladbrokes told this masthead it “is a company that does not ban winners”. A spokesperson for the betting giant said it adhered to the minimum bet limits required by the racing codes. In reference to capping payouts, Ladbrokes highlighted its $3.2 million payout last month to the lucky punter who landed the Melbourne Cup first four, saying “we are not afraid to pay someone if they win big”. The spokesperson said Ladbrokes sets its own betting markets, and was not reactive to what other bookmakers were doing. “If other bookies want to copy our prices that’s not something we can control,” the spokesperson said. The company said it had an obligation under legislation to clamp down on “bowler accounts”. Brandon said “bookmakers are not bookmakers any more”. He said they are not taking risks, but using algorithms and strategies to analyse punters instead. “They do form on their punters,” he said. “They say this bloke is losing 11 per cent per annum, so we can bet him to a certain amount. “This bloke’s only just losing, he is losing only 1 per cent, so we will restrict him a little bit. “This bloke is winning 3 per cent in NSW, so we won’t bet him in NSW, or he is winning 5 per cent on dogs, but losing 12 per cent on horses so we will restrict him on dogs. “So they analyse the client, not the outcome of the event. That’s how they work, so it needs to go back to how it was.” MacDonald said he knew of a case in which every member of a punters’ club had their winning bets voided by an online bookmaker 16 minutes after a race. They had all bet to win $5000. “The bet won, the bookmaker paid out the bet, and then they voided the winnings (removed the payouts from their accounts) and returned the stake,” he said. “Only one of them has received an email so far as to why the bets were voided. Everyone else has just got radio silence.” Sportsbet told this masthead that it “does not ban customers just because they are winning”. “Every customer is able to bet with us, in their own name, as defined by respective minimum bet laws set by the racing bodies,” a Sportsbet spokesperson said. “Our terms and conditions are in place to ensure a fair go for all customers, as is the case across many other industries. We responsibly manage customer accounts for regulatory, compliance and safer gambling reasons.” Minimum bets Sergio* is a full-time punter who bets on harness racing. He said he was able to get by because of minimum bet laws introduced by Harness Racing Victoria in January 2018. The laws mean online bookmakers “must stand to lose a maximum of $500 for a fixed-odds win bet” on country races from no later than 10am on a race day. The amount increases to $1000 for metropolitan races. “A lot of big punters sign up with 10-12 different accounts if they want to have a real crack because the corporates will only bet you to win $500,” Sergio says. “To win thousands, you need multiple accounts.” Some punters claim they are not paid out for big wins with some bookmakers. Credit: Nathan Perri He said it took careful planning because all the bookmakers were linked. “All of the corporates have algorithms for their odds,” he said. “They actually don’t employ someone to set the odds, do the markets, they are just copying what the main bookies have. “For example, if I hit the TAB first [with a bet], all of the other bookies will roll the odds down, following the TAB, without actually taking a bet. “So, I have got to hit them in order – smallest bookies to biggest bookies. A lot of them have algorithms but TAB, for example, won’t give a stuff if I hit something at one of those smaller bookies. “But if I go the other way around, the smaller bookie will react straight away to the TAB price.” Racing Victoria introduced a minimum bet limit for thoroughbred racing in October 2016, which applies after the final acceptances deadline. Wagering service providers have to allow punters to win up to $2000 on a metropolitan win bet and $1000 on a non-metropolitan win bet. But there are no minimum bet laws in place for betting on sports such as AFL, tennis or basketball. “Legally, they don’t have to take any money on sports bets,” Sergio said. ‘Against our policy’ Brandon said he broke with his routine recently when he tried to have a $1000 cash bet on a horse at $3.50 using an electronic betting terminal, or EBT, at a Melbourne pub TAB. “I went up to the EBT, and there was a sign on there saying, ‘no cash in this machine, please see the bar attendant for a voucher’,” he said. But when he approached the bar, he was told by a staff member there was a “limit of $200”. When he asked for five $200 vouchers in exchange for his $1000, he was told it was “against our money laundering policy”. One punter claimed he could not make a cash bet at a TAB in a pub. Credit: Louie Douvis “I couldn’t get on,” he said. “I wanted to have a cash bet and couldn’t get on. I thought, ‘no wonder the turnover is suffering’.” A TAB spokesman said: “TAB venue staff are trained in responsible gambling practices and can refuse to issue vouchers where they believe it is in the customer’s best interest not to.” The betting organisation said it did not cap payouts to punters - “as highlighted by a punter who collected $728,000 from a $24 mystery bet on the Melbourne Cup” - but it did cut off or restrict losing punters. “We are introducing new technology to detect changes in customer behaviour faster so we can intervene sooner to protect customers from gambling harm,” the spokesman said. Taxing the punter Increases in taxes have become another bugbear for punters. They say, ultimately, these extra costs are worn by the customers. From January 2019, the state government introduced a point of consumption tax to replace the wagering and betting tax structures. It was a way for the state to properly tax online bookmakers who are often licensed outside of Victoria. Both Ladbrokes.com.au and Sportsbet.com.au are licensed in the Northern Territory. Ladbrokes is owned by Entain, which is listed on the London Stock Exchange, while Sportsbet is part of the Flutter Entertainment Group, which is a worldwide online gambling operator with headquarters in Dublin. “Because they [the corporate bookmakers] were eluding taxes, the governments and tax authorities said, ‘we are not getting our whack out of this’, so they introduced all these taxes,” Brandon said. “But the corporates responded by just putting up their percentages. They used to bet to 110 per cent [for a market], now they bet to 125 per cent. To the point where the turnover is now dropping.” The Victorian point of consumption tax jumped from 10 per cent to 15 per cent in July, with half of the income guaranteed to be funnelled back to all racing codes. In other words, the Victorian racing industry is now welded to an income from the online bookmaker model. “The government and racing bodies are taxing the industry to death,” MacDonald said. “When they are increased, it is passed on to the punters. When the online bookmakers have poorer margins, they have to cut down on the winners. “But winners are a big part of the game. If more winners are allowed, it would make the margins sharper. So losers would lose at a slower rate. “It is a cycle of poor management. Governments and sports administrations want greater returns from tax, but they are losing revenue.” Racing Victoria said gambling revenue fell 10 per cent last financial year, and is already down nine per cent this year. The other side effects, MacDonald said, was that more and more gamblers were turning to the black market. Political mission Whether Pangallo’s bill can start a chain reaction remains to be seen. But he is determined to make a difference. “The conglomerates who own these companies – like Flutter Entertainment (Sportsbet) or Entain Group (Neds and Ladbrokes) – have resources in the billions of dollars,” he said. “Their algorithms pick up on every tiny detail – from the way you swipe on your phone application to the IP address you use when making bets. “But advances of technology have seen a new genre of smart and well-resourced gamblers attempting to improve their chances of landing winners. Some punters are just really good at analysis, while others utilise complex computer algorithms. “As a result, these greedy betting companies have wised up and devised their own way to ensure they still hold the upper hand – by simply banning the punter. “In any other industry, that would be unconscionable, if not illegal conduct.” *Names changed to protect privacy. News, results and expert analysis from the weekend of sport are sent every Monday. Sign up for our Sport newsletter .
Jury are deliberating in the long-running YSL gang and racketeering trialOnline debate over foreign workers in tech shows tensions in Trump's political coalitionCorruption among Catholic public officials in the Philippines