for, prior to the entry of the equalising third party, each contestant is poised between (1) taking from the other or paying him; he therefore hovers between gain and loss. The one who puts up the stake never intended to set a reward (juʿl) for the winner merely by virtue of his victory so that the contract might be classed as a bounty. Once a third person joins them, however, a second possibility (2) arises: that both may end up paying the third. The third would then receive a reward for outrunning them, and the arrangement would fall under the heading of stipulated rewards.

They say: The Prophet ﷺ accordingly stipulated that the third must not be sure of winning, for he did not content himself with the mere appearance of an outsider so that his entry would be nothing but a stratagem; rather, his horse had to be such as to accomplish the intended (3) removal of gambling by matching the performance of their two horses.

They add: For this reason, even those who allow legal stratagems insist on this (4) parity. The third person’s participation may not be a sham; the contestants must fear him, as (5) each fears the other, and hope to defeat him, as (6) each hopes to defeat his rival. His outward presence alone does not suffice to free the contract from the taint of gambling.

This is the utmost that can be advanced in support of this ḥadith, both in chain of transmission and in meaning.