As for its invalidity as a partnership contract, that is perfectly evident; it is not a type of partnership, and none of the rulings that govern partnerships apply to it.

Section
The factors that rule out its being treated as a vow are as follows:

First: The one who makes a vow undertakes to give what he has specified if his desired objective is achieved, whereas the contestant is only required to pay his stake when the very opposite of what he wants occurs.

Second: The one who makes a vow undertakes to hand over what he vowed to someone other than the victor, while the contestant undertakes to give it precisely to the one who defeats him.

Third: The person who makes a vow need not have someone else alongside him sharing in that vow, whereas the wager necessarily involves another party.

Fourth: If it becomes impossible to fulfill a vow, it is converted to its legally prescribed substitute; if no substitute exists, an expiation for an oath is due. No such provision exists for the wager.

Fifth: A vow is valid whether unconditional or conditional, as in the statements, “I owe Allah a fast of one day,” or, “If Allah heals my sick relative, I owe a fast of one day,” which has no parallel in a racing wager.

Sixth: A racing wager is invalid with respect to fasting, pilgrimage, retreat, prayer, and other bodily acts of devotion; it can only be placed on money, whereas a vow may pertain to any of these acts.

Seventh: A vow is discouraged, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Indeed, a vow does not bring….”