- This topic has 72 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
madman – nearly all of those points are things that i’d expect an educated punter to check…..there are obvious reasons why gambling is known as a mugs game….
Oh I check alright Underscore, which is the reason I listed them, after many years of punting you do learn to spot these things.
But still doesn’t make it alright !Since racing began punters have moaned about horses being stopped. About 1 time out of 50 they might be right.
I think this is a valid point…
Clearly there is a difference (although not appreciated by the Ballydoyle worshippers) between a "Hefferman" and what is being discussed here
"Stopping" horses is about preventing them from winning when they are fit enough and well placed to do so. Sure, some of what Madman refers to is hardly ideal but its a case of knowing the trainer and the horse, which is surely what punting is all about?
Does any trainer always have his charges 100% all the time?
Someone want to tell”FistsofFury” about Santa claus and the tooth fairy!!!
I dont know what planet he is on but there isnt much oxygen!!!!!
Does any trainer always have his charges 100% all the time?
Nope. Otherwise they’d be over the top after a couple of races. You aim to get your animal 100% for its main target. ie Chelts, Aintree or a Class 5 Hurdle at Sedgefield.
Fist of Fury,
I also don’t think anyone has said the horse was stopped (which seems to be the main reason for your post). What has been said is that the horse was not put in the race.
You also said something on the lines of, that if a horse is short of work, then they are not going to knock 10 bells out of him. This then prompts the obvious question;
If the horse was short of work (and therefore not fit enough), then why did they run? It has already been pointed out on this thread that it is an offence to race a horse with a view to conditioning.
Mike
If the horse was short of work (and therefore not fit enough), then why did they run? It has already been pointed out on this thread that it is an offence to race a horse with a view to conditioning.
Yes..it might be a difficult dividing line, but which trainer hasnt used a race to sharpen up a horse? Very few
has to be remebered that some horses simply will not do the work at home and need the buzz of the races to exert themselves sufficiently.
If the horse was short of work (and therefore not fit enough), then why did they run? It has already been pointed out on this thread that it is an offence to race a horse with a view to conditioning.
Yes..it might be a difficult dividing line, but which trainer hasnt used a race to sharpen up a horse? Very few
has to be remebered that some horses simply will not do the work at home and need the buzz of the races to exert themselves sufficiently.
Yes, that’s a very valid point Clivex.
But there are times when it is hard to spot and there are times when it is blatant.
So when you are blatantly going to do it, then where better to do it than at the course where the owner of the horse in question is on the board of the racetrack
Mike
this site is turning into a farce
Why ? we haven’t quiet got around to talking about the weather yet underscore. But with such boring midweek dross to suffer, it shouldn’t be too long.
Oh roll on May.all this fuss over a non buzzer!!! why not keep it quiet and double your bet next time ??
as for aces four, i think top marks to ferdy murphy for being open about the horses fitness when he could have kept quiet (apart from the owner nobody else has the right to know about the wellbeing of the horse).
surely this is all part of racing and if it puts your back up that much then you should be looking at some other sport to bet on -imoObviously, we don’t know exactly who is posting on here but I find it disappointing the number of apologists for trainers and those who don’t seem to give a monkeys about punters interests.
Obviously, we don’t know exactly who is posting on here but I find it disappointing the number of apologists for trainers and those who don’t seem to give a monkeys about punters interests.
I know this is an old chestnut which some people seem unable to accept, however the horse is owned by the owner, the training fees are paid by the owner, the entry fees are paid by the owner, the vets fees are paid by the owner – etc. etc.
The bottom line is the owner pays the bills and it is the owner and only the owner who the trainer is accountable to and the only person the trainer has to give information to.
This is the RACING forum not the Gamblers forum. Is there not a section on here somewhere just for betting etc. Also i make no apology for sticking up for trainers especially when they are open and honest with regard to the condition of their horses. I’ll also make no apology for a decent jockey ensuring that an animal is guided correctly towards the ultimate goal of the owners……I couldn’t give a monkey’s ar$e for anyone betting on the horse.
underscore
Your post "underscores" why in 10 years times racing as we know it will be dead on its feet.
Too much other "real" sport out there.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.