- This topic has 169 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Cheers FN, it’s a bit of a sore one, but it happens so as you say it’s
back to the drawing board. Credit to Gary O’Brien, but not so to the
remaining bookies who are still offering odds on the horse when very
clearly it won’t run.Totally agree….still being matched on the machine at 60 upwards.
Presumably they will say unable to remove until overnight decs.
We all know the pitfalls of A/Post,but it still begs the question.
Should all bets placed on this horse after the statement stand?
There appears to be a time lapse with some layers in these instances,making an informed decision ahead of a race is one thing,being pickpocketed is another.
Poor PR at the very least,this is not good for the sport in general.Spot on FN. I had a similar conversation in the Tingle Creek thread, where the “integrity of
the sport” was being questioned by people “in the know” taking advantage of bookmakers when
it was suggested they may well have inside information that a horse won’t be running and the
yard had yet to make an announcement. Douvan was the horse in question in that case. With
the suggestion that it was underhand and not in the spirit of the sport, which I don’t necessarily
disagree with, I brought up the case where Vicente, who was down to run in the Becher Chase on
Saturday 9th December. On 5th Dec an article was published with Paul Nicholls saying that the
horse would not be running, and yet on when I checked at 10pm on the 6th Dec, several firms were
still offering odds. I brought this to light on the Becher thread. As the thread on the Tingle Creek
had turned into a bit of debate about the integrity of the sport, and that bookmakers were being
hard done by, which as I said I didn’t necessarily disagree with, I thought it only fair to bring
up that integrity goes both ways, and that when bookmakers have solid information from either
respectable owners or Trainers (such as Nicholls) that a horse will not be running, they should
pull the horse from the betting. It was brought up that the trainer can scratch the horse via Wetherbys
at any time, and that he doesn’t have to wait for the entry stage if he wants to make it official.
I accept that the trainer could do this, but it’s sticking your head in the sand to ignore someone
of the ilk of Nicholls, who makes it clear 4 days before the race that the horse will not be running.
I wonder how much money was taken by bookmakers, who were fully aware of Nicholls statement, before
they removed the horse from the boards. In any case, it doesn’t wash to say you have to wait for
the trainer to scratch the horse officially. If that were the case, then Bet365, Ladbrokes, Coral,
Betfred and some others would not have removed Folsom Blue from the betting, whilst many other main
bookmakers still have him on the boards.I’m not into bookie bashing, I think they sometimes get it in the neck unfairly, but when expressions
such as “the integrity of the sport” and “in the spirit of the sport” are bandied around (by those in
that business) at punters who are not breaking the rules of the game (and I’m not talking about inside
information) but are said to be taking advantage by certain methods of betting, then those pointing the
finger should make sure their own hands are clean. In instances like these, I think they need to stock
up on the old carbolic.It’s my understanding that Nicholls (or any trainer) is in breach of BHA rules if making a statement like that before officially scratching the horse from declarations.
From our side of the line, we do our best to remove any horse from the betting if we think it is an unlikely runner. I’ve spent a good amount of time this week tidying up our ante-post markets – removing novice chasers from the Stayers’ Hurdle and removing horses like Supasundae, Debece, Wholestone and Barters Hill from the chases. They’re now ‘doubtful’ in the system and not displaying.
Still it’s hard to keep track of every trainer’s press release – it’s just luck if one of us happens to read some throwaway line about Vicente, Folsom Blue, Rock The Kasbah etc. It’s up to Nicholls to scratch the horse (just takes a couple of clicks at his end) to make it official.
Stuff like THIS is the real concern. Notice PP/Betfair price changes W/R/T Samcro and Next Destination. No press announcement about Samcro’s dirty scope was made until 3pm. They pushed Samcro out from heavy odds-on to 15/8 way before that news went public. How did they know? And if they DID know, why did they try to sucker people into betting Samcro at a juicy-looking price rather than forming a new book or suspending the market?
Again, as I mentioned last time we spoke about this LS3, I accept that the trainer should
scratch the horse from the race, and it’s a fair point you make, and it would be fair to
point the finger at them if they haven’t taken the appropriate steps to remove the horse
officially. I have to say fair play to your firm on this occasion as you were not one of
the many that still had Folsom Blues on their boards when I posted above. Shame on Betvictor,
Stan James and Boylesprts who still have him in their betting at 10/1 (Boylesposrts 8/1),
I’ve just checked their sites (11.09 04/01/18).I accept that there is only so much you can do, and that you can’t be aware of every comment,
but the case we spoke about before, Vicente, I read on 5th December and in fact it was reported
on the ATR website on the 4th. I don’t accept that that kind of information can be overlooked
by leading bookmakers, who need to have their fingers on the pulse.I’m in agreement with you about movements in the market which may suggest money has been made
because of knowledge that a horse who has an engagement wont be heading there. It’s a tricky one
and hard to have the solid evidence that it has occurred, as in all likelihood it has presumably
been made by someone able to distance themselves from, and protect the source.You don’t have an easy job, you would need eyes on the back of your head, and you could do with
spies that wouldn’t look out of place in Game Of Thrones, but on occasions some bookmakers choose
to drag their heels, when it is common knowledge and well reported that a horse will NOT be taking
part in a race. I think in instances like that, it does your industry little good.Has anyone gone nrnb? Having said that, I think I’ll wait till Saturday in case some of the bookies go 6 places [if the race goes ahead, that is]. My long short list thus far being Pobbles Bay, On the Road, WWW, Ask the Weatherman [most appropriate in the circumstances], Buckhorn Timothy and Two Smokin Barrels [who I have been following for years].Darn it; just remembered O’Faoilins Boy who I have been backing for decades…don’t want another Wayward Prince situation….[even though I still can’t spell his name….]
Rock The Kasbah now a doubt because of heavy ground. Has run once in 20 starts on official heavy ground and lost at odds-on.
…Trainers being put away by biased going reports.
Clerks of racecourses don’t want to call it heavy because they get more non-runners.
Rock The Kasbah’s record on truly heavy ground is excellent.
Value Is EverythingGuardian reports that Chepstow needs ‘no more rain than is forecast. Clerk: “It’s not waterlogged but it’s saturated, it’s at what they call field capacity.
“When I walked the course at lunchtime yesterday, there had been a lot of wind and it had dried the top of the ground and I was thinking, ‘This is great’. But we’ve had 5mm of rain since midnight and sure enough, the water’s back right up there.”
They ought to cancel rather than run these marathons in desperate ground, imo. I think slowmo finishes do more damage to racing’s image than the whip does.
Rock The Kasbah now a doubt because of heavy ground. Has run once in 20 starts on official heavy ground and lost at odds-on.
…Trainers being put away by biased going reports.
Clerks of racecourses don’t want to call it heavy because they get more non-runners.
Rock The Kasbah’s record on truly heavy ground is excellent.
May be the 11-10 he has to carry in the ground rather than the actual going.
I’m with Joe here and should cancel rather than run in a quagmire. Let’s hope if they do run jockeys use their heads and pull up when horses get tired. If so there may be no finishers anyway.
Trouble these days is there seems to be two kinds of heavy. There’s conventional “heavy” and then there’s “bottomless/almost (or actual) unracable. Conventional “heavy” is ok, if it’s like what Un De Sceaux struggled through the other day in Ireland, NO!
I’d imagine they won’t be able to re-schedule again; bad enough now with other staying races not far away being affected.
Value Is EverythingBigG LS3…..both excellent points.
I fear we are only scratching the surface here.
The sport appears totally Un-Policed,for want of a better phrase.
This can only be resolved from within.
People will speak with their feet,of that I have no doubt.Agree with the ground comments.
Watching horses out on their feet does little to enhance racing.If it’s absolutely bottomless then hope they abandon. However, although jumping on good-firm might look better for the viewer I would think a harder surface produces more injuries than true heavy.
Value Is EverythingRock The Kasbah now a doubt because of heavy ground. Has run once in 20 starts on official heavy ground and lost at odds-on.
He’s raced once on it and was beaten at short odds, yet his record on it is Excellent ?
I must have misunderstood.
Official going is one person’s assessmemt of what the state of the ground is, Mark; the clerk of the course. Clerks want as many runners at their track as possible, when the official going is heavy courses get fewer runners/more non-runners. Therefore there’s a conflict of interest, whether consciously or subconsciously clerks often leave the going as “soft” when they should change it to “heavy”.
On official going descriptions yes, Rock The Kasbah has only run once on heavy and lost at odds on, but as I said – on truly heavy ground (ie on what should‘ve been described as “heavy”) his record is excellent.
Value Is EverythingHow do we know it’s true Heavy ?
This is one of my favourite races on the calendar but has been marred by postponements in recent years. I’ve still a financial interest in the race but I think I’ll now just watch on Saturday and discount any further study. The rain is supposed to lessen over the next 48 hours but the quality of the ground must be very poor.
So here’s hoping for a win for Final Nudge, Chase The Spud Or Vintage Clouds and also a clean bill of health for all those taking part. It will be an absolute beast of a race in this ground.
How do we know it’s true Heavy ?
Race times in conjunction with sectional times.
Value Is EverythingCan I just say regarding all this bookies knowing before punters chat that is going on on this thread.
It is my opinion and always has been that bookies have always been in possession of more information than most punters and farbeit for me to stick up for bookies but if they price up a horse at a certain price and the punters still want to back it then surely that responsibility lies with the punter not the bookie.
What is the difference between knocking one out because you know it is not going to run in the ante post market and knocking one out when for example you know it wont go on the prevailing ground or has worked badly recently ?
This game is all about trying to outsmart the bookie and get the value or upper hand.
Meanwhile back to this being the WELSH NATIONAL THREAD
I am on Final Nudge at 16/1 Rock The Kasbah at 12/1 and Mysteree at 11/1 and I hope it goes ahead.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.