Alan Byrne, Racing Post comment

[conundrum]

Marble wrote…

-Bacon, Francis,Viscount St Albans
Novum Organum bk.1, aphorism 95.

Apart from his esteemed writings, this is the very same guy who invented the bacon buttie….a true genius.

[Nor1]

Prufrock

wrote

We are capable of exerting control over our destinies – something worth remembering when you next step out into a road as a ten-ton truck comes round the corner – if not of controlling them entirely. The former is the important aspect in this argument.

Not when the ten-ton truck loses control and invades your space on the pavement.

As for the poor bee…
http://www.sustainweb.org/foodfacts/pli … honey_bee/

[Glenn]

I see Paul Dixon is claiming that they have plenty of good ideas but no money.

Isn’t that a bit like sending the old telegram ‘System working well, please send more money’?

The Rabble have had but one idea this last five years and that’s to defraud punters as much as possible. You can see how well it’s working in the levy returns
– it has led to the sitaution where they have no money to implement any more of their nonsensensical anti-punter ideas. It’s Fiscal Darwinsim in its purest form.

Meanwhile the good ship racing is going down. Absolutely no question about that. Another cannonball was fired into its bows this week by a ship called Newmarket flying the skull and crossbones. The captain? A guy called Pumpkinhead that First Mate Scotney previously decided to let walk the plank into a school of tiddlers when shark infested waters were available.

[Trickmeister]

Graham Green in Saturday’s Post. A small article, referring to at least 6 different players in the game yet Paul Dixon is quoted as saying – "…it’s nothing to do with racing’s structure; it’s everything to do with money."

Yet the same article says that Rod Street admits that so many different stakeholders militates against the pursuit of radical initiatives.

While the players involved cannot agree on the problem, it’s no wonder they continue to act as different factions. As a start point, how about everyone agreeing on a succinct, clearly defined statement of the problem facing racing which is not couched in ‘buts’ ‘subject to’ ‘taking account of’ and all the other weasely(?) fudges?

In my experience if you don’t know what the problem is that you are trying to solve then it is impossible to arrive at an effective solution. Conversely, an agreed problem statement can point to an obvious solution, no matter how unpalatable it may be. If you agree the sum is 2 + 2, it’s pretty difficult to argue against the solution being 4.

[Author]

Posts