- This topic has 49 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
hahaha! Ian and I have said the same thing at the same time. That wasn’t a fix I promise Joe!!! ;)
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Spooky snap, there, Jonibake!
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Jonibake, I’m failing to see the difference here. Deliberately running your horse over the wrong trip is stopping it from running to the best of its ability. It’s not so blatant as pulling its teeth out, but the intention and the result are exactly the same.
If trainers who stay within the rules are not to be criticised, then what is the point of this thread? No action was taken against Byrnes; he was deemed to be within the rules.
One last go:
The “intention” is “different“.Connections are not “stopping” it from winning, they are “running their horse to the best of its ability” at that trip. They are trying to win the race. Are any of those things true wth one being “physically stopped“? NO. Therefore it is “different“.
All we can ask is for connections to be trying their best to win any race the horse runs in.
How can connections trying to win a race be deemed bad?
How can it be equated to physically stopping a horse from winning?Anyway, you seem to be in a minority of one Joe.
Value Is EverythingAnd one last go from me, Ginger. But let us first clarify the terms of reference here for the avoidance of doubt. We are discussing trainers preparing a horse for a touch. This then precludes any trainers whose intentions are experimenting with a young animal to find its best trip, or trying out a new trip with a genuine belief the horse might actually be suited by it or running with any other intent than to land a future gamble. I just want to remove any sideways shifting or potential excuses. We are dealing with trainers plotting a horse up – nothing else.
Such trainers when running a horse over the wrong trip are stopping their horse from winning just as determinedly as telling the jockey to pull it.
They are stopping the horse from winning by putting it in a race that they believe it cannot win.
The fact that it might gallop its poor bloody heart out (which is highly unlikely anyway given the ultimate objective) is neither here nor there ethically. Rules-wise it might be acceptable; ethically there is not a whit of difference between this and a horse stopped in any other fashion. This is self-evident. It is beyond dispute. By the very definition of what we are discussing here the trainer’s intention when entering the horse is preventing it from winning as part of the strategy of deception.
Definition of prevent: To prevent is to stop something effectually by forestalling action and rendering it impossible:
Kindly note the word ‘stop’.
Fair enough Joe. I’ll agree to disagree – for me the important sentence in your post is “Rules-wise it might be acceptable” Trainers have to find a way of making a living and keeping owners happy. Nothing like pulling off a coup like Tuesday to do that. I just think that was going way too far. 3 in one night!! I wonder if he would have got away with it in the UK? I’m just thinking of the 10 year ban Eddie Ahern got for pulling one……
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
I love Joe’s tenacity but running a horse over the wrong trip or going is not stopping it from trying to win because the only race it can win at the time is the race in question – by that “logic” you stop a horse by withdrawing it or not entering it in the first place.
The point is in the race itself the horse was allowed to do its best in the prevailing conditions.
Big difference from horses actively being stopped from doing their best in optimum conditions leaving punters having to second guess the motive each time – are the owners here today, for example?
Betting should be about trying to unravel the mass of data in the formbook and apply it to the contest in hand – not scratch around trying to find clues as to whether a horse is trying or not
Market moves are no real clue either – a horse shortening in the betting does not equate to form in the formbook.
I’m just glad this sort of thing doesn’t happen every day or as often in the UK as in Ireland.
I had over a thousand bets in 2015 on UK racing and only once did I consider myself retrospectively to have been on a non-trier.
I focus on horses I consider well handicapped and suited by going/distance so I am probably predisposed towards backing horses whose connections are motivated to try when I back them but one in a thousand? I will take that with a philosophical smile.
But I will not touch Irish racing outside of Group races – it’s clearly as bent as a 69 Euro note! As Roscommon illustrates!
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"We are discussing trainers preparing a horse for a touch. This then precludes any trainers whose intentions are experimenting with a young animal to find its best trip, or trying out a new trip with a genuine belief the horse might actually be suited by it or running with any other intent than to land a future gamble. I just want to remove any sideways shifting or potential excuses. We are dealing with trainers plotting a horse up – nothing else.
Such trainers when running a horse over the wrong trip are stopping their horse from winning just as determinedly as telling the jockey to pull it.
You’ve excluded the unexposed type being run at experimental trips which, other than for those who specialise in the dark arts of pedigree analysis, are a no-no for any sane punter anyway; so you’re presumably referring to the exposed (at a trip) animal that’s either stepped-up or stepped-down from the trip it’s been running at. Now, regardless of whether connections are plotting a ‘coup’ or just experimenting again at the new trip I fail to see how this can be regarded as something remotely akin to the blatant stopping of a horse in a race
With form in the book, the marked change in trip planned next-time-out surely provides the punter with an interesting extra ingredient to digest when analysing its chance
If a dyed in the wool 2-miler that’s obviously risen too high in the handicap to win again is suddenly stepped-up to a succession of 3m races, runs down the field as expected and is then returned to 2m ‘on a winning mark’ then its chance is surely there for all to see: it’s not covert, it’s just hiding in plain sight and essentially manipulating the handicap system as a trainer of handicappers should: like it or not and I like it, or at the very least expect it as an integral part of the betting conundrum
Stopping a horse in a race is covert hiding of ability known only to connections and is therefore a deception out of plain sight, for which punters should rightly feel aggrieved
I don’t remember such an outcry on here when Curley pulled his latest gamble, in fact it was quite the opposite if I remember correctly. GT I believe you were one of the Curley defenders.
Surely if a horse is not running its optimum distance or on optimum ground etc. the price will reflect this and punters have the opportunity to think “Why is this horse so big” and then find out the reasons e.g. running over half mile further than optimum etc. Sometimes, as GT says they do make fools of us and go and win.
But when a horse or horses are backed in from 3,000+/1 into 42/1 a few hours later, questions need to be asked. Why were the horses such odds just a few hours earlier. Surely the bookies could not get it so wrong? I’m not having a go at Byrnes as if he had tipped me up with a quiet nod-nod-wink-wink then I would have been straight on and kept most of it to myself perhaps telling a couple of mates who I could trust not to let the cat out of the bag. I would be rejoicing the Byrnes coup but also in the back of my mind thinking how can he get away with such a thing.
As THM says Curley’s been doing it for years and when his coups come off he’s praised to high heaven by punters and journalists alike.
So let’s analyse the horses
War Anthem – 3rd time in a 2 mile Maiden, therefore no handicaps to worry about. Previous form 10/18 and 16/18 a total of 137 lengths behind the winner. Backed from 16/1 into 3/1 earlier in the day. Ring price 5/1 out to 6/1. This to me seems dodgy.
Mr Smith – Down 5lbs form initial handicap mark given in November 2015. 4 fairly innocuous performances over between 2m and 2m3f. Nearest to winner was 21 lengths 4th place in first hurdle race. This race backed in from 10/1 to 11/4 in the morning and then 11/4 to 7/4 in the ring. Ran over 2m4f so extra distance may have helped but not a great deal. Again looks fairly dodgy to me.
Top Of The Town – Running over 3 miles which seems the horses optimum (won only previous race at 2m7f). 2 races last month, the first since last August, at 2m5f (14/18) and 2m4f (9/20) therefore probably running in these to get race fit with this as the plan. Lowered a total of 3lbs after these 2 races. Won previously off mark of 99 (Won off 100 here). Price backed in from 10/1 into 4/6 early in the day and then 6/4 into 5/4 in the ring. Not really dodgy but definitely aimed at this race. BUT did the horse run on merits in its 2 previous races has to be the question? But distance can be given as an excuse (Always behind therefore were the other horses going plenty quick enough for him).
That’s my take on it anyway FWIW.
I have never praised Barney Curley – I detest the man.
I don’t care how much work he does for, or money he donates to, charity – he was another one who didn’t just cost bookies money, he cost honest formbook student punters who backed the runners up, the owners, trainers, jockeys and stable staff of those runners up, who had collectively campaigned their horse openly and fairly and got mugged off for their efforts plus anyone who backed Curley’s horses in pre-coup races as they trailed in down the field under “considerate” rides.
Curley, Byrnes, anyone else who does it – I’d warn off every mother’s son of them.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Drone, I’d say that exposed horses being run over the wrong trip with the express intent of getting back to a winning mark do not apply here, because they fall outside the key objective: preparing a horse for a proper Byrnes/Curley type touch. I keep coming back to intent here because it’s the crux of the issue under discussion.
That’s not to say the practice with exposed horses is ethical, but I won’t sidetrack on that for now.
As you say, exposed horses with a steadily dropping mark suddenly back over the right trip are there for all to see – bookies included: no big gambles are going to be landed on them.
If the types of trainer we’re talking about here are using wrong trip runs as part of their strategy, I’d expect the animal to be thoroughly unexposed at its best trip, so all those wrong trip runs are just as covert as any other tactic.
FWIW, I’m not bothered either way by these coups, and I very much doubt your everyday punter loses sleep over them. The trainers all still have their licenses, so they’ve been breaking no laws. If the laws are wrong – which they almost certainly are – then those making those laws should be harangued, not the trainers.
As to what I’ve been banging on about here, one of the key weaknesses in the laws is that ‘pulling a horse’ to disguise its ability is illegal but running a horse over the wrong trip to disguise its ability is not. Laughable, in my book, at least.
As to what I’ve been banging on about here, one of the key weaknesses in the laws is that ‘pulling a horse’ to disguise its ability is illegal but running a horse over the wrong trip to disguise its ability is not. Laughable, in my book, at least.
Hit the nail on its head. Also, apart from the aggreived punters, or bookmakers, what about the “honest” connections who thought they had found a winning chance for their horse only to be deprived of that opportunity?
We know handicaps are rare in the USA precisely because they are open to this sort of corruption. There is also little doubt that if Charles Byrnes, and trainers of a similar ilk, were based in Hong Kong, for instance, they would be warned off for the sort of stunts they pull over here.
I get the distinct impression that some trainers are “protected”. Tony Martin and Charles Byrnes have already been metnioned, and in this country a lot of the big Newmarket trainers regularly get horses “well handicapped” and subject of betting plunges. Prescott is probably the most famous for this. Other trainers, with far less powerful supporters are scapegoated in order to convince the betting public that integrity exists.
The word “shrewd” is often euphemistically used to describe certain individuals who, in any other walk of like, would be regarded as cheats.
I don’t see it as anything but blatant cheating. Just like the gamble he landed a few months ago…25/1 into 3/1..leaving shocking form behind to win hard held…all excuses already written out to go into the enquiry with…very similar to this time…the famous old…inexperienced jockey rode in previous failures…jumped poorly…new things tried in training…horses in better form blah, blah, blah!
They will just keep sticking two fingers up to the authorities and punters though, as they are allowed to get away with it…
I’m still waiting to hear back from an email I sent about 5 times to the bha…asking why their handicapping system encourages cheating and punishes horses that run on their merits…giving two crystal clear examples of two horses from different ends….one dropped something like 16lbs in 5 consecutive non trying efforts…held up out back, never put into race etc….compared with one horse that had not dropped more than 3lbs despite 20 consecutive races without winning….
That’s the bad side of racing…it’s why I’ve started concentrating much more on the top graded races and top meetings…probably no coincidence that so far 2016 has been my best for a very long time!
Surprise, surprise – the Irish Turf club, after carrying out a “detailed inspection” of Charles Byrnes’ yard have decided not to take any action. What a joke. As for the man himself. This is what he said “It’s just the way it turned out. I won’t say that I planned this. I just had a bunch of six or seven horses that hit form and I thought, to hell with it, I may as well throw three or four of them in together and we only put it together in the last couple of weeks.” After he said these words he burst out into uncontrollable, hysterical laughter and actually fell to the ground, doubled up, banging the ground as tears rolled down his cheeks.
"this perfect mix of poetry and destruction, this glory of rhythm, power and majesty: the undisputed champion of the world!!!"
Let’s face it, in Ireland, you could hack into and raid a pension fund and the Irish Turf Club would believe you stumbled into the website by mistake while googling while a large number of posters would applaud you for putting one over on the financial system.
English racing is by no means perfect but, outside of Group races, Irish racing is far worse.
All Irish handicaps – just swerve, swerve, SWERVE.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.