- This topic has 52 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
What price would you make Grand Sequioia to be third in the 9.20 at Kempton tonight knowing that it wasn’t first or second?
According to the trilateral’s trifecta it’s around 1.05 – the forecast paid £52.25 and the tricast 54.96.
Another shocking example of how the three tramps are strangling the game.
THEY even turned on the mist machines tonight hoping we wouldn’t see the shenannigans that led to the beast being returned 4/9 despite being constantly odds against on Big Blue.
What price would you make Grand Sequioia to be third in the 9.20 at Kempton tonight knowing that it wasn’t first or second?
According to the trilateral’s trifecta it’s around 1.05 – the forecast paid £52.25 and the tricast 54.96.
Another shocking example of how the three tramps are strangling the game.
THEY even turned on the mist machines tonight hoping we wouldn’t see the shenannigans that led to the beast being returned 4/9 despite being constantly odds against on Big Blue.
I was on evening duty for Timeform Radio and nearly choked when I saw the course shows. The price on Betfair was a shade over evens when the track’s first show (4/6) came through and actually drifted to 6/5 a few seconds before the off. Can we have a Q&A with Chris Bell soon please Corm?
The most hilarious news we’ve had this week is that John Gosden wants all of this type of racing handed over to the bookmakers!!!
I don’t subscribe to a lot of Glenn’s whinges about bookmakers, but this is an absolute disgrace and brings the whole bookmaking industry into disrepute.
There should be some sort of enquiry into what exactly is going on at this track.
BTW – I can categorically state that Coral did not influence this SP – we do not stand at Kempton and we didn’t back Giant Sequoia with any on-course bookies (or anyone else for that matter).
Press release from Betfair:
WAS 4-9 GIANT SEQUOIA THE WORST EVER SP RETURNED IN BRITAIN?
Horse shortened from 4-6 to 4-9 on course, but returned a Betfair SP of 2.17
PUNTERS were dumbfounded when Giant Sequoia was beaten at odds of 4-9 in the concluding handicap at Kempton last night – but it had nothing to do with the fact that the horse could only finish third.
It would have had everything to do with the fact that the progressive handicapper was shortened from 4-6 to 4-9 on course, despite never dipping below even money on Betfair in the same period.
The only large bets recorded on course, according to the Racing Post, were as follows: £500-£500 (x3) £400-£500 (x3) £400-£650 (x3) £1000-£1750, and £500-£1000 (x3).
However, it actually drifted on the exchange in the same timeframe – despite a £25,000 request to back the horse at 2.1 (11-10) appearing on the site in the lead-up to the race – and returned a Betfair SP of 2.17 (basically 11-10, even after the maximum commission of 5 per cent is taken into account).
Furthermore, the over-round in the race, which was delayed until 9.40pm due to problems with fog at the course – thus lessening the prospect of “office money” shortening the horse’s price – was a massive 141 per cent in the 13-runner handicap.
Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin commented: “Giant Sequoias grow from a seed the size of a grain of wheat into huge trees over thousands of years.
“It took a similar unlikely development in about five minutes at Kempton last night to return that horse at 4-9 – and there has to be an investigation into how it was sent off at that price, how many bookmakers were standing at the late hour and who was backing the horse and why.
“It may have lost anyway but horseracing punters and racegoers simply won’t stand for it, long-term, in an increasingly competitive sports betting market.
“It must be a prime contender for the worst SP ever returned on a British racecourse – and punters deserve to know why.”
The only large bets recorded on course, according to the Racing Post, were as follows: £500-£500 (x3) £400-£500 (x3) £400-£650 (x3) £1000-£1750, and £500-£1000 (x3).
The (x3) is the clue here. Hillbrokes rep going bang bang bang right down the line of the three tramps at each price increment. Notice how the even money and 4/5 never made it to the SIS shows.
Do the market reports no long attribute money to being ‘office money’ these days?
What’s hilarious about it ?
141%
Will be commonplace if the bookmakers have to fund the whole show.
On the bright side, it wont concern those employed by Sheikhs and the Lloyd-Webbers .
What’s hilarious about it ?
141%
Will be commonplace if the bookmakers have to fund the whole show.
On the bright side, it wont concern those employed by Sheikhs and the Lloyd-Webbers .
John Gosden’s interview in Owner & Breeder magazine is very well thought out and typically forthright. He does suggest that if bookmakers want banded style cards, they should fund them themselves. I wouldn’t call this "handing it over". This type of racing will only survive long term if those who put it on ensure that it pays for itself in terms of betting revenue. That certainly wouldn’t happen with antics like last nights.
This type of racing will only survive long term if those who put it on ensure that it pays for itself in terms of betting revenue.
Which it wont, and in the process drive more people out of and away from the sport. Still, the re diverted levy money will keep those in the luxury their accustomed to.
Funny how it always comes back to gambling in the end.
Which it wont, and in the process drive more people out of and away from the sport. Still, the re diverted levy money will keep those in the luxury their accustomed to.
I couldn’t disagree more with that. The projected demise of low grade racing with massive overrounds would only be good news for the sport and those who work in it.
Doubt the owners, trainers, jockeys, stable staff, form providers, data suppliers, web developers, racecourse staff, media, gamblers etc,etc,etc involved with low end racing would agree with you, Rory.
Maybe I could protest on the Bury Road when the day to day sport I enjoy is taken away from me
to pay Lord Lloyd Webers stable fees. Anyone got a tent?Whenever there is an uncompetitive market, bookmakers are going to bet with a higher overround. Trying (it is very hard) to see the bookmaker’s point of view here. Usually at these Kempton meetings few bookies turn up. Not many punters turn up either, so very little money to go around. How much money do bookmakers pay to get in? Is it 5 times the tatts price? If that is the case, to make a profit on the day. Bookies may not be able to offer anything like what they would normally.
Having said that:
If nobody wants this rubbish racing, what’s the point in having it? It seems now trainers don’t want it either. Though is John Gosden’s opinion the same as small trainers, who rely on this stuff? Even if the answer is NO; should we persist with this grade? Just to keep small or poor trainers and jockeys and no doubt good stable lads, in a job.Value Is EverythingThough is John Gosden’s opinion the same as small trainers, who rely on this stuff?
I’d tentatively suggest not.
The singlemost revealing question in the
Post
‘s "Questionnaire" every Sunday is the one of whether the subject believes there is too much racing.
The lines have, with relatively few exceptions, become fairly well drawn over time, I think. Media types, betting types and journeyman riders mostly seem to say there
isn’t
too much racing; those at or near the top of the training / riding tree say that there is; and John Berry barely gives a straight answer to anything.
Of the trainers, the likes of Tom Dascombe and Rae Guest have come down especially emphatically in saying the volume of racing is not excessive.
The former admits to having had his view turned over time by the reality of trying to find the right race for less than stellar performers, and is far more appreciative of the lower-grade fare than ever he was when starting out.
The latter was yet more strident, stating that it’s all very well some people clamouring for less low-end racing, but it’s absolute lifeblood to a yard like his which realistically is never going to be adorned with wall-to-wall superstars.
James Eustace, slightly more charismatically, answered; "
No, not if it means I can win more of it".
It’s clearly just a snapshot of opinion from the 50 or so questionnaire subjects per annum, of course, but I’m not sure it’s entirely without merit as a barometer of opinion among certain practitioners in the sport.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Padmini in the last at Lingfield today. Betfair SP of 3.03 returns at 11/10. This is akin to David Hood waiting for a betting shop punter to come out of a Hills shop then crfacking him on the head with a baseball bat and taking his winnings out of his pocket.
Padmini in the last at Lingfield today. Betfair SP of 3.03 returns at 11/10. This is akin to David Hood waiting for a betting shop punter to come out of a Hills shop then crfacking him on the head with a baseball bat and taking his winnings out of his pocket.
Not all his winnings. Hoody would leave him his BFH.
Padmini is a different kettle of fish to Grand Sequoia imo. Frankie Dettori is the most popular jockey in the world and he was on a four timer at Lingfield, so this would have been a shocking result for all bookmakers. The money hedged would be reflecting significant and genuine liabilities on the horse.
to pay Lord Lloyd Webers stable fees. Anyone got a tent?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.