- This topic has 659 replies, 109 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
The question is how RUK choose to cover it. For the channel not to take advantage of Red Button technology – which is available to everyone who subscribes to the channel – over the summer months at least, is a failure of courtesy as well as imagination.
Maybe "current inability or reluctance to utilise resources more" would be nearer the mark. Is it
a priori
that if all bar one meeting were hidden behind the red button, the one remaining meeting on "regular" RUK or ATR would be accorded that much more in terms of pre- and post-race analysis, rather than being padded out with more Skybet and Victor Chandler ads, etc.?
However egregious some of us may or may not find it, would it surprise (m)any if the company’s business model deviates little from broadcasting few extras for as long as a) the backwash of Setanta’s implosion, and b) the backdrop of a recession, are still considerations?
The fundamental problem of the low-grade, gaff-track jumps fodder is that these races take
so long to run
, vampirically sucking time from each 30-35 minute slot, so that we end up with a ludicrous temporal imbalance
in their favour
.
"Fodder", "vampirical", "ludicrous"… these are all fairly emotive terms. I’d sooner we kept this to being a discussion of a quantitative issue rather than of a qualitative one.
There is something wrong with the broadcaster’s priorities, when post-race expert analysis of (say) the Yorkshire Oaks is drastically curtailed because we have to rush across to Bangor for (say) an interminable 3 Mile Mares Novice Hurdle.
Flat races are very swift in comparison to 3 Mile novice hurdles, but we are robbed of fair paddock and analysis time by the low-grade jumps fare.
Regretting that 3 mile races take longer to run than 5f sprints is like complaining that being rained on gets you wetter than not being rained on – it’s an irrefutable fact to bring up, but no less unfair for doing so.
Moreover, I’m sure there may be people on here who can put us right if necessary, but I wouldn’t have presumed the dynamic of the broadcasters’ relationship with their respective courses is such that burying of races under a red button as a first resort by the former is actively tolerated by the latter.
There’s another issue to consider. Utilisation of the red button wouldn’t technically deviate form RUK’s oft-stated "you won’t miss a thing" mission statement, because as you say, the races are still viewable by some means; but there is an inference of inconsequentiality about relegating the Bangors of this world (which would still be many given punters’ preferred meeting on the given day) to red button coverage that plenty would not appreciate.
We had some fearful abuse emailed in to the radio for relegating some races in the past to coverage of just the final 30 seconds, and / or to telephone service coverage only. We just won’t entertain similar omissions nowadays if we can possibly help it – it doesn’t sit right with our own "because every race is a big race" maxim.
A simple Red Button is all that’s needed.
Outside of the immediate confines of one broadcaster’s coverage, a Red Button option will have wrought very little of benefit if two closely timetabled races, one at an ATR track and one at an RUK track, still contrive to clash following a delay.
I’d still maintain that programming longer breaks between races, at the time of year when such breaks can best be accommodated, plus as hoc dialogue between courses and a BHA raceday planner, collectively remain a more credible option than relying on the ingenuity of our two bespoke broadcasters.
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.
- Total Posts 17716
"Fodder", "vampirical", "ludicrous"… these are all fairly emotive terms. I’d sooner we kept this to being a discussion of a quantitative issue rather than of a qualitative one.
You may sooner we did, but the problem is that this
is
a qualitative issue! Or perhaps you would argue that the Yorkshire Oaks is only one race, making a Mares Novice Three Mile Hurdle its equal?
Quantitatively
of course you are right, but that is hardly an argument to carry much weight.
My colourful quoted vocab. was mainly in reference to the
temporal
aspect of the case, which I’ve tried to present quite coolly: these summer jumps races take a long time to run, which commonly eats into build up and/or post-race analysis for our major group races.
Leaving aside my adjectival ebullience, there’s absolutely nothing emotive about this argument – it’s purely factual, based on the percentages of broadcasting time given over to the conflicting codes.
I do like your suggestion to increase gaps between races to 40 minutes: but I suspect we may be in a small minority on this one.
The question is how RUK choose to cover it. For the channel not to take advantage of Red Button technology – which is available to everyone who subscribes to the channel – over the summer months at least, is a failure of courtesy as well as imagination.
This often quoted "red button technology" really needs to be cleared up. The red button isn’t some marvellous invention of technology, it is simple another television channel that that viewer accesses via a different button than the usual method, ie pressing 101 on your remote control. Paying for another channel for viewers to access races that may clash is very expensive. Would you be happy for RUK to increase the subscription so that you can get a clear view of a race, that is probably being shown on C4 anyway?
- Total Posts 17716
The red button isn’t some marvellous invention of technology, it is simple another television channel that that viewer accesses via a different button than the usual method, ie pressing 101 on your remote control. Paying for another channel for viewers to access races that may clash is very expensive. Would you be happy for RUK to increase the subscription so that you can get a clear view of a race, that is probably being shown on C4 anyway?
It’s not a different channel, merely a secondary feed which can be selected easily and without significant cost. If ATR can do this (as they do) on a regular basis, putting full coverage of selected meetings behind the Red Button (albeit at a lower bandwidth) then there is no reason, technical or fiscal, for RUK to withhold a similar Red Button service from £20 p.m. subscribers.
But just as RUK have thus far failed to provide much in the way of subsidiary content (stable visits and the like, such a valuable feature on ATR), so they’ve ducked the technical possibilities of multi-streaming technology.
This often quoted "red button technology" really needs to be cleared up. The red button isn’t some marvellous invention of technology, it is simple another television channel that that viewer accesses via a different button than the usual method, ie pressing 101 on your remote control. Paying for another channel for viewers to access races that may clash is very expensive. Would you be happy for RUK to increase the subscription so that you can get a clear view of a race, that is probably being shown on C4 anyway?
Obviously like the RUK hierarchy you have not yet lost your C4 analogue terrestrial signal like some of us. I suppose I could turn RUK off on my Sky Box and retune it to C4 if RUK let me know in advance which races they were leaving to C4 but I fail to see why I should do that when I’m paying £20 a month for the "privilege" of having RUK.
- Total Posts 17716
With magnificent timing, we RUK subscribers today received a heartening email circular, trumpeting forth the good news about all the splendid
jump
racing we can enjoy on 432 tomorrow –
and right through the summer months!
Either nobody in the managerial echelons keeps in touch with the Racing Forum, or they have developed an exquisite sense of irony.
The fundamental problem of the low-grade, gaff-track jumps fodder is that these races take so long to run, vampirically sucking time from each 30-35 minute slot, so that we end up with a ludicrous temporal imbalance in their favour
For my money I`d prefer we had the flat rubbish behind the red button
An over 5 minute delay to the 7.50 at Folkestone due to the low lying sun (almost non existent in the view of the commentator and presenter at the track) causing 8 of the 18 fences to be omitted but then absolutely nothing done by the BHA to stop the race being run at exactly the same time as the 8.00 at Newmarket. A 2 minute delay to the Newmarket race would have been sufficient.
Surely Nic Coward & Paul Roy will be up in arms and heads will roll after another race clash despite there being only 2 meetings this evening. No wonder the levy is on a nonstop downward spiral.
Think you’re being unfair about tonight Eddie, as I only saw one race at Stratford clash with Cartmel as the amateir riders couldn’t understand what it meant be forming a line at the start.
Don’t worry, the BHA pay someone £30k a year, or soon will do, to be a "Race Times Executive." You’d £30k would be enough to stop this, but clearly it’s not.
47 Races Today Between 2.00pm and 6.00pm
Why not a few of them between 12.00 and 2.00 and another few between 6.00 and 8.00 instead of all the races crammed between 2.00 and 6.00pm?
Probably it’s because those are the sort of times that are convenient for spectators, particularly on a Bank Holiday.
Agree with the above.
There are two schools of thought for me:
Do you spread the races out more to make things easier for the bookies & tv coverage?
Or do you time the races for the convenience of racegoers on course, regardless of what’s happening elsewhere?
I think on a Bank Holiday, you have to steer towards the latter. Although I have a feeling in the bookies today, we’ll be watching alot of the action from Towcester or Cartmel in a small ‘picture in picture’ box.
- Total Posts 17716
They have to saturate you with today’s racing because 99% of it is complete garbage and they’re hoping punters wont notice in their frenzy to place a bet.
Personally i think its overkill.
Saturating the day with so many races leads to a large majority of possible racegoers summarising the whole day as garbage and not bothering.
A carefully planned process with at least 1 quality race at each meeting would better serve, instead of the current process "lets squeeze in as much as we can no matter how bad it is"
They have to saturate you with today’s racing because 99% of it is complete garbage and they’re hoping punters wont notice in their frenzy to place a bet.
Well, that’s hard to deny either. Although while alot of the horses may be low quality, the big jocks were out at Goodwood. Three for Fallon & a double for Moore.
I’m sure there’s a certain type of mug punter that blindly backs big name jockeys & they would’ve had a field day today.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.