- This topic has 42 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
The Quinlan touch at Lingfield today…
Seen it briefly mentioned in Jose’s brilliant thread taking on the handicapper in the other section, but surprised there’s no mention on this main board..
What chance have punters got with the way these two horses have been running lately as opposed to how they performed today when the money was well and truly down.
Bishopbriggs is an absolute joke….out of the last five runnings four different jockeys have managed to gain these in running comments…
slowly into stride, always towards rear
outpaced and always behind
steadied in rear, soon outpaced, some late headway never nearer
dwelt, always in rear
Why have those four jockeys all ridden the horse like that when it has won twice in it’s career, both times making all to win?
What happens today…it absolutely bounces out, makes all and wins pulling a cart and you get Adam Kirby punching the air like he’s just won the Derby!
- Total Posts 17716
No reflection on your main point Zamorston – indeed I agree with most of it – but the punching of the air by the jockey might have something to do with the owner having the same surname?
Today, imo, was as bad for British Horse Racing as Deano at Southwell, Casela Park at Newcastle etc.
With the people in charge of this sport we have, nothing will change.
Another mess of a situation created through various things. I’ve thought about prize money, but even with that I can’t bring myself to go “it’s ok, well done.”
To think of the money wasted on integrity services that can’t do any-more than I can. We have no authority powered sectional timing, no professional stewards, no regular race readers and just an ignorant man in charge of handicapping, who should have recognised the point made by Eddie Fremantle when the mega Barney Curley event took place earlier in 2010.
I’m currently trying to work out which one was worse today – Tell Halaf or Bishopbriggs. I’m edging towards Tell Halaf, personally.
He won on the same horse for the same connections twice last year and didn’t appear quite as pleased with himself as he was today…Must have been a bigger cut today.
- Total Posts 17716
Today, imo, was as bad for British Horse Racing as Deano at Southwell, Casela Park at Newcastle etc.
With the people in charge of this sport we have, nothing will change.
Nor should it. "The Coup" has been an enticing part of the sport since the Arab shrewdies layed the odds-on Massala against the unconsidered Ben Hur in the 4:50 from Jerusalem in 30AD.
Whether morally justified or not, most punters this morning will be admiring the Quinlans’ initiative in giving the bookies a minor pasting yesterday, as one for the "little people" against the fat cats.
It’s fun. It does no harm. And although I’m pretty indifferent to the all-weather, it certainly adds spice to the winter warmers.
Tell Halaf had the second best speed rating in the race from Lingfield last June (my figs) on all performances over the last 12 months. He would have won that day given a better ride by Spencer who got him boxed in on the rails. That race has produced 10 subsequent winners.
Bishopbriggs had the best speed in his race(same criteria) from Wolves on the 29th of January this year. He won that day and was 4lbs lower today.
So in fairness the
published
back class was there, and you’ll see worse, imo. What they were doing in the meantime is obvious but the stewarding much of the time is an embarrassment and driving people into the arms of football.
You could probably do worse looking for all weather horses back down to a winning/ran well off, mark, after several no shows and take a chance at big prices in the morning. You’d have done ok yesterday.
I have to question whether using riding tactics that don’t suit the horse is any worse than running a horse over the wrong trip or unsuitable ground. Connections are free to use any of these tactics and have the horse still ‘run on its merits’ ie this isn’t a jockey ‘stopping’ the horse, it is merely using the race conditions to cause it to run below par.
The problem – as Jose has so effectively shown on his thread – is the reaction of the handicapper to these below par runs. If the performance isn’t within 7lbs of a horse’s current rating then it shouldn’t be rated. If the handicapper changed his policy of dropping horses for these runs there would be no incentive to use such tactics.
Nor should it. "The Coup" has been an enticing part of the sport since the Arab shrewdies layed the odds-on Massala against the unconsidered Ben Hur in the 4:50 from Jerusalem in 30AD.
Whether morally justified or not, most punters this morning will be admiring the Quinlans’ initiative in giving the bookies a minor pasting yesterday, as one for the "little people" against the fat cats.
It’s fun. It does no harm. And although I’m pretty indifferent to the all-weather, it certainly adds spice to the winter warmers.
It’s punters their selves, in whatever capcity, who now have the potential to be turned over, so I doubt that is the general feeling.
If you feel like some of us do that at least one of these horses were not rode on their merits, then I think that’s damage enough done to racing.
The Stewards considered the apparent improvement in form of the winner BISHOPBRIGGS (USA) ridden by Adam Kirby and trained by M G Quinlan compared with its previous run at Kempton on the 9th of September where it finished 12th beaten 8 1/4L but having received a report of the trainer’s explanation that the gelding had benefited from extensive course of back treatment since his last run they decided not to hold an enquiry. The Stewards ordered BISHOPBRIGGS (USA) to be routine tested.
The Stewards considered the apparent improvement in form of the winner TELL HALAF ridden by Adam Kirby and trained by M G Quinlan compared with its previous run at Wolverhampton on the 16th of October where it finished 9th beaten 16L but having received a report of the trainer’s explanation that the stable is in better form than when he last run they decided not to hold an enquiry.
I’ll just make this point – the back treatment information should be made available beforehand, even if I don’t believe it.
The stewards accepting that "we’re in better form" so it’s all ok is ridiculous. Of course you’re in better form – it’s why you’re in better form that is of interest.
Spot on Jose. It does plenty of harm to those who have backed Tell Halaf in its previous races when the horse hasn’t been interested in getting too close. Certainly not my idea of fun, in any case.
- Total Posts 17716
the gelding had benefited from extensive course of back treatment since his last run they decided not to hold an enquiry.
As an excuse for the improvement in form – it’ll do.
As a reason for the horse being ridden differently, it stinks – as do the stewards and the BHA, for failing to even question what appears blatant chicanery.If the performance isn’t within 7lbs of a horse’s current rating then it shouldn’t be rated. If the handicapper changed his policy of dropping horses for these runs there would be no incentive to use such tactics.
The problem is, to me anyway, the handicapper himself. Particularly on the AW a horse flies up the weights for one win & doesn’t come down again for an eternity.
It almost looks, again to my eyes only, that the handicapper isn’t giving all the horses in a race a theoretically even chance to win, just the one’s that haven’t won in long while.
- Total Posts 17716
This thread seems to me as miserable, old and hackneyed as 2010. I very much hope that this sort of tuneless harping about clever strokes by lesser trainers, struggling to make a living with a bit of gambling on the side, will vanish in 2011 like the Newbury mist.
Fat chance.
But aside from the bizarre notion that we should unite in a doleful chorus of moral disapproval of this age-old stratagem
The Coup
, which has added colour and fun to Racing over two millenia, it seems curious that some posters deem it evidence to cite the way these horses were ridden in previous races.
This strikes me as just another form of after-timing, and every bit as empty. It proves nothing, filling a factless void with mere opinion.
The Stewards were right to make their enquiries after the race, and equally right to accept the trainer’s explanations. Quinlan’s coup is the racing equivalent of tax avoidance, not tax evasion, and equally within the law.
I for one do not want to see the BHA acting like a modern Spanish Inquisition, rushing around with holy zeal to spend our money –
racing’s money
– on endless investigations to placate a handful of negative posters on TRF and other internet forums.
Do we really think this sour harping on grey-area decisions and minor coups is in any way
for the good of racing
? Or does it merely add fuel to the bonfires of those outsiders who believe that the whole thing is bent, boring and tedious?
My personal resolution for 2011 will be never, ever to use that phrase
for the good of racing
when I’m really talking about the good of my own pocket.
Pinza, if you had this going on every race would you really celebrate it?
In your view, Dean McKeown should be welcomed back with open arms then?
I’ve eliminated opinion where these "coups" are concerned – I highlight daily the most likely, probable coup horses, and I don’t just blame connections for it.
I for one do not want to see the BHA acting like a modern Spanish Inquisition, rushing around with holy zeal to spend our money – racing’s money – on endless investigations to placate a handful of negative posters on TRF and other internet forums.
That is the problem – they have spent a fortune on something I could do more to correct if I was made head of handicapping tomorrow with the simple instruction to the team of 12 (I think) of "don’t drop any horse that has run 10lbs below its form."
There is "The Coup" where connections have set it up through trying, even at wrong distances. Then there is "The Coup" like yesterday where……….
- Total Posts 17716
Pinza
Dress it up and disparage as you like, the horse has not been ridden on its merits. That is clearly against the rules of racing, and would see the perpetrators in serious trouble in other jurisdictions. The real problem here is officialdom turning a blind eye to it.
Form for Bishopbriggs 4 wins reads:Made all, ridden well over 1f out, ran on.
Made all, ridden 1f out, driven out.
Driven along to lead, hard ridden from over 1f out, all out.
Led until over 5f out, chased leader until ridden to lead again over 2f out, ridden clear entering final 2f
Whereas, for the 3 runs prior to yesterday, it reads:Awkward start and slowly into stride, always in rear, hung right from over 1f out, never dangerous.
Held up in last trio, effort over 1f out, not clear run entering final furlong, stayed on near finish
Slowly into stride, behind most of way.You might see that as ‘colour and fun’, clearly many others see it as cheating, which isn’t acceptable, and, at the very least – should be inquired into.
I think you need to be careful about accusing connections of not running a horse on its merits merely because he hasn’t been asked to make all.
Front runners are difficult to win with because:
1) They tend to need an unopposed lead to show their best;
2) They need to break well to get the lead;
3) A poor draw (particularly on the AW) can make it very difficult to get to the front.Bishopbriggs has started slowly on a number of occasions and attempting to get to the front in those circumstances would use up far too much energy.
There may be many reasons why a horse ends up being held up when the trainer’s instructions were to lead if possible. I’ve lost count of the number of times a jockey has failed to implement our instructions in a race either because circumstances conspired against him or because the inexperience (or arrogance) of the jockey concerned caused him to use his own judgment (wrongly) and adopt different tactics.
As far as the front running tactics go tuffers I’ve just watched the horses last half a dozen races along with all 3 of it’s victories (didn’t take me more than 5 minutes either
)It comes across pretty clear to me that on only 3 occasions has the jockey given the horse the chance to lead. Actually, I maybe being a bit harsh there because yesterday it actually broke well and with being stalled on it’s own next to the rail was able to get out and get the position Adam Kirby wanted.
On it’s 2 previous wins at Wolverhampton it was drawn 10 of 10 and 12 of 12 so arguably not the most favourable of draws. What is blatantly clear though is Adam Kirby is absolutely desperate to lead on both occasions and drives the horse for all it’s worth to cut across the field and get to the front, also blowing your theory of wasting too much energy early out of the water…just watch them both and tell me I’m wrong!
On all the other races I watched the horse didnt break well, but there was absolutely no vigorous effort (like Kirby’s) from any of the jockey’s to try and get to the front.
When connections run horses maybe over wrong trips or on wrong going or courses they don’t like at least you’ve half a chance as a punter of working things like that out. Whether a horse who wins making all is going to be held up out the back and never be in contention or blast out and make all to win is something you haven’t a chance of and it leaves a sour taste for me…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.