- This topic has 135 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Mike, Towcester’s grandstand doesn’t really allow for that but a stiff drink and hundreds of expletives made us feel a bit better…
Rob, i’m not saying they should be banned, but on the figures this thing improved out of sight… I’m willing to say that Earle got the horse, ran it (Not 100% fit), worked out how good the horse was and placed it well landing a touch at the same time.. I just wish i’d gone with my eyes and not my head..
The bookie paying out about 10 young birds who’d had three pound each at 66/1 didn’t look best pleased!!!
Quote: from Aragorn on 12:51 pm on April 2, 2007[br]<br>The bookie paying out about 10 young birds who’d had three pound each at 66/1 didn’t look best pleased!!!
Sad thing is, if it was a quiet day, it was probably their money which reduced the price from 66/1. Many years ago at Royal Ascot I managed to shift a horse’s price from 66/1 to 50/1 with just 50p each-way, admittedly in the Silver Ring, but prices sometimes change for very little money!
Rob<br>
(Edited by robnorth at 1:18 pm on April 2, 2007)
I’d say that this was a case of a horse improving when changing trainer which is something that regularly happens. Also Heavenly Pleasure may have preferred the good ground rather than the heavy going that he’d experienced in his previous race.
It doesn’t take much money on course to change the price of a horse from 66/1 to 33/1. If it had been a planned gamble then the price would have gone much lower imo. ÂÂÂ
Hi all
obviously it’s not all dodgy, the higher the class the better it is. There’s a horse, yes just one horse that I will site here as a piece of evidence.  This horse has been messed around with no end. This will soon wing in at a good price.
City For Conquest.
byefrom<br>carlisle<br>
Quote: from Aragorn on 12:51 pm on April 2, 2007[br]… I’m willing to say that Earle got the horse, ran it (Not 100% fit
Mickey Mouse NH racing, Pulled up horses should be void for betting purposes next time out. IMO
Rob, it was pretty busy, as Towcester always is due to the free entry. The wednesday being busier than the thursday last week as well.. I would have thought there was a few more quid than that laid. Probably each way money from the yard perhaps but I think it would have taken more than a couple of quid…. I could be wrong though..
Aragorn…I think what you’ve highlighted here is a classic example of the form book being misread therefore a race result looking dodgey.
Firstly, in this particular race the favourite opened at a ridiculously short 4/5 (SP 8/11) given its only previous outing, a comfortable 21l win over Share My Dreams, was ran at 16 furlongs on Heavy going, as oppossed to the 21 furlong on Good going at Towcester. Althought, the former was run in a pretty smart time for the grade.
Whereas, Heavenly Pleasure’s two previous outings when she was pulled up, one was also on Heavy going and may easily have accounted for the poor performance and the other with a different trainer at the back end of last season.
Similarly, a market move from 66’s to 33’s (can’t quite remember so may be wrong but I don’t think 66’s was ever available off-course) represents a 1.5% move on the book which is a fair degree less than the 2.3% required to move the price from 4/5 to 8/11.
Please don’t misunderstand. I’m not trying to be a smart ass after the event, I’m just attempting to suggest that maybe a lot of what we view as dodgy may in fact be accounted for in the form book (with hindsight). <br>
Pompete, don’t worry, I was as much posing the question to get people’s take on it because it could be interpreted both ways in my eyes..
It was definitely 66’s on course.
I thought the favourite ran its race to be honest and was beaten by a better horse on the day.. I’m more annoyed I didn’t back it!!!
Things to note when going to Towcester, back Jonjo O’Neill almost blind, and back any outsider that looks fit in the parade and attracts good support in the ring!!
Re: Aragorn and Heavenly Pleasure.
Racing timeline betting odds’ snapshot<br>Wednesday March 28, 2007<br>4:25 Southwell<br>11/2  Mahmjra<br>8/1  Bollin Derek<br>4:35 Kempton Park<br>5/1  Roznic<br>33/1  Espoir Du Bocage<br>4:45 Towcester<br>33/1  Heavenly Pleasure<br>11/1 Divine Wisdom<br>8/11F  Saphire Knight<br>4:55 Southwell<br>3/1  Feelin Irie<br>8/1  Mid Valley
That corporate bookmaking “connectionsâ€ÂÂ
Alan, with the greatest respect- I always try to remain uncynical- but I haven’t a clue what you’re on about. In twenty words or less of plain English, what, in effect, are you saying?
And if you’ve uncovered some crazy code, why aren’t you making a fortune out of it?
<br>More to the point, a horse could still be 66/1 with several bookmakers at the off, but be returned 33/1 at SP simply because those 66/1 men aren’t part of the sample being used to set the SP.
Or not enough of them were showing 66/1.
That’s a far more likely scenario than a stable gamble.
AP
Quote: from AlanRidley on 7:01 pm on April 2, 2007 Oh, and about robnorth and and the “10 birdsâ€ÂÂ
AR…Have you got a view on the implications of the upcoming removal of SIS’s monoploy and the possibility of more than one first show being available to high street bookmakers, is News International behind this or is it a feint attack upon you, in light of your investigations?
Ps, I’m writing this in a hotel foyer…
<br>With my coloured crayons.
Mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.