- This topic has 65 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Bar it’s first run as a 2yo Nimello had a very poor record on fast ground. It’s two recent wins were under different conditions. Last time it ran on fast ground it had a physical problem. Surprise, surprise, it runs poorly now it’s on firm ground again. The price even for a place maybe very generous, but surely there must be at least a chance that people with a bit of knowledge or a good view of the horse at the course, and it doesn’t have to be ‘inside’ knowledge, take a chance to make some straightforward money.<br>If you question the price in this instance then do we have to set price limits for every horse that runs? I backed Blue Patrick at Ascot last week, rating him something around a 3/1 – 4/1 chance, yet 12/1 was available. Does that mean that something was suspicious. Of course not, it just means the market or the punting public got it wrong on the day. With Nimello they got it right!
As Alan suggested, it would help if there was a specific charge, but there isn’t.
Rob
Quote: from rory on 3:48 pm on July 15, 2003[br]Scary ~ that some of the cynical punters among us can’t smell a rat over the Nimello affair. The only alternative is that some moron with more money than sense happened to get lucky. No genuine punter/layer would have opposed the horse at the prices on offer, even if he thought the horse was a dodgepot. <br>
Rory
The rat, if it is that, is that a horse is being run under conditions which palpably don’t suit it. I do believe there are questions to be asked in that area.<br>The ‘moron with more money than sense’ might just be someone with very good judgement.
Rob
Article by David Carr 15/06/03
KEVIN Ryan has blamed ground that was firmer than expected for Tuesday’s controversial performance by Nimello – which resulted in the horse being referred to the Jockey Club amid concern over betting patterns – and revealed he will keep him to the all-weather in<br>future, writes David Carr.<br>The Yorkshire trainer hinted that had he been at Salisbury himself he might well have withdrawn the gelding, who finished 13th in a claimer under Paul Fessey after drifting markedly on Betfair and been "very scratchy in his movement" according to the stewards’ secretary.<br>"Some of what has been written is ludicrous and I haven’t been<br>accused of anything – my job is training horses to win races and the betting is nothing to do with me," Ryan said.<br>"The ground was faster than we expected. They said it was good, good to firm in places, but it had dried out and Paul said it rode much quicker. I love horses and I wouldn’t run a horse who isn’t right – I’ve taken horses out before because of the ground but I<br>wasn’t at Salisbury.<br>"Paul gave him a great ride, as<br>he got straight across to the far<br>rail to give him every chance of winning the race. Unfortunately, it<br>didn’t come off but it wasn’t his fault that the horse didn’t go on<br>the ground. He pulled up a bit<br>sore and is a bit pottery now.<br>He’s an old horse and has his problems."<br>Nimello’s running on similarly firm ground at Musselburgh earlier in the season also came under scrutiny, and Ryan wants to avoid being caught out again.<br>He said: "At Musselburgh, he stumbled coming out of the stalls and ricked something, but from now on we’re going to stick to the all-weather unless we get soft ground at the back-end."
Says it all as far as I can see!
Dark Knight
I can’t say at what price I would ‘have smelt a rat’, if indeed I would have done.
If I can turn the question back on it’s self. At what price over ‘the expected’ do you decide for any given horse that something odd is going on?
It strikes me it’s rather a subjective judgement along the lines of ‘how long is a short piece of string?’
Rob
…and you are implying that any time a horse is beaten having been laid at long odds is that the trainer, or jockey, or the farrier, or sundry other people involved with the horse are dishonest. <br>As Kevin Ryan admitted the horse ran under conditions which didn’t suit and, more distrubingly, probably caused harm to it. He should be called to answer for that, but unless there’s clear evidence of a connection further dishonesty then i don’t see that it can be taken any further. At the PRESENT TIME I don’t see any such evidence being produced.
Rob
<br>A fair question. I think every horse has a range of prices that it could be reasonably traded within without being suspicious. I would say in this case anything really over 5 or 6-1 for a place would be fairly suicidal punting. 25-1 – I definitely think that something strange is going on.
<snip><br>
The key point here is that you say ‘I would say in this case….’ It backs my point that judgement of price is subjective.<br>Yes, the price does raise eyebrows, yes, the matter should be investigated, but that doesn’t automatically mean that somebody is guilty of an offence and must be punished for it .
Rob
Quote: from thedarkknight on 4:33 pm on July 15, 2003[br]Rob – remember this wasn’t an isolated incident with horses drifting suspiciously under this ownership.
As has been said on other threads lightning doesn’t strike four times usually.
(Edited by thedarkknight at 4:34 pm on July 15, 2003)<br>
Indeed!
One would presume that the Jockey Club would be aware of this and would follow it up, and indeed they may already have done. In light of various allegations of dishonesty in the Press and on TV then it would be in their own interests to investigate as thoroughly as they can.
Rob
TDK
Sorry to carry on, but I think there is something to add.
The obvious question begs asking, has anyone who has expressed their understandable concerns about Nimello, Royal Insult et al written to the Jockey Club Security Department? If not why not?<br>Don’t tell me they won’t do anything, because if you are worried about that then maybe you should take your money/interest and worry about some other sport or interest.
If the answer to the first question is no then please detail the instances which are of concern and I will write a letter. It could result in anything between complete re-assurance and complete loss of confidence. After all, if you saw the same man in the vicinity of a number of burglaries then surely you would report it to the police?
Rob
So they’re on the case.
The report suggests they have taken the matter seriously. As Alan Potts has said they’re main problem is deciding what offence has been committed!
Thankfully the JC have shown concern about running a horse who is unfit. That really should be something for them to worry about.
Rob<br>
(Edited by robnorth at 6:19 pm on July 15, 2003)
Rob
Back to that fantastic form book of yours and your faith in it…
Did you lay Nimello on the day?
win bets? at what prices? what was your liability?<br>place bets? at what prices? what was your liability?
Did you put your money where your motor mouth is?
Are you sticking up for this for fear you are in the gun?
The person with the credability in this is James – his comments are plainly not "hindsight" but obviously serious reflection.
rouge homme
(Edited by redman at 9:37 am on July 16, 2003)
Quote: from redman on 12:35 am on July 16, 2003[br]Rob
Back to that fantastic form book of yours and your faith in it…
Did you lay Nimello on the day?
win bets? at what prices? what was your liability?<br>place bets? at what prices? what was your liability?
Did you put your money where your motor mouth is?
Are you sticking up for this for fear you are in the gun?
The person with the credability in this is James – his comments are plainly not "hindsight" but obviously serious reflection.
rouge homme
(Edited by redman at 9:37 am on July 16, 2003)<br>
No I didn’t lay or back Nimello on the day. I had dismissed in from the possibilities in that race but in the end didn’t have a bet.
I regard your question regarding my motor mouth as offensive. Firstly, I have never spoken to you. Secondly, I’m very sorry that I have a contrary opinion to yourself, I hadn’t realised that it was against the rules of this board.
Believe me the chances of me being in the gun are pretty remote. I can’t think that my fivers and tenners are going to make a huge difference to the nation wide market. It doesn’t stop me having a decent knowledge of the sport, nor having an opinion on it.
James and others have pursued a reasoned discussion. In my opinion there are reasons why Nimello could have been opposed in that race. I’m certainly not happy with the events of that race, most importantly the fact that a horse was run when either unfit, or when likely to cause itself injury.
Rob
<br>There’s an awful lot of understandable specualtion here. Nimello’s price drifted dramatically on the exchanges.
I’m not convinced though that this was a plot to make money. What surprises me is that connections persist in running the horse on ground that the horse doesn’t like. It does put the horse at risk unneccessarily.
I persist in my view that the horse wasn’t going to win owing to the ground. You could have offered me 500/1 and I wouldn’t have placed a win or each-way bet on him. The last two races he’d won before the Salisbury claimer were on the sand at Wolves. Very different to fast ground on turf.
The Royal Insult case is sad. Whether or not any wrongdoing has taken place is unclear. Royal Insult had his career ended in the worst way possible.
Could anyone tell me how often horses drift massively in price on the exchanges?
<br>
you know I am coming to the conclusion that this guy is going to get off …
if he sticks to his story that he was just astute and simply gathered knowledge (albeit that he had extraordinary access to horse, trainers, jockeys, lads etc.) – and provided no one gives him, and themselves, up, its going to be next to impossible to prove (beyond reasonable doubt) that he has done something wrong.
Dropping the 100k just may be the best accident to befall him…
How is that going to look for racing?
Bl**dy terrible!
What will the public perception of the integrity of racing as sport on which to have a safe punt?
tooting’s comments are ringing in my ears – not good.
What’s the upshot…
it will just open the door to nefarious laying – and betfair will shout all the better ist transparent – we have improved the information flow to punter.
not for me … I will give it away
This really really upsets me.
rouge homme
PS. robnorth, apologise for my motor mouth comment – I just think you are sticking up for the indefensible – though maybe you just want to see the best in everyone (which of itself is an exceedingly admirable quality). RH
<br>The ground is a hugely important factor in the race. Nimello had shown that he didn’t like running on fast ground and that it may even cause him physical (as well as mental) harm.
If Nimello had such a good chance why did the bookies make the horse a 12/1 chance?
Nimello has declined significantly and the form of his two wins at Wolverhampton wasn’t good enough for him to win the claimer at Salisbury.
I will say what I’ve said already – the most suspicious thing about this whole race is that the horse was run on ground that he clearly didn’t like. That is the part that concerns me most. I do not understand it. On two of his last three starts on fast ground, Nimello has been reported lame. This isn’t just a case of a horse not liking the ground, it’s a case of a horse finding it physically painful to run on a type of ground.
Legal Set – weird tactics. It certainly looks dodgy. Do Betfair know who is laying the horses? Is it possible for them to know for sure?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.