- This topic has 12 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
I can take or leave Matt Chapman, He annoys me at times with his over the top style, but I do admire him for his straight talking, when compared to others, particularly on Attheraces.
However I thought he was completely out of order to suggest any wrong doing in the case of Border Lad today, and the sort of hysterics he launched into after the race, only serve to wind up those who believe the game to be totally crooked.Border Lad, a 7 year old by Double Trigger, was having his third start this season for Alison Thorpe, having previously been with Richard Lee. He had one run when out the back in a bumper in April 09, and then four starts all over the minimum trip over hurdles between December 09 and April 10, the last of those in a handicap off a mark of 82 (a harsh mark given he had hardly been sighted)
This season he started off from a mark of 74 over 3m2f at Hereford in heavy ground. That was the race that gave me reason to believe he had a chance today, he crept into the race, before tiring about 6f out and was eventually pulled up. That race served to show that he did have a little ability, and whilst he obviously needed further than 2 miles, either 3m2f was a tad too far, or perhaps he wasn’t quite fully wound up. Either way he only went off at 14’s that day, a similar race to today’s.
Last time at Taunton over 3m, he finished mid div only beaten 18 lengths, again showing enough promise to suggest a race at the bottom level could be found for him.
He has obviously improved this season, despite dropping in the handicap, and it’s a well known fact that Double Trigger’s progeny do tend to improve with racing/age.
The third favourite Queenstown Lad had an official rating of 50 when it won 2 starts ago but was beaten 29 lengths last time. The fourth favourite Royaume Bleu apart from on one start at Plumpton, has beaten beaten in excess of 28 lengths on all other starts. In my opinion if either or those two had one, it would have been just as much of a "shock", and yet they were only 11/2 and 15/2 in the market!
The second horse today Septos, had arguably shown even less on the track than Border Lad, but I doubt Matt Chapman would have said anything if he’d won, because he hadn’t seemingly been backed. The third horse was beaten 52 lengths by the second, with the favourite Royal Chatelier having fallen 3 out, when looking booked for a place at best.
Border Lad was backed from 25’s this morning to around 8/10’s with most firms. He opened up on track at 14’s, so hardly a major plunge, and returned at an sp of 11/1.I sent an e-mail to Matt Chapman similar to this posting, only to receive a response, which basically called me a liar for suggesting I fancied the horse last night before he was backed, that I was obviously a better tipster than him, and he just repeated how far the horse had been beaten last year.
I can’t remember Matt Chapmans exact words straight after the race, but it was along the lines of "Well what chance has the punter got with a result like that, come on stewards, you need to look into this and find out exactly whats been going on".
Of course he said he wasn’t pointing the finger at Ms Thorpe for any wrongdoing, well just who is he pointing the finger at then?It was there for all to see from those 2 runs this year, that he wasn’t without a chance, in such a terrible race, in desperate ground.
Of course his ranting found favour with the betfair forum brigade and such like.
- Total Posts 17716
Matt Chapman may have gone about things in his now infamous over-the-top manner, Robert, but he did nothing wrong in suggesting that the stewards should look in to Border Lad’s apparent rapid improvement.
He did state that (considering the plunge from 28/1 in to 11/1) punters had little chance of picking him out beforehand, but was quick to add that connections should be asked if he’d had a problem that had been rectified or if he’d had something akin to a wind operation.
There was no unequivocal inference that anything untoward had taken place.
Without giving the form too much consideration it’s hardly shock of the century that in desperate ground the two horses carrying the least weight fared best.
The two bottom weights also finished first and second in the other handicap hurdle once again well clear of the third.
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
There are innumerable instances of such unlikely winners, there will be dozens this week. Trainers have become very adept at disguising a horse’s ability. It normally goes unremarked upon which explains my surprise at Chapman’s outburst.
He is stepping out of line and needs to watch his back. Connections keep things in the family, they don’t run racing for the punter’s benefit.
My point was really, that there was no "rapid improvement" I’m sure most people aren’t bothered, but if you watch his run at the track over 3m2f in January on his first start for 9 months, he would have finished a close up third or fourth over the 2m6f distance, but he stopped very quickly. He was running off a 5lb lower mark today, in arguably a weaker race. His run last time at Exeter was fair enough for the grade, not beaten very far, and I think in the end 11/1 was about the price he should have been in that race today, off such a light weight in heavy ground.
I know he did mention, breathing ops etc etc, but given he only ran 2 weeks ago, I think he probably knew that was highly unlikely. He just seemed to me, at least, to be stirring up trouble, when I honestly don’t think anything untoward had taken place.
The horse opened up at 14’s on track, and was only 28’s/25’s in a place with the few that priced the race up early this morning. Hardly a great plunge. If you going to investigate that race, as the previous poster says, you’d have to be looking into a few races every single day!
Anyway I’m just repeating myself now, it’s no big deal, I just didn’t think it very fair that he got on such a high horse about it, when clearly 25’s was too big first thing (just a shame I missed it).All the points you make Robert are perfectly valid, Chapman is a clown and egotist who has no time for others opinions. If the horse had be trained by the "master trainer" you wouldn’t have heard a word from Chappers.
I seem to remember Alison Thorpe missing an interview at the last minute on Get On a few weeks ago, maybe that had something to do with it.Much as I enjoy your thread, Robert and I acknowledge that you spotted the horse well in advance, isn’t it uncanny how the optimum performance of horses like Border Lad always seem to coincide with heavy backing?
The unfortunate consequence of racing for loose change it seems.
I think Matt was frustrated with everything in his rant, not just this horse, who is the latest in a long line of similar types this winter.
isn’t it uncanny how the optimum performance of horses like Border Lad always seem to coincide with heavy backing?
But it wasn’t "heavily" backed, it’s hardly likely to start at 11/1 on a wet Monday at Hereford if it’s "heavily" backed. Some folk probably thought it was a worth a few quid at 20 plus because it would go through the ground etc.
What about the second horse that was only 3 lengths behind and was 40/1?Alison Thorpe runs Jewellery in the 4.45 at Taunton today. It was available at 20s in places but now trades between 4s and 11-2. May be of interest to watch this one
Yeats, the horse was available at 28/1. You’re not telling me that connections didn’t have money on at 28/1. Define heavy backing? Someone knew that the horse was expected to leave its form well behind.
As for this being an example of "value hunting", the shrewd, cold hearted, eagle eyed professional punter, backing every horse in the race for one clever reason or another (distance, sectional time, jockey’s birthday), that tactic can go badly wrong.
I’ve backed horses at huge "value" prices which "would go through the ground". Nelson wouldn’t have been able to spot them with the telescope to his good eye. I’m sure you have too.
The case for Border Lad was hardly bet-compelling in advance, a fact odds compilers took account of the night before.
To answer your second point, let’s go back to Jack’s Revenge. In that race, there were a few other horses campaigned in identical fashion, including a Chapple-Hyam horse, a Richard Guest horse and a James Given. A couple of those looked well. They all drifted – like the 40/1 placed horse you mention. Really, if the 40/1 horse you mention had won, you wouldn’t have heard doodly squat from me on this subject. Thats the beautiful randomness of horse racing and no-one tried to pull the wool over the eyes of anyone else. Connections must have been thrilled with the horse’s improvement.
How come that move from 28/1 to 11/1 occurred at the same time Border Lad produced – by some considerable distance, and with uncanny prescience on behalf of the market – his best ever performance?
Maxillon
I can’t remember all the exact details, but from memory when I checked oddschecker yesterday he was 28/1 with one firm, and 25’s and 20’s with the others that priced it up early, not including the "Big 3" who don’t price up such races until later.
He opened up at 14/1, and wasn’t immediately backed, finishing up at his sp of 11/1. My point was, 12, 14 or 16/1 to me seemed the right sort of price for the horse anyway. Whether it was connections who backed the horse, or others, I think all that happened was that someone had spotted a bit of value at 25’s and the lucky 2 people who probably had £20 on at 28’s, and the perhaps some of the "herd" followed the move.
I’m not sure how many actual odds compilers exist at the moment, if my time working at Ladabrokes Head Office is anything to go by, not very many! but the one or two who priced him at 25’s or so before the others copied/followed the exchanges just got it a little bit wrong. If the horse had been backed into 5/1 or less, then I could understand a little suspicion, but that wasn’t the case. The fact that a horse like Royaume Bleu started at 15/2 without being backed, tells you what a weak race it was.
What really upset me (not that I was quite reaching for the hanky) was the fact that Chapman straight after the race said something along the lines of "what chance has the punter got, on his starts to date this horse has been beaten "84, 105, 87, 47, 105, then pulled up and 17 lengths last time" Now those first 5 figures mean absolutely nothing. They were a year ago or more, over 2 miles on firmer ground when with another trainer. The pulled up run at Hereford over 3m2f, as I mentioned before, was actually a decent run in the context of yesterdays event on his first start for ages, and the Taunton effort backed up that fact.
The real mystery is perhaps how he started at 14/1 when he pulled up at Hereford, as he really had shown absolutely nothing before that run, I can’t recall if he was perhaps backed a little that day.
The slowcoach that is Hopeful Start was running over 2m3f around Taunton for the second successive time today, seemingly being held up 30 lengths off the pace after half a mile because he obviously has a sprint finish. Thats the sort of thing that needs highlighting more, I just hope the handicapper doesn’t completely full for it!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.