April 17, 2004 at 12:36 #4014Racing DailyParticipant
- Total Posts 1364
Agreed Ian. I rarely post on BF now as it is closer to a flaming board than a racing-based chat room.<br>I do sometimes contribute in the General Betting room. There are some quite interesting threads in there, as opposed to the "**DOUBLE MAXIMUM WIN BET – LUMP ON!!** crap that you get in the racing room.April 17, 2004 at 14:03 #92954astonMember
- Total Posts 168
Thats very true TDK. When I first joined this forum I felt that it was very "cliquey", but I have noticed a significant change for the better within the last couple of months. Things got a bit heated for a few days, with some serious enough arguments. I think thats what was needed, and there has been a better atmosphere on here since it all came to a head. <br>Does anyone agree?April 17, 2004 at 15:09 #92956
Personally I don’t mind the stars system – to get 5 stars you only need to post a couple of hundred posts. I was keen to get to 5 stars when I joined so I posted Ian-Davies style (approx 50 a day ;) )
This place isn’t half as cliquey as [removed]
IMO, but Betfair is by far the worst. I read the forum for a laugh sometimes!April 17, 2004 at 15:10 #92958
Can’t believe the other forum name is censored! :oApril 17, 2004 at 15:22 #92961DaylightMember
- Total Posts 369
IÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ve just been informed of the article and had to laugh at the quality of the article, I am very flattered to have another mention in the industry paper on a Saturday edition even if it is trying to show me in a poor light. Secretly he must be impressed by my (aka ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‹Å“CreepoÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢) commitment to rate EVERY post ever made on here. Apart from obviously being in posession of a flux capacitor which enables me to fulfil this time-consuming feat, I also manage to squeeze in editing EVERY swear word ever posted.
I do enjoy Paul HaighÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s column and this is probably the reason I am not fuming at such an ill researched article. His writing style determines I should take the comments in jest, but I can be sure he wonÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t have the balls to own up to the mistake in next SaturdayÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s article unless of course accompanied by a jibe? I will be watching next weeks column with interest but I will not hold my breath as in my opinion I suspect PaulÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s more of a gelding than a colt!
For the record, as anybody (well I thought anybody) would know the ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‹Å“star systemÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ is a friendly welcoming incentive for regulars to notice new members and welcome them into the TRF community as well as being nothing more than a bit of fun, as most forum software comes with this package but I have adapted to be horse racing related eg. Instead of ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‹Å“New’ish MemberÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ IÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ve put in ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‹Å“Handicap ClassÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢. I really donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t have the time to rate EVERY post, nor do I edit out EVERY swear word as the automated swear filter does that too.
<br>April 17, 2004 at 15:39 #92963tootingMember
- Total Posts 379
He (zorro) has apologised to you over on the madhouse – don’t suppose he’ll come on here and do it direct…
I prefer to imagine he has a different nickname on here, and stopped posting after a few goes, because he was distraught at only getting 1 star for his pearls!April 17, 2004 at 16:26 #92965
If Haigh’s theory was correct then every post Ian Davies makes would be top class! ;)April 17, 2004 at 17:57 #92967clivexMember
- Total Posts 3420
Whats od is that he seems to think its all abit serious here
No doubt hilarity is football style insults and naughty words
Its not all serious here:angry: ..I have agood laugh at many postsApril 17, 2004 at 18:18 #92968Nick HattonMember
- Total Posts 399
Here’s an extract from the Betfair discussion today, including Paul Haigh’s (zorro’s) apology ……
<br>I thought it was rather spoiled by the complete b***ocks about the Racing Forum’s "star" system. It’s nothing to do with a "creep" of an administrator judging all the postings. It’s to do with how many postings you’ve made over time. That’s why "new member" always has one star. Thought he might have been able to work it out for himself if he’s that much of an addict.
If I was the bloke running TRF, I’d sue. He’s kept it running pretty much single-handed for two years, and his reward is to be described as a creep in the Saturday edition of the Racing Post. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â <br> Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â
Posted by : zorro 17 Apr 11:06 Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â <br> <br>Oh dear. So that’s why there doesn’t seem to be any consistency in his "judgements". Profound apologies to Creepo, whomsoever he may be.
<br>April 17, 2004 at 19:24 #92969DaylightMember
- Total Posts 369
That’s a fair swap! He prints his inaccurate assessment in a paper read by tens of thousands of people and then puts the appology in a chat room whereby it is read by a few with it disappearing in hours!
We’ll see if he’s eligable to run in a classic in next Saturday’s post!April 17, 2004 at 19:47 #92970NixerMember
- Total Posts 105
It’s nice to know that he researches his topic very well before he puts it to print.It’s nice to know what type of journo he is and i think anything he has to say regarding the gambling industry and any of it’s aspects must be taken very very sriously:o :o ……..how hard is it to figure out what the star system is all about.April 17, 2004 at 20:43 #92971Slippy BlueMember
- Total Posts 43
What a strange feature that was in the R.P.<br>When I read the bit about the star ratings and the creepo moderator,well,I nearly choked to death on my Bovril crisps :( <br>Very poor indeed.<br>Anyways Creepo,I think you do a sterling job …!April 18, 2004 at 13:15 #92972ArdrossMember
- Total Posts 98
It is no surprise, most of his articles seem to be ill-researched leading to half baked opinions . What is most worrying is that this is from their leading feature writer . I don’t particularly warm to David Ashforth but his articles do at least seem to be based on proper research .
What a shame the editor of the RP does not star rate their articles . I doubt Haigh would ever get past selling platerApril 18, 2004 at 13:53 #92973insomniacParticipant
- Total Posts 1453
His comments about TRF were, of course, nonsense. This article apart though, I’ve always enjoyed reading Paul Haigh; don’t always agree with him, but there is a place for his approach in the racing press.<br> Bear in mind that he’s Welsh and likes cricket, so is obviously a little unbalanced!April 18, 2004 at 16:43 #92974turtleMember
- Total Posts 31
What a shame the editor of the RP does not star rate their articles . I doubt Haigh would ever get past selling plater Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â
<br>You leave Paul alone, boyo bach. He’s my hero. The Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â laboured Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â attempts at ‘humour’ by the likes of Ashworth, Down Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â and, yes, Freud, just make me appreciate Paul’s easy, stream-of-consciousness levity more. Have you ever tried to write for a living Ardross? If you had, you might just begin to appreciate Paul’s skill.
(Edited by turtle at 5:51 pm on April 18, 2004)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.