- This topic has 70 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
chelt is a 50/50 mix of hcps/nonhcps; top 10 races for turnover were all non-handicaps; says nothing of course, coz as we all know punters just love handicaps
It’s not a "mid afternoon bookies benefit", it’s one of the best quality handicaps of the whole season. Not only did it produce a fantastic finish but the first four home will all be contesting graded races this year.
Oh I know all that, dear Ginge. I’ve had my share of winners of big handicaps. But they are simply not worth the effort in my view, and they only exist to get a lot of money back in the satchel quickly. It is totally unscrupulous, and to see various luminaries of the game taking money from bookies to exhort the public to bet in such races is unseemly if you ask me. Which is why I laugh sardonically about all the waffle and brouhaha that surround them. It is also why the wider public are totally uninterested. It is also why the sport is universally known as ‘a mug’s game’. If anyone can seriously challenge those points in tones other than that of the indignant anorak, I will be happy to respond.
I like handicaps where you can keep the variables in perspective and where you have plenty of form to work with; they are virtually the only races I bet in. The eternal questions always remain. Why is x horse in the race when it is obvious to ME, a city-dwelling mug with no contacts, that he will do nothing? Why are we, the betting public, being encouraged to bet our hard-earned in ridiculous races full of guesswork?
Not true Prof. The "Public"
are very much "interested"
in big handicaps more than any other race. Witness the Grand National. Most big betting races are big handicaps. Public
are
interested because they consist of bigger prices than any other type of race.
If you’ve had your "share of winners" in big handicaps then you can not complain Prof. Surely all anyone can expect is a "share of winners"?
I have had my share of winners, and they came out of laborious form study. I realised recently that all things considered, they were not worth the effort of study; mid-to-low grade all-weather hcaps were a far happier hunting ground, with their share of decent prices.
I said once on here that racing is a farce of concealed information that depends on virtually all punters losing virtually all of the time. That is an indisputable fact, and it is also the reason for the extremely poor public perception of the game. No-one on here, despite much skirmishing and gnashing of teeth, has ever been able to overturn that observation for the simple reason that it is true. Yes a few of us can stay ahead of the losses for periods but most Turf-followers, if they are intelligent and moral beings, must find the game absurd and unseemly at times.
The wider public (non-gambling addicted) are not interested in big handicaps bar the National and only then because of its cultural place in society, a position that is gradually being loosened for various reasons. I would have £50 with anyone that if you stopped and asked five members of the public to name a big handicap they could not go beyond the National.
If you said to a non-racing member of the public that you’ve backed a 2/1 shot – they’d say
"what’s the point? Winning £2 for a £1 stake isn’t worth it".
Strangely, they also see short priced favourites (around 2/1 or less) as
"not worth opposing"
. They don’t understand odds. Therefore, Joe Public (and many punters for that matter) want open races with (what they see as) reasonable prices. This is one reason why the Cheltenham Festival is so popular; not only is it top quality races, but even the conditions races (unlike mostt conditions races) are ultra-competitive. In the general scheme of things, handicaps are more competitive than conditions races and therefore more interesting for the general public than most (non-Cheltenham Festival) conditions races.
If you take a non-racing person to the races, as a betting proposition they are generally less interested in the best quality race, the 5 runner conditions race with 6/4 fav… And more interested in the 16 runner class 4 handicap with 5/1 fav.
Value Is EverythingIf you said to a non-racing member of the public that you’ve backed a 2/1 shot – they’d say
"what’s the point? Winning £2 for a £1 stake isn’t worth it".
Strangely, they also see short priced favourites (around 2/1 or less) as
"not worth opposing"
. They don’t understand odds. Therefore, Joe Public (and many punters for that matter) want open races with (what they see as) reasonable prices. This is one reason why the Cheltenham Festival is so popular; not only is it top quality races, but even the conditions races (unlike mostt conditions races) are ultra-competitive. In the general scheme of things, handicaps are more competitive than conditions races and therefore more interesting for the general public than most (non-Cheltenham Festival) conditions races.
If you take a non-racing person to the races, as a betting proposition they are generally less interested in the best quality race, the 5 runner conditions race with 6/4 fav… And more interested in the 16 runner class 4 handicap with 5/1 fav.
I agree with all of that, Ginger. The public will bet at bigger prices, but they wouldn’t know the difference between the Charlie Hall and the Hennessey. That’s because their interest runs no further than a fiver on a bigger priced fav. Why? For reason already discussed…
So if you agree Prof, why moan about big handicaps being ultra-competitive when it’s what the public/many punters want?
Value Is EverythingIt’s not a "mid afternoon bookies benefit", it’s one of the best quality handicaps of the whole season. Not only did it produce a fantastic finish but the first four home will all be contesting graded races this year.
The race almost panned out exactly as the betting indicated it would and out of five horses I listed in my preview I had 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th places in the race. Hardly bookies benefit material.
It’s really quite simple, if you don’t like the race, don’t bet.
It is largely a mugs game and nothing wrong with that if you are getting entertainment whilst losing your cash. All hobbies cost money and gambling is no different.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
mid-to-low grade all-weather hcaps were a far happier hunting ground, with their share of decent prices.
I would totally agree with this, on AW & turf.
I said once on here that racing is a farce of concealed information that depends on virtually all punters losing virtually all of the time. That is an indisputable fact
No it isn’t, it’s just your opinion. Racing depends on punters winning often enough to maintain an interest but losing overall.
it is also the reason for the extremely poor public perception of the game.
Evidence for this please?? I can only speak for the people I know, but racing for them has a very positive image. Anyway, I would posit that animal welfare concerns are a a million times more likely to cause concern in the wider public than any association with gambling.
I would have £50 with anyone that if you stopped and asked five members of the public to name a big handicap they could not go beyond the National.
Well obviously! Because racing is a minority sport. 95% of the public wouldn’t know what a handicap was! I would have £50 with anyone that if you asked five members of the public to name the world indoors bowls champion they couldn’t!
Mike
I think we have been here several times before.
Yes, lots of smaller punters want to win big for a small stake. Unfortunately, the vast majority, if they win at all, will just give it back. They might not care but should you really be shaping race planning around the habits of a group of punters who basically just keep the bookmakers happy?
So if you agree Prof, why moan about big handicaps being ultra-competitive when it’s what the public/many punters want?
Look let’s be honest, we all know what’s happened here. Prof’s had a bet on the Paddy Power via some stats-based analysis and it’s got stuffed.
So he’s come on here to blow off again about how it’s all a plot and everyone hates racing blah, blah, blah..
Mike
should you really be shaping race planning around the habits of a group of punters who basically just keep the bookmakers happy?
If they’re the ones who ‘keep the bookmakers happy’, the reality is that they are the ones paying the Levy.
There’s plenty of people who say that’s a crap system but it’s the one were stuck with.
Mike
I think we have been here several times before.
Yes, lots of smaller punters want to win big for a small stake. Unfortunately, the vast majority, if they win at all, will just give it back. They might not care but should you really be shaping race planning around the habits of a group of punters who basically just keep the bookmakers happy?
The reason why bookies love big handicaps is because they bring in more money; more punters bet on those races (with the possible exception of top quality races of any type, but even then they’ve got to be competitive top class races). If that were not so, ie if the majority of punters were to favour small conditions races as betting propositions – bookmakers would be "happier" with small conditions races…
So is it the bookmaker’s fault or punters Stilvi? Basically, the more money brought in by bookmakers the more money goes to prize money. So it’s not only the bookmaker who is happy, majority of punters and BHA too. Handicaps help the levy because of punters predjudice and therefore bookmakers will want whatever brings in most money.
Value Is EverythingLook let’s be honest, we all know what’s happened here. Prof’s had a bet on the Paddy Power via some stats-based analysis and it’s got stuffed.
So he’s come on here to blow off again about how it’s all a plot and everyone hates racing blah, blah, blah..
Mike
Well, I didn’t like to say it quite that bluntly.
Value Is EverythingLook let’s be honest, we all know what’s happened here. Prof’s had a bet on the Paddy Power via some stats-based analysis and it’s got stuffed.
So he’s come on here to blow off again about how it’s all a plot and everyone hates racing blah, blah, blah..
Mike
That is exactly what’s going on here.
If you have found a niche that suits for your gambling, then give it a rest and get on with punting there.
Leave us mugs to get hypnotised into offloading our cash in these evil traps, where, apparently, nobody has backed the winner, no doubt due to a plot that saw newspapers leave the horse out of the racecard and secret TV filters block out the horse’s name from our screens
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
95% of the public wouldn’t know what a handicap was! I would have £50 with anyone that if you asked five members of the public to name the world indoors bowls champion they couldn’t!
Mike
They asked 100 members of the public to name Gold Cup winners (Pointless) and not one came up with 3 time winner Best Mate
Only 4 named Kauto Star and Denman was also pointless.Think that shows the wider public’s interest in racing. Although I’m sure if Cheltenham and racing was regularly on the BBC then Racing would be much more high profile as it was back in the 70s/80s
Cannot but admire the prof’s eagerness to fill the breach in negativity.I could direct him to more but what’s the point?
Only 4 named Kauto Star and Denman was also pointless.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.