- This topic has 13 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 18 years ago by
.
- Posts
Yet again we’re greeted this morning by Pricewise recommending a horse at a price which, unless you’re Hong Kong Phooey and quicker than the human eye, was never truly available.
Today he advises backing Medicine Path at 9/4, a price which was only available with two companies (Blue Square and 888Sport) and lasted for a massive…wait for it…four minutes. Should his selection win then he’ll have the Racing Post crawling up his backside, advertising their superstar tipster who’s put up a 9/4 winner when, in reality, no bugger managed to get on at that price.
For what it’s worth I hope Knowhere stuffs Iris De Balme now…
Exactly David,
Sorry LGR but….Blame yourself LGR for not getting on in time.
Put the TV on teletext just before your bookie opens (telephone accounts). Look at the time, and press the last telephone number as the clock moves to the opening time. Doing this I have had little or no problems getting on, even if it is Pricewise.
You can not really blame the bookies either, they can not afford to take a right hammering, it is good buisiness to shorten a price that has (even in four minutes) been backed.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingThe fault lies somewhere between the bookmakers who won’t lay odds to decent stakes and also to pricewise arbers.
Most firms prices are available on Friday night for a good while. Trouble is though people need their card marking about what horses to back and what price to take rather than trust their own judgement.
Two more…
WInning Jollies[/color:1d6p6kcp]
…for Sir Tom and his loyal band of arbing followers today. When it comes to unearthing favs that are gonna trade shorter this man has no peers.
The "arby army" don’t care whether Tom’s tips are good or cack, as Glenn is pointing out.
Just hope Tom doesn’t pick one of your selections if you want to get a decent sum on.
Such is my petty nature I don’t back anything which Pricewise advises, whether or not I think it is the banker of the century.
I doubt very much whether the ‘type of person’ Pricewise appeals to has the time to sit, poised and ready with telephone in hand, waiting for the second their favourite bookie opens for business. Some will be asleep (as I invariably am first thing on a Saturday), some will be working and some will, funnily enough, have a life. Even the addicted gamblers, who follow him blindly just so they can get their money down without having had to look at a race, won’t be knocking down doors or crashing the BT exchange to get on.
And why should they have to if Sir Segal and his editorial bum-lickers want to claim the success at advised prices? Then again that is dependent upon him actually tipping a winner…
The 9/4 about Medicine Path (I backed Metropolitan Man in the race anyway) was available from 08:29 to 08:33 with only two firms – hardly readily available now, is it? Were I craving for the ‘Pricewise wisdom’ every Saturday I’d still be reaching the good part of my dream about Lindsay Lohan and three types of chocolate sauce…
Quote – “Some will be asleep (as I invariably am first thing on a Saturday), some will be working and some will, funnily enough, have a life.”
LGR – anyone who adopts that attitude to their betting doesn’t stand a chance and doesn’t deserve to win. You can’t blame bookies for shortening the odds on horses (such as Pricewise tips) where they know there is going to be money nor can you blame the editorial staff for highlighting winners.
Quote “Then again that is dependent upon him actually tipping a winner…”.
I recall runnig a Pricewise Challenge a couple of years ago, forum members made selections in the same race(s) as Pricewise and we kept score at best price in the Pricewise table. Without allowing for the fact that I wasn’t as rigourous in imposing the deadlines on forum members that Segal has imposed on him he performed excellently over a long period. Only a couple of forum member finished ahead (as you’d expect statistically).
As a matter of interest, and to put your comments into context, your own performance in the little test we had would suggest that, rather than bleating on constantly about how bad Pricewise is, you would find your own bank balance significantly enhanced by setting that alarm clock a little earlier at the weekends and paying heed to Mr Segal’s advice rather than backing your own fancies.Sorry about the rant but I find your oft repeated and largely unjustified whining about Pricewise extremely irritating.
Maybe I’m going slightly off topic here, but I’m not a big betting person. Obviously though, I did have a bet on Fiepes yesterday. However, what amazed me was the difference in prices available. As I was on my way to Sandown, a friends of mine told me what price 3 bookmakers were offering – one was 10-1, one 12-1 and one 14-1. When I got to the course, I expected the price to be settled around 11 or 12-1. However, there were 7 bookmakers on the front row that I checked and the range of prices was quite amazing:
8-1 / 10-1 / 15-2 / 12-1 / 14-1 / 9-1 / 11-1
Now as I say, I’m not big on betting, but when you see variations like that, I think it’s difficult for the SP guys to actually calculate the prices. As for Fiepes, I’m told he was no bigger than 12-1 in the shops when the shows opened just before the race, but 14-1 was widely available – apart from the one mentioned, there were a couple of bookies just behind the front row who were also going 14-1. Sometimes I’m sure, you do have to move quick to get the price, but that 14-1 was available for a good few minutes with, as I say, more than 1 bookmaker.
Darren – AngloGerman
Perhaps Fiepes Shuffle is a bad example Darren, as with him doing his running almost exclusively on the continent he becomes a lot harder for the bookies to assess, especially before the money comes (or doesn’t).
A couple of years ago Lord Donoghue viewed a similar scene to the one you did at Sandown:
8-1 / 10-1 / 15-2 / 12-1 / 14-1 / 9-1 / 11-1 about the same horse on seven different boards.
The only difference was he was viewing it from a different angle to you – from Corals’ private box to be precise.
Coral’s grocery clerk What do you see my Noble Lord?
A Starving Donoghue I see the vast majority of the punters backing that horse seeking out the 14s. That is where the majority of the volume is and that is the price that is ruling in the ring.
Coral’s grocery clerk Why don’t you look again after you’ve tucked into the lavish buffet we’ve laid on for you, you might see things clearer then
some time later…
A Very Well Fed Donoghue I see a median price of 10s – that should be the SP. Now what’s for desert?
Since this toerag’s reforms the prices relayed to the shops and used for SPs are not the prices that rule in the ring – they are lower than the price that rules in the ring. Hope that explains the discrepency yesterday.
SP returns should be modified to return a standard over-round for each and every race.
Such is my petty nature I don’t back anything which Pricewise advises, whether or not I think it is the banker of the century.
I doubt very much whether the ‘type of person’ Pricewise appeals to has the time to sit, poised and ready with telephone in hand, waiting for the second their favourite bookie opens for business. Some will be asleep (as I invariably am first thing on a Saturday), some will be working and some will, funnily enough, have a life. Even the addicted gamblers, who follow him blindly just so they can get their money down without having had to look at a race, won’t be knocking down doors or crashing the BT exchange to get on.
And why should they have to if Sir Segal and his editorial bum-lickers want to claim the success at advised prices? Then again that is dependent upon him actually tipping a winner…
The 9/4 about Medicine Path (I backed Metropolitan Man in the race anyway) was available from 08:29 to 08:33 with only two firms – hardly readily available now, is it? Were I craving for the ‘Pricewise wisdom’ every Saturday I’d still be reaching the good part of my dream about Lindsay Lohan and three types of chocolate sauce…
So what you are saying LGR is the Racing Post / Tom Segal should not advertise / claim the prices, because people like you are too lazy to get out of bed in the morning.
If you do not back the thing when the price is available how can you criticise?
Most punters bet on the fav, 2nd or 3rd fav, with most money going on the fav. So it is obvious bookmakers will need to cut shorter priced tips (9/4) sooner than they would one at a bigger price.
If it is available, it’s available, whether readily or unreadily.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.