- This topic has 52 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello everyone –
My first post on here so I should be pattering along on eggshells – but I’ve always tended to dive into things head first
so I’ll be honest and say that I’ve enjoyed reading every post on this thread, which has possibly been the most interesting thread I’ve seen on any racing forum for quite a while (is what encouraged me to join) due to such a variety of responses, including Colonel F’s. Sounded like he’d had a bad day, and it’s been a lean, mean time for racing recently, so can understand him expressing his feelings. He probably feels much better now 
Some interesting literary talent in there too!
Nice forum btw
Colonel Flay should be allowed back. His original post is a priceless gem.
Look at the post above you.
What I find ironic is that someone who quotes Dr Johnson should get banned for using bad language.
I do not think many punters appreciate what goes in to a Spotlight write up.
How many have tried to do what they do. I have.
Study the form and work out an accurate assessment of each horse (around 30 words per horse).
A betting forecast which is what they think each horse will be (not should be). Betting to a certain percentge.
Then a verdict, second guessing what the betting will be to find a good bet. With reasons for a selection.
They often do not know what the going will be at the time of writing. They do not know what the trainers will say about their chances.
They are not the highest paid people either. Time is not unlimited. If they take too long in working a 10 runner race out, it would not be worth doing.
I was talking to a freelance Spotlight writer who said the way I work races out, I might be able to write a Spotlight or two. But as a novice, I’d have to start on the poor racing. As I am not used to working these out (I don’t bet in them), found it more difficult to do in that bracket in trial runs. The good stuff I found relatively easy, but that is no good to me.
So anyone who thinks it is easy, I have a challenge for you.
Write a Spotlight type of assessment of a poor race and put it on here. Before the proper Spotlights are available on the Racing Post website. ie no copying.
Mark
Value Is EverythingAs Gingertipster stated most people probably don’t appreciate the spotlight write up. I for one don’t and making them optional viewing on the new site was a good move
There in lies the key, they’re OPTIONAL. If you don’t like them don’t read them.
interesting to hear an insider’s point of view, thanks for posting that Gingert.
Appreciate the lack of time they have in particular – but if they don’t have enough time to research the facts, they should say so, not go making sweeping generalisations and incorrect statements. Many people do, unfortunately, take them as expert, fully informed views, and you have to ask, why shouldn’t they? Seems reasonable enough to do so. But as I said on the Daily thread re Will The Till, I’ve learned not to – tho their general overview of a race is ususally very useful.
BTW I find the Postdata stuff even worse for inaccuracies because they’re meant to be totally factual. Eg, sometimes they’ll put a trainer as an x for out of form which directly conflicts with their own rtf (run to form) analysis which could be 65%! (ie pretty good) – or when the trainer’s last winner was maybe 25 days ago – but s/he’s only had one runner since!
interesting to hear an insider’s point of view, thanks for posting that Gingert.
Appreciate the lack of time they have in particular – but if they don’t have enough time to research the facts, they should say so, not go making sweeping generalisations and incorrect statements. Many people do, unfortunately, take them as expert, fully informed views, and you have to ask, why shouldn’t they? Seems reasonable enough to do so. But as I said on the Daily thread re Will The Till, I’ve learned not to – tho their general overview of a race is ususally very useful.
BTW I find the Postdata stuff even worse for inaccuracies because they’re meant to be totally factual. Eg, sometimes they’ll put a trainer as an x for out of form which directly conflicts with their own rtf (run to form) analysis which could be 65%! (ie pretty good) – or when the trainer’s last winner was maybe 25 days ago – but s/he’s only had one runner since!
Would not say I am an insider Ryor. Have only talked to a Spotlight writer. They can spend as much time on the races as they like. But are only paid a certain amount per horse. Obviously if they take too long it would not be worth doing. As with any job, I am sure they would like more money, so they can take more time. Used to work as a full time carpet fitter, the more we were paid per square yard the better job we could do. However, I am sure The Racing Post is paying the going rate. Everyone makes mistakes, and see no justification in your words "sweeping generalisations and incorrect statements". You should not expect the impossible. Can asure you Ryor they are definately experts and are very well informed people.
I partly agree with you about rtf figures. I like to use the Racing post website by going to the race card, clicking on each trainer, and coming up with my own trainer form rating. This is sometimes very different to rtf figures. Just because a stable has not had a winner for some time does not mean a stable is in poor form. rtf means "run to form". Each horse can run to form without winning or even be placed.
Mark
Value Is EverythingI’ve already done a Spotlight style feature on four, or maybe five races on this forum, and in most of them I’ve stopped for a break after 8 or so horses. I’ve also taken 2 or 3 days to do one race, what with actually having a job for once. That is why I asked in my first posting on this thread, how many meetings do they do in a week? I’d have thought with 48 hour declarations on the Flat it ought to be 3. But I suppose because of economics it has to be more than that.
Just had a brainwave. I might have had it before – I don’t know, I’m getting old and amnesiac.
Why do Spotlight writers cover a whole meeting? Shouldn’t they specialise – sprint handicaps, claimers, 1m Sellers etc?
:idea:
Just had a brainwave. I might have had it before – I don’t know, I’m getting old and amnesiac.
Why do Spotlight writers cover a whole meeting?
They don’t.
Arhtur Askey dented CuBone
his flash horriblis.
He recovered but was never quite the same
a slip of the tongoe
flash
a Sachs moment
and Ross went the way of Bross
but CuBone was a gentleman
and recoveredI dont know about Ted Bundy
but Ivan Milat wore facial hair
and I came across his horrendous murders
in Wolf Creek
All new posters
TAKE NOTEI actually thought the frilm wolf Creek
should be banned
unimaginable horror
and slaughter of sheep
however after a good night’s sleep
the night after I watched it
and reading Cherie Blar’s autobiography
My chainsaw Hubby
I have changed my mind….breathing periods
and the death sentence
outlasts Bundy and Milat
just remember its forever
and the bankers got offp.s. I have not read the whole of this thread
I am croned
so may have joined CuBone
temporarily in the land of OHHHHRyor, this is how to post….
Get some sleep Gamble..:idea:
Just had a brainwave. I might have had it before – I don’t know, I’m getting old and amnesiac.
Why do Spotlight writers cover a whole meeting? Shouldn’t they specialise – sprint handicaps, claimers, 1m Sellers etc?
I believe the top guys / girls, the ones who are directly employed, do specialise in certain types of racing. One does two year olds only etc.
Mark
Value Is EverythingHave only talked to a Spotlight writer. They can spend as much time on the races as they like.
You entirely sure about that, Mark? I’m sure they’re subject to off-stone times like anyone else on the paper.
For information, our Spotlight workload at the Prostsman was always 60 horses’ worth of race per day, by a given time, and inclusive of all tissues and verdicts. That wouldn’t be too far removed from the Post‘s.
As with any job, I am sure they would like more money, so they can take more time.
The money-time correlation is not one the Spotlighters have much autonomy over, for the reasons previously stated. An extra £50 per stint might be extra stimulus for turning in a better job, but it doesn’t make the working day – which for jumps Spotlighters couldn’t really start until the decs arrived at 10.30am from the PA or whosoever else – any longer.
Cheers,
gc
(PS Do you know if Stewart got my email about the 21st, Mark?)
Adoptive father of two. The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.
I believe the top guys / girls, the ones who are directly employed, do specialise in certain types of racing. One does two year olds only etc.
Correct. In a similar manner, Jonathan Neesom only does jumps Spotlights, the lower the grade the better, and tends to get most of the hunters’ chases when he’s available.
gc
Adoptive father of two. The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.
14 January 2009
7.20 Kempton
3yo+ Mdn 7f
[/color:3duai6ny]
Okay, it ain’t a low grade race, but 6 of the 10 are making their debut, and of the other four, the most recent run was 91 days ago.
I admit, this race has beaten me, and there are a couple that I’m not sure what to say.
I’ll be buggered if I do a claimer, but I wouldn’t mind attempting a seller as I reckon I could dig out some form.BLUE WARRIOR
Descended , four generations ago, from the great broodmare Reprocolor, but the last mating (Touch of the Blues) was decidedly downmarket, despite him being a G1 winner. The sire is 0 for 16 GB&I on the AW, and 0 for 27 7-9f. Blue Warrior will prove best 7-9f, though probably slightly better on turf than AW.EAGLE NEBULA
The trainer has gone past the desperation stage a couple of runs ago. Has run over a variety of distances, and in a claimer, but just doesn’t have the finishing kick. Will eventually win a race, but not today as there are a couple of nice types here.DUKE OF NORMANDY
Will eventually do best at 10, maybe 12 furlongs. Was leading just before 2f out last time over this distance, after which something presumably went wrong. As he’s been off the track 3 months, that makes him a contender today.KNOW BY NOW
THIEF OF TIME
By Clodovil, who is undistinguished as a sire. Clodovil himself is by Danehill, so he should eventually start to produce the goods on the AW.ZIGGY LEE
Has lots of american blood. Was running on late over 5f on debut. Something obviously went wrong next time, or just didn’t like the Soft ground and something went wrong later. Will be a major contender.DESTINATIONUNKNOWN
Harry Findlay hasn’t told Willie Haggis this yet, but he intends to aim her at the 2011 Mares race at the Cheltenham Festival. Seriously though, I like everything about the pedigree apart from the sire. If she doesn’t win today, she will turn out to be the best horse eventually.DONTRISKIT
Not sure that this horse wouldn’t be better on pedigree over 6f. The fact she is starting over 7 either indicates she doesn’t have any speed, or they are laying the groundwork for a h’cap win later in the season. Either way, leave alone. On the other hand, she is a fourth foal, and 2 of the other 3 won over 7f.PATIENCE REWARDED
Don’t have anything to say, but will be another major contender.SYRINX
On pedigree I would be worried that this one had too much toe for the others and would just blow them away. However, she has already shown that she ain’t anything special.CONCLUSION
Destinationunknown is the tip, and the minor places will be fought out between (in racecard order) Duke Of Normandy, Ziggy Lee and Patience Rewarded.PS Don’t take this seriously as punting advice, as I was slightly squiffy when I did it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.