June 12, 2017 at 00:09 #1304101Richard88Participant
- Total Posts 275
Where there is money there is corruption. And that applies both ways in this game.November 26, 2017 at 10:11 #1328780
Lots of discussion on this. I am firmly of the opinion that commercial arrangements between bookmakers and trainers or jockeys should be banned completely with immediate effect. It’s the only way to eliminate the spectre of collusion between the two in respect of the transfer of ‘inside’ information, protecting public perception of the sport’s integrity and, although everyone seems to be head in the sand about the prospect, the fact that this type of arrangement brings us closer to the stopping of horses for mutual gain between that one party who has the ability to influence a race result and the other who stands to benefit from it.
One thing that gets spoken about is the big sums involved. Anyone any idea how much we are talking? Is it six figures per year? £50k, £10k? Less?
I guess it varies but say, Henderson or Nicholls. How much would they expect to command?November 26, 2017 at 10:37 #1328787
I concur entirely, it should never have been allowed in the first place.
It was rumoured that Henderson receives 80 grand per year from his bookies while Bruce Millington stated that they couldn’t retain Nicholls services because they couldn’t pay anywhere near what he was offered by Betfair to move. Would think it is well into 6 figures.
What about the integrity of the sport?November 26, 2017 at 10:41 #1328789SteeplechasingParticipant
- Total Posts 5769
I think the BHA will rightly stop it. Trainers should also be subject to the same betting rules as jockeys.
Never argue with a fool. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience, then onlookers might not be able to tell the difference. https://lazybet.com/November 26, 2017 at 10:52 #1328790LostSoldier3Blocked
- Total Posts 1894
If you’re paranoid about this, I think it would be worth putting in some time to study Oddschecker.
Do the firms stand out on prices on horses representing the yards they are linked with? I’d like to think Oddschecker hits home that Ladbrokes Coral have no ‘inside information’ about Dan Skelton or Colin Tizzard. We often stick out against the ones that move!
There are a few specific relationships that might need to be analysed. I’m not accusing them of anything per se but, for example, Paddy Power Betfair seem to know the score with Gordon Elliott’s horses. They seem to top up the subsequent drifters first thing in the morning and are usually already well on the right side of the live ones by the time the money hits the market. Could be coincidence though.
Personally I wonder what value there is in having a trainer/jockey blog anyway. Now and again as a punter you get a few nuggets of information, but they’re generally vague and non-committal about the chances of their horses. Anything juicy is instantly factored into the market anyway. Sometimes they even put you away – saying “should run well” pre-race and then “needed the run” in post-race interviews!November 26, 2017 at 11:12 #1328798witParticipant
- Total Posts 2152
different landscape of course since no bookies allowed and a monopoly on betting, but HKJC Rule 151 says:
>>….a person shall be guilty of a corrupt, fraudulent or improper act or practice if he: —
(6) Being an owner, nominator, licensed person or employee of The
Hong Kong Jockey Club by advertisement, circular, letter or other
means offers to give information concerning his own or other horses
in return for any monetary or other consideration or who connives at
on top of that, Rule 150 says:
>> Any person found guilty of a corrupt, fraudulent or improper act or practice
whether or not his conduct constitutes a breach of any other of these Rules
may be declared a disqualified person or be otherwise penalised by the
Stewards of the Jockey Club or the Stewards in accordance with their
Trainers and jockeys do not have tipping columns, ambassadorships or sponsorships but can speak to the Press and give opinions on HKJC TV.
with no betting monopoly in GB, it seems that jockeys can have tipping columns, ambassadorships and sponsorships as long as they are approved by and registered with the BHA:
but there is no similar approval /registration required in the case of trainers:
and with jockeys the trend seems to have been away from collective and towards individual sponsorship:
presumably bookies in it for the long haul are as keen as the BHA to have a betting product that the public trust enough to bet on, and would argue that it is better to have things done above the table / on the breeches / on the footbal shirt and regulated, rather than under the table and unregulated.
whether you go for a total ban or for allowed-but-regulated, it seems odd to treat jockeys differently from trainers / other Licensed Persons.November 26, 2017 at 13:38 #1328832
LS – it’s not about being paranoid, it’s about the perception of the betting public.
For example I’ve long thought that the close relationship your own Mike Dillon appears to have with the Coolmore/Ballydoyle ‘lads’ was not healthy.
Now, your average Saturday punter may not know or care who Mike Dillon is, who he works for and why that relationship is not a healthy one for the sport so in terms of its damage to the sport it’s probably negligible.
But Nicky Henderson’s twitter feed being run by a bookmaker? This country’s leading trainer so far in bed with a bookmaker that they are controlling and influencing the information that comes out of the yard regarding the well-being of his horses. That surely is not right?
Regarding what the value is, presumably it is a device to drive traffic to the sites and presumably, given the sums reportedly involved, it works.November 26, 2017 at 14:17 #1328839LostSoldier3Blocked
- Total Posts 1894
It is paranoid Corm – you’re seeing that trainers write blogs for bookmakers and assuming there is more to it than that. You’ve mentioned Mike Dillon before – again if you follow the big races and watch Oddschecker with Coolmore’s runners you’ll note that we often get them totally wrong. No sort of magic steer from Big Mike.
I don’t think the industry should have to pander to people’s fantasies. However, IF there is cause for concern manifested by suspicious patterns on Oddschecker, the you might have a case.November 26, 2017 at 14:34 #1328845
I’m saying there is potential for there to be more to it than that.
I’m also sating that there is a likelihood that punters, people like me, will always eye such arrangements with suspicion. Is that good for racing and betting?
Racing’s integrity should be wholly above board. Having trainers and jockeys in the employ of bookmakers doesn’t give the impression that it is, regardless of whether any actual wrong-doing can be proven.
I’ll keep track next season on Lads/Corals stance on Ballydoyle runners and let you know how the data speaks.November 26, 2017 at 15:27 #1328864SteeplechasingParticipant
- Total Posts 5769
I can understand your defensiveness, Soldier but I think Corm is spot on. Nothing to do with paranoia and active skulduggery doesn’t come into it. Perception matters an awful lot, perhaps more in racing with its historical association with gambling than with any other sport.
BHA’s press releases over the past year or so often mention ‘public perception’ and I’m in no doubt they’ll stop this kind of association – might not be right away – they’re building up substantial animosity in the training ranks just now – but it won’t be long.
Never argue with a fool. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience, then onlookers might not be able to tell the difference. https://lazybet.com/December 9, 2018 at 08:33 #1388663
Still waiting, doubt the hopeless BHA will do anything now, things are too far gone.
How long have trainers been allowed to bet but jockeys haven’t? And what have the authorities done to rectify this contradictory stance?
Instead trainers are patted on the back by all and sundry in the industry including the gravy train racing media for landing a “touch” while jockeys are treated like the lowest form of human being if caught having a bet.December 9, 2018 at 10:05 #1388665
“It was rumoured that Henderson receives 80 grand per year from his bookies while Bruce Millington stated that they couldn’t retain Nicholls services because they couldn’t pay anywhere near what he was offered by Betfair to move. Would think it is well into 6 figures.
What about the integrity of the sport?”
I cant believe betfair pay Nichols that much the cheeky beggars only used to pay me £70.00 per week for my lay a day column.December 9, 2018 at 10:43 #1388670
“I can’t believe betfair pay Nicholls that much the cheeky beggars only used to pay me £70.00 per week for my lay a day column”.
Beggars can’t be choosers potato
I would do/have done it for £60.00December 9, 2018 at 11:05 #1388673
Surely this was worth more than £10.00 a post？
Ok so this was a bad example as unfortunately this lay finished 1st but who else in the racing media calls racehorses cretins? I was a niche market.
Simon Rowlands has a lot to answer for in my personal opinion.December 9, 2018 at 11:21 #1388674
Perhaps this was a better example. Can you imagine that betfair used to publish the opinions and tips of Ryan Moore, Gordon Elliot, Paul Nichols, Donal McCain and POTATO
On learning how much these people were getting paid compared to what they gave me I’m seriously.contemplating taking them to employment court for robbery.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.