- This topic has 68 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
.
- Posts
What exactly are the punters on here expecting to hear from trainers?
Less inane waffling.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
maybe they should change the interviewers…..the majority are very poor…"How are you feeling?" "Are you looking forward to the race" …….
If they want trainers to talk in detail about races then put some time aside in the schedule for trainers to be interviewed in the morning by the likes of Lydia…
Throwing qns at a trainer 2mins before or after a race is just stupid.
You only get what you give….
underscore wrote
What exactly are the punters on here expecting to hear from trainers?
Answer?
That the horse is fit and ready to run to the best of its ability. Punters can then decide whether the course/going/distance/jockey might not suit.Nor – i think the "punters" on here are looking for more than that…..i think thats the problem.
The philosophy that it’s ok for owners/trainers/jockeys to withold vital facts from the betting public, in order to land a punt or ‘lay’ the horse, is surely unsavoury putting it politely. The betting public funds these activities.
The betting public PARTIALLY funds these activities and their funding is voluntary, not a tax – if you’re unhappy with the level of information in the media, you have the option to cease betting.
As for connections ‘witholding’ information, in the vast majority of cases the information isn’t witheld, it’s never requested in the first place. How big would the Post have to be if they quoted every trainer about every runner? And who is to decide which facts are ‘vital’ and which are simply irrelevant?
I’m personally in favour of greater openness – my trainer is aware of my views and is willing to talk to the Post or to the TV stations at any time. But there is a downside to this – I once gave a pre race interview on RUK in which I offered my honest view that my horse would struggle a bit under a big weight despite being favourite. In the event, the other jockeys more or less gifted him the race by allowing him to sit second behind a very slow pace and he got first run and won. I didn’t have a penny on him, but the post race comment on the other forum was almost 100% to the effect that I was a cheating bar steward who had deliberately misled punters in order to boost the price for my own bet.
So long as the attitude prevails that all owners/trainers are up for a bit of corruption ( a view you seem to share), it’s hardly surprising that other decline to put themselves in the line of fire.
It’s not hard to argue that punters (in general, as opposed to those specifically on TRF) invite the response they get from owners and trainers.
I think its important to keep some context on this discussion.
I personally don’t expect or care that every trainer of every horse in every race give his/her thoughts regarding every horse in his care. Ownership has always come with confidentiality privileges (for want of a better term) and always probably will, most of us non owners who bet on the sport every day completely accept this, indeed it regularly creates the dreaded V word when owners over estimate their own runner in a race.
The captive audience for racing is drawn in by the sport on its biggest days. Everyone in racing should be facilitating this in the long term interest. Given the majority of horses at the top level are owned by bloodstock corporations, tycoons and royalty I don’t understand what all the secrecy is about. It certainly doesn’t happen with National Hunt, where Nicholls, King, Henderson, Pipe, Mullins, Meade etc… all do more than their fair share. Perhaps that’s part of the reason we’re regularly told jumps racing has never been more popular, well attended and well subscribed.
Apracing wrote
The betting public PARTIALLY funds these activities and their funding is voluntary, not a tax – if you’re unhappy with the level of information in the media, you have the option to cease betting.
The same could be said about owners. If unhappy about media information they could cease owning.
Facts that are vital, I would have thought, are simply whether the horse is fit and able to run to the best of its ability. As for being "a cheating bar steward who had deliberately misled punters" you know it was your honest opinion and that’s all that matters. Reasonable people would accept the fact that horses can surprise or disappoint. Look at the Guineas this year.
I do not share the view that
all
owners/trainers are up for a bit of corruption.
Only someI would have thought, are simply whether the horse is fit and able to run to the best of its ability.
Nor1
This is a subjective judgement and if you asked two or three people involved in the stable it’s possible you wouldn’t get the same answer. I’ve noted quotes from trainers about the readiness of their horses and having seen them I’ve come to a different conclusion. Ultimately it’s my opinion against theirs. One person’s ‘fit and able’ is another person’s ‘needs the run’.
If you know how to confidently judge that a horse is ‘able to run to the best of its ability’ please let us know, because there are plenty of racing enthusiasts on here trying to decide that about many horses every day. All you get from the stable will be a biased view ot the same, be it optimistic, pessimistic or neutral.
Perhaps you might suggest where this information about each horse should be published, and more to the point, who should be charged with collecting this information about hundreds of horses running every day? It’s fine saying ‘we should be told this, we should be told that’, but without an idea on supplying the views ‘we should be told’, it means very little.
Rob
I think its important to keep some context on this discussion.
I personally don’t expect or care that every trainer of every horse in every race give his/her thoughts regarding every horse in his care. Ownership has always come with confidentiality privileges (for want of a better term) and always probably will, most of us non owners who bet on the sport every day completely accept this, indeed it regularly creates the dreaded V word when owners over estimate their own runner in a race.
The captive audience for racing is drawn in by the sport on its biggest days. Everyone in racing should be facilitating this in the long term interest. Given the majority of horses at the top level are owned by bloodstock corporations, tycoons and royalty I don’t understand what all the secrecy is about. It certainly doesn’t happen with National Hunt, where Nicholls, King, Henderson, Pipe, Mullins, Meade etc… all do more than their fair share. Perhaps that’s part of the reason we’re regularly told jumps racing has never been more popular, well attended and well subscribed.
I’d say thats more to do with the fact National Hunt is the greatest sport on earth and Flat racing is pish!
What exactly are the punters on here expecting to hear from trainers?
Well, if we’re discussing trainers’ words when put on the spot with a microphone thrust in their faces, as would seem to be the case on this thread, then personally I don’t expect much at all. Few people excepting the RADA-trained and grizzled politician have mastered the art of thinking-then-speaking-on-your-feet oratory. Of trainers Gosden is one of the few so blessed and to criticise Stoute – who strikes me as essentially a private inward-looking chap – using Gosden as the ‘model’ is unfair.
If I want to get the thoughts of trainers (or anyone else) I would much rather read them in print after some thought and reflection has been given to the words than a millisecond after the question has been posed, which near-invariably only results in a succession of tired cliches, well-worn phrases, repetition and on occasions regret at what has actually been said.
And its not only the more considered words committed to print that are more worthwhile but – in the case of trainers – also the numerous televised stable visits when he/she has been forewarned and has had time to prepare what is to be discussed with the eager viewer. So much more interesting and relaxed.
As ever in cases such as these put yourselves in the position of the interviewee and think hand-on-heart how you would cope in a similar situation.
Why it is deemed necessary for sportsfolk in the public eye to be adept at their game
and
public speaking is something of a mystery to me.
- Total Posts 17716
I really don’t think there’s a thing wrong with the way SMS conducts himself an doesn’t deserve some of the snide comments on here.
I can’t remember him saying many things then changing his mind too often. Neither do I think he’s willing to make a complete ass of himself by saying so and so will win/run in such and such until he’s damn sure it will. If anything he gives the impression he is not willing to rush into any decision that might lead to punters losing there money. Any trainer who says so and so will win such and such in 3 months time is guessing. That is not SMS’s game.
He may come across as being pompous but it’s jus this way and doesn’t make him some sort of stuck up snob.
The great man apparantly shed a tear or 2 when Conduit won the St Leger for him after 25 years of trying. Frankie certainly doesn’t think he’s stuck up or pompus when he asked him if he could give him a hug and had him and everyone else in fits of laughter when he did.
Cameras and Microphones to different things to different people. Some like Jonjo and Barney Curly who don’t give a hoot and act exactly the same way on it as off it. Others go into panic mode especially when some idiot asks them to show them their bad teeth
Judging them on what you see on TV can be miles off what they are like away from it. I was reading an article a while back where someone was trying to interview him and said he couldn’t because he was jumping upand down like an idiot and shouting like crazy at a TV set……some cricket match was on in Barbados. Hard to imagine the somwhat pompous man we see on TV acting like that.
robnorth
The info on whether the horse is fit and will run to its best ability could be published in the RP’s highlights. Or the racing card. Or perhaps the BHA could take the initiative. As I said I think this happens in Australia.
It doesn’t have to be an essay, a ‘one-liner’ will do.
"Had a bruised foot but all seems well now and we are hoping for a big run"
"Coming back to fitness after a spell of lameness. We will have to see"
"No problems. Fit and well. Hoping for a very good run"
"Changing tactics today. We will try to take the race from the front"
"Still a baby so will not be given a hard time with the whip"
"Not sure whether this horse has a winning distance but we are trying"Comments from the trainer might add interest and convey an openess to the racing public. The punters can ignore them if they so wish.
An invitation to blandness if ever there was one. All that would happen would be that trainers who chose too would master the art of saying not a lot in a one liner. In the vast majority of cases you would end up learning no more than you do now from Spotlight.
robnorth
Blandness or not, at least it would be straight from the horses mouth, figuratively speaking, and not from a racing journalist.
I would agree with Rob. Plenty of opportunity for the trainer to be ambiguous. How useful would be
"If he ran to the form of last year he would have every chance, however he has been disapointing of late and we can’t pinpoint why" ?
Trainer would be covering any eventuality in the fact of saying could win at best but wont if running as recent. You could figure that out by looking at its form I would have thought.
What could, and I stress could, be of more value and insight in to a horses fitness/chance would be the old chestnut of publishing in some way the horses weight.
- Total Posts 17716
What chance have we got, when one of the biggest owners in the game is kept in the dark?
http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/newmarket-1000-guineas-newmarket-ghanaati-oaks-favourite-after-guineas-shock/183540/reportsIf any money was going to spent on a measure to show the fitness of horses then weighing of horse would be as good as anything. This idea has been mooted by many parties.
One measure I could support is if a horse has been injured. Some note of the injury and a signal of recovery would be helpful.
The problem is that most horses are going through a standard training process and the trainer would be issuing no more than a bland statement about their well being. One would hope that regular appearances on the racecoruse would confirm race fitness anyway. Would the Racing Post be willing to print a hundred lines per meeting like this, and who would pay for its publication?
Rob
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.