- This topic has 45 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Not sure whether it was what Graysonscolumn had in mind but a while back I did some very crude research into fallers at each course. I add the link below, not because my ‘research’ was very revealing (it wasn’t) but because of the excellent points that were made by many people that might help someone with more time/expertise than myself to do a more thorough piece of work.
I should also add that this work wasn’t geared towards identifying potentially dangerous or unfair fences so may be of only marginal use in this discussion
That was the very piece of work I had in mind, Aranalde – good to see it brought to the fore again!
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Thanks for that. I had totally forgotten that thread.
I have been meaning to do something similar with all jumps races 2000 to mid-2007 but need to persuade my data analyser (aka other half) to break off from watching Deal Or No Deal and X-Factor.
While the fallers-to-jumpers thing is clearly more relevant than fallers-to-runners, extracting the former is nigh-on impossible other than in cherry-picked instances, whereas the latter is much easier and still of interest.
Nice first post zipper .. you’ll need to stop having a pop at Craig Thake Prufrock, there’s nothing wrong with an X.
I find the MM "serial rapist" quote disgusting. No place for this kind of stuff on here.
I find the MM "serial rapist" quote disgusting. No place for this kind of stuff on here.
Jesus, some people are so sensitive, it was just a figure of speech, get with the real world.
You may use language like that every day but still out or order to direct that at an individual on here.
I said it was a poor arrival at the forum Jeremy, not that he (or she) was a poor arrival.
Welcome to the forum Zipfastner (where did you get the name?)
Your research is fine, just learn to accept valid criticism graciously and you won’t have a problem.You may use language like that every day but still out or order to direct that at an individual on here.
I didn’t say he was serial rapist wallace, but if he was he would still be immune to criticism in Jeremy Grayson and a few others here on the forums eyes.I t was put in my not so subtle way of getting a point across. Even the forum Gods are not always right.
By the way I didn’t use any foul language, wallace.
I said it was a poor arrival at the forum Jeremy, not that he (or she) was a poor arrival.
Ah, right. Noted.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
I didn’t say he was serial rapist wallace, but if he was he would still be immune to criticism in Jeremy Grayson and a few others here on the forums eyes. It was put in my not so subtle way of getting a point across. Even the forum Gods are not always right.
Marz, be assured that there are no "Gods" on this Forum, but rather simply some contributors whom Forumites may find themselves agreeing with more often than not. Logic dictates that reasoned arguments on Cheltenham’s fences, the merits of Denman’s performance, etc. are going to be met with a kinder response than those of the form,"That horse / jockey / trainer / pundit / forumite is a complete *@?#!%", and their respective posters likewise.
No "old pals’ network" wields any degree of intellectual or censorial might over TRF – even trying to do so would be akin to trying to stem an ocean tide with one box of Kleenex. The Forum is emphatically bigger than one individual or group of individuals.
If I were thinner skinned I suppose I might be cross at the aspersions on my critical judgment that you have posited both here and in one of the TRF Awards’ threads, but instead I’m happy enough that the – constructive – occasional criticisms I’ve committed to air and print of even some of my "sacred cows" (from Richard Guest to Timmy Murphy to RUK to one or two former work colleagues) in the last few months alone contradict these adequately.
When confronted with any challenging of his calling skills, however aggressive or potty-mouthed, the late racecourse commentator Raleigh Gilbert’s stock response was always simply "thank you for listening", a shrug and a walking on. In a similar vein, therefore, thank you for reading.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Jeremy,
With reference to your first paragraph, why is this the case though? Why should discussions about Cheltenham fences or the merits of a horse be met with kinder responses than discussing a blatant non-trier if one is spotted?
You’re absolutely correct with what you say – the last time I asked for opinions on a non trier I was told I was from a different planet, was told I was talking out of my pocket and was told I was mad to have a bet in certain races – or words to those effect. Hardly any responses were relevant to what I was pointing out. But if I make a contribution to how good Denman is or what I think of a fence then healthy debate continues.
This is a racing forum, where all topics should be treated the same, barring the odd ridiculous ones (or the ones that I start some might say
). Why should "How good is Denman…." or "What do you think of the 2nd last at….." be a more or less important topic than someone pointing out a non trier or criticising a bad ride?Mike
I am not sure it is more or less important, but I am sure that if you choose to identify what you feel are non-triers or bad rides you need to be very careful about what you say.
Anyone posting on such matters should be aware of the requirements of the libel laws and where fair comment ends and vindictiveness takes over.
Some people on here blatantly are not.
I honestly don’t know whether you are one of these people, by the way, though as a published writer I would hope not.
I am not sure it is more or less important, but I am sure that if you choose to identify what you feel are non-triers or bad rides you need to be very careful about what you say.
Anyone posting on such matters should be aware of the requirements of the libel laws and where fair comment ends and vindictiveness takes over.
Some people on here blatantly are not.
I honestly don’t know whether you are one of these people, by the way, though as a published writer I would hope not.
I totally agree Simon.
The only time I have started a topic on such a subject was regarding the Timmy Murphy one – and at the time I posted he had already been found guilty and banned accordingly under the appropriate rules – so I don’t think I did anything wrong there.
But yes, we all have to be careful when identifying what we think are non-triers – there is a fine line between talking gibberish and talking sense lol.
Mike
Michael (may I call you Michael?).
The thing is that, in effect, you can’t actually post about non-triers, other than in non-specific ways or by referring to a case that has been proved, and even then you need to be careful. People need to be oblique and euphemistic. None of this "you must call a spade a spade" nonsense. Acknowledging that J Bloggs’ Hook-It-Up just might have been some sort of a garden implement is about as far as it can go.
Bad rides are a similar matter, though there is a bit more latitude here. But any imputations of dishonesty or inability to ride a clothes horse about a person whose profession it is to ride real-life horses also have to be made very carefully.
That’s why the two issues are arguably not all that important on here. Candour is usually not possible. Not unless the poster wants to end up sharing a cell (with cormack, possibly) in Wormwood Scrubs.
Prufrock
). Why should "How good is Denman…." or "What do you think of the 2nd last at….." be a more or less important topic than someone pointing out a non trier or criticising a bad ride?- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.