- This topic has 104 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"Stealing!"
"Robbing!"
"Conspiracy!"
"Extortion!"Dearie me,
Lady Bracknell is about to faint…
Two questions for you folks:
1. If these four horses had won exactly as per yesterday, except singly, with a month’s gap between them, would you be so up-in-arms? If not, why not?
2. Which rules of racing have been broken?
Quite honestly, Low Key and Seven Summits would have been well fancied anyway. Eye Of The Tiger only had to be within two stones of his best to carry his rivals and Indus Valley (the most questionable for me) had also dropped markedly in the handicap.
These punts go on pretty much every day in racing. Most of them fail. This time they didn’t. However, it’s the fact that someone smartly bunched four of them together on one day that seems to have offended people, rather than the reality that such punts actually happen.
I love seeing money moving around in racing, it’s what gives UK racing it’s unique buzz.
Mike
In fact, the faster a handicapper gets a grip of you, the closer your horse is to dog food.
You sound like the ideal owner.
Mike
Dearie me …lady Bracknell indeed , I am still heartily laughing
well at least the real spooks on this forum have shown their colours
The remainder like Mike have taken the gamble with a pinch of salt , 5 mins of fame over , lets move on
Quality post sir , just how did you not win poster of the year ???
sound the claxon somebody
imo
"Stealing!"
"Robbing!"
"Conspiracy!"
"Extortion!"Dearie me,
Lady Bracknell is about to faint…
Two questions for you folks:
1. If these four horses had won exactly as per yesterday, except singly, with a month’s gap between them, would you be so up-in-arms? If not, why not?
2. Which rules of racing have been broken?
Quite honestly, Low Key and Seven Summits would have been well fancied anyway. Eye Of The Tiger only had to be within two stones of his best to carry his rivals and Indus Valley (the most questionable for me) had also dropped markedly in the handicap.
These punts go on pretty much every day in racing. Most of them fail. This time they didn’t. However, it’s the fact that someone smartly bunched four of them together on one day that seems to have offended people, rather than the reality that such punts actually happen.
I love seeing money moving around in racing, it’s what gives UK racing it’s unique buzz.
Mike
Pretty much agree Mike.
Fantastic stuff yesterday!
When looking at "form", Indus Valley’s last four races have been poor. But judging it by the 3rd of 14 at Dundalk 30th September 2011 – was extremely well handicapped. Obviously on any of the last four runs I would not back the horse even at20/1
because of most "recent" form. But if
knowing
it was back to its best he’d have a
favourite
‘s chance. Like many of the 4 coup horses, he did
NOT
need to
improve
his form, just
return
to form… Which is something
EVERY
punter betting in the race needed to take in to account,
whoever
they were backing. If considering the price worth taking the chance – then sorry – they only have themselves to blame.
We’ve just had a thread on here where (amongst other things) people were complaining about horses not being fit after a lay off. Now some of the same people seem to be complaining Indus Valley was fit and well after 700 days absense? Or rather, complaining they did not personally know about it. With time to get over whatever ailed him in those four poor runs
Is it skulduggery for some punters/owners/etc to know more about the fitness of horses than others? I think not.Is it any different to the form student knowing more than the average punter about a horse and therefore knowing a horse is too big a price? I’ll leave you to answer.
Sadly for one punter to win another has to lose. That’s racing.
700
days off in itself suggests something
was
amiss when last seen and also gives an excuse for the return to form. And were there any signs of skulduggery in any of those previous results?
From what can be see from old Timeform comments I can only find (from a fairly quick look) one run from one of the four horses that looked suspicious, and that wasn’t last time out. Although they did seem to suggest about more than one horse there was a possibility of better to come some time in the future given connections.
If anyone is to blame, then a large proportion must go to the BHA Handicapper, who dropped the horses too far. But then again, they’re often criticised for not dropping horses quick enough. Suspect whether any skulduggery was involved or not – trainers and owners involved in this case will find the Handicapper does not drop any of their horses by as much again. I remember many years ago Tony Martin getting a reputation for pulling wool over the eyes of handicappers. His runners felt the handicapper’s mistrust afterwards. In fact, if I were an owner in any of these yards I’d think seriously about removing it.
Value Is EverythingI’m not ‘offended’ by the gamble, as Mike puts it. I just don’t see successful plotters as anything more than people who are in it for themselves, and therefore they are not my robin hood. I don’t think it’s good for the balance of the game, but we all look for holes in handicap marks, so it is what it is. I’d do it myself if i could get away with it. It renders alot of the game unattractive from a punters point of view, so people who care about the sport have every right to have a problem with it, whether it’s above board or not. Until a new system is implemented, then the cycle will repeat. Would less horses make the track if it was tougher to land a touch ?
We can all disagree or want rid of things that are legal and not breaking any rules, such as FOBT’s, ain’t that right Mike ?.
If anyone is to blame, then a large proportion must go to the BHA Handicapper, who dropped the horses too far.
Agreed
Eye Of The Tiger was understandably given a probably hefty initial ‘guesswork’ mark of 112 on his first run for Curley based on his three wins in France and Germany but this collapsed to 56 after six runs ‘out the back’ over a period of a mere five months. Drops due sure but an average of 10ibs per race? Generous I reckon as these reassessments as far as I can judge were based on ‘no form’ rather than quantifiable ‘poor form’
Ditto Low Key, from 88 to 60 based on ‘no form’ not ‘poor form’
Indus Valley who quite reasonably crept down the weights during a fruitless 2010 and 2011 was then suddenly dropped 4lbs and 9lbs on the back of a second-last and last. Again generous, and smacks of desperation by the handicapper
Moral Mr Handicapper: don’t drop a horse significantly if you can’t quantify the form
From a personal race analysis point of view I’ve never been keen on betting in races that contain such horses as the above: types returning off a long layoff/ostensibly well handicapped on distant back-form/new trainer/new headgear. Because I too can’t quantify their form. Walk away
Seven Summits win is a straightforward matter of an unexposed horse who’d shown significant promise over hurdles and in his case could be deemed fortunate that he wasn’t raised from 95 following his eye-catching run at Fontwell
Copyright forbids me from quoting Timeform’s assessment of his races prior to yesterday but suffice it to say they were glowing, weren’t they Ginger
Didn’t see the racecard, was he given a p or P?On the subject of these Curley-type ‘coups’ I’m ambivalent towards them: they do paint racing (to the unitiated who don’t know what a formbook is) in the seedy light it’s been lumbered with since inception; but do have some admiration for the connections who manage pull it off: all the horses do need to win don’t they and 9 times out of 10 they don’t
No skullduggery, just a smart and ‘professional’ job done with generously handicapped horses
I do wish though that those involved would admit it was a job planned and executed pefectly, rather than use weasel words they deem to be ‘acceptable’
Yep, the wins were there for all to see if you looked hard enough though not at the SPs returned. Bookies will lay ridiculous underlays to the bandwagon jumpers until domesday. Money lent yesterday, no more no less
Just to prove what a high-quality journo Dave Yates is, his report in one of the children’s newspapers has already got the cash won to
£15 million
:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/barney-curley-horse-racing-coup-3052703#.UuFk9rTFLIU
Any advance?
Mike
In fairness to Newsboy he is merely regurgitating Paddy Powers typically sensationalist claims.
I loved the whole thing, Yellow Sam 3.
"Stealing!"
"Robbing!"
"Conspiracy!"
"Extortion!"Dearie me,
Lady Bracknell is about to faint…
Two questions for you folks:
1. If these four horses had won exactly as per yesterday, except singly, with a month’s gap between them, would you be so up-in-arms? If not, why not?
In the above case, it ain’t a conspiracy, because the 4 sets of connections need not be involved in the organization and execution
2. Which rules of racing have been broken?
A running and riding infringement with the objective of trying to manipulate a handicap mark is an offence in its own right, and if evidence of this is found then it is acted on. (From BHA press office)
Mike
BTW, Bachelor’s Hall’s posts on this thread are some of the best I’ve read on any forum on any subject. Nailed it!
Joe
Absolutely,couldn’t agree more.
A bookmaker speaking on behalf of punters is like a butcher speaking on behalf of cattle.
I’ll have to try remember this gem – spot on!
Using a boxing analogy, you’ve signed up to fight a nine stone journeyman only to find yourself stood in the ring watching a rabid looking 1989 Mike Tyson marching towards you. Would you feel comfortable staying staying in the ring? Or would you go to the commissioner and withdraw from the fight citing a breach of contract.
Transferred to horse racing, you’ve entered your 55 rated plodder in a 0-60 handicap only to discover it’s a 0-60 with an 85 rated animal thrown in at the whim of Barney Curley.
The owners of the original entrants knew roughly what they were up against and were competing against equals. When it transpired that a Curley horse was unplugged, that was no longer the case. Had I legitimately trained my horse to run on its merits in the appropriate class, given the circumstances, I would feel entitled to have my entry fee refunded as well as potential loss of earnings and compensation for the time it will take to ready my horse again.
The up-and-coming boxer under-estimated his opponent, thinking he was unfit and passed it; yet despite dropping a stone in weight the powerful right hook was still there.
Value Is EverythingHow’d he get on anyway? They don’t lay 2 bananas anymore.
http://tinyurl.com/q9xkbes
Before the craw thumpers and bleeding hearts !!bookie apologists get too carried away , lets have a cold look
Our racing funding system is based on punters losing to bookies , they get the lions share , racing gets a small share , like or lump it thats a fact
we like punters to lose , we like racing to have loads of prize money sloshing about … then someone has the temerity , nay Gall ….to plan a coup like this , keep it quiet , execute it to perfection , and it all comes up trumps , is then greeted with disdain !!!
what sort of planet do these people live on , what sort of delusional sense of righteousness do they have ???
In Hong Kong , you can have as much on as you like , same in the USA . or France , anywhere where racing is funded by PM returns
We get to hear the bleating of sheep , about how wrong this whole thing is
Cripes
imo
In the above case, it ain’t a conspiracy, because the 4 sets of connections need not be involved in the organization and execution
Whether you call it ‘a conspiracy’ because it happens on the same day is pretty moot – basically the same process would have occurred to the same horses whether they ran at the same time or weeks apart.
A running and riding infringement with the objective of trying to manipulate a handicap mark is an offence in its own right, and if evidence of this is found then it is acted on. (From BHA press office)
Correct. But there’s no evidence of that.
I’m struggling to see the problem with this. All four horses had every right to win their races on the form in the book. If a top-flight trainer had brought back a decent horse to win heavily-backed after a layoff, everyone would be proclaiming their genius!
Mike
How’d he get on anyway? They don’t lay 2 bananas anymore.
http://tinyurl.com/q9xkbes
Oh stop whinging.
You can have up to two grand no-questions-asked on Virtual Horses and Virtual Dogs
.Mike
Is there another Curley connection with today’s market mover Piper’s Piper 5.00 Kempton, 2/1 from 20/1? Interestingly trained by Mandy Rowland , not far from where I live, at more of an equestrian centre than a racehorse training stable. PP was trained previously by John Butler as was Low Key yesterday.
Job done!
The stable second Prohibition ( ex Butler) wins at 16/1
Said one punter at Kempton "it’s a disgrace, like everyone else I followed the money on Pipers Piping believing it to be another good honest old-fashioned gamble and I was happy to play up my winnings from Wednesday’s four-timer. The game’s bent, it’s a conspiracy, fking trainers, fking jockeys, I’m skint"
Paddy Power were careful not to report that "there’s no doubt this is one of the best days in the history of bookmaking"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.