- This topic has 104 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Barney Curley being done for using ACP on The Bonus Ball in March 2010 – does make you wonder whether ACP could have been used to make horses run poorly in this case. Then given a break to get fully fit/dropped in handicap… And then…BINGO!
I have spoken to the BHA and they tell me…
If you can speak to the BHA Joe… What about asking whether any of the four horses were tested after running poorly on previous starts?
Does anyone know?
Value Is EverythingAmazing how what is quite clearly the betting coup of all coups,the players involved and the odds taken on 4 horses with a close alliance to Barney Curley running to marks generously given by the powers that be,particularly
Eye of the Tiger
who’s time incidentally proved that he ran to a mark of at least 90 and yet some on here cant see the Transparancy.The system allowed this Coup to succeed and Barney Curley milked it.Whoever gave ‘Eye of the Tiger’ a comeback mark of 56 the same mark as the 11yo
Magicalmysterytour
who’s claim to fame was winning a Class 2 handicap from near on 50 outings beggars belief,no wonder Barney kicks these so called professionals where it hurts and more than anything else,irrelevant of how much he took from bookmakers he’s exposed these clowns as incompetent.Barney basically walks into the Bank and empties it,its Historically proven but the system still allows it.
I’m a Union official and the standard proof in employment cases is ‘balance of probability’. This can also be known as preponderence of evidence. The key here is evidence. There must still be evidence to say a person was more likely to have done something than not. For instance, in a company if some money went missing of someones desk and a person was around at the time, there is still no evidence to suggest he took it, even on the balance of probability. Balance of probability is just a lower standard of proof than beyond reasonable doubt used in criminal courts.
In this case there doesn’t, as yet, seem to be any evidence at all that wrong doing was used. Just saying a person has used drugs before is no evidence to say it was used this time. Just saying horses have shown improved form does not give any evidence to say horses were not run on merit before.
Betlarge made a very interesting point about the fact that if these horses had all won on seperate dates nothing would be said. In the last race at Kempton that evening Calisto Light, who had shown very little before, was backed down from 16/1 early to 7/4 and won. Because it wasn’t connected with the others hardly a word has been said.
Ginger, I spoke to the BHA press office before posting/blogging on this. Anyone is free to contact them and the email address is published on their site.
As to your other question, I haven’t checked and I don’t know if those horses would have been included in the ‘why they ran badly’ section of the BHA site (perhaps a better title would be ‘why the trainer said they ran badly’)
Kenh, the core of my ‘balance of probability’ argument is the conspiracy aspect. Although it’s not certain, I’d say it’s highly likely that those involved in the coup took part in some degree of organization/collusion. Although the organising of a betting coup is not an offence, Rule (A)30 (Conduct prejudicial to horseracing) and Rule (A)41 (Conspiring to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice) might be relevant Rules here.
The BHA has announced they will review the previous performances of all 4 horses. Should they find that those horses were not run on their merits at any point, would that constitute conspiring to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice? Could it be deemed conduct prejudicial to horseracing?
We shall see.
Kenh, the core of my ‘balance of probability’ argument is the conspiracy aspect. Although it’s not certain, I’d say it’s highly likely that those involved in the coup took part in some degree of organization/collusion. Although the organising of a betting coup is not an offence, Rule (A)30 (Conduct prejudicial to horseracing) and Rule (A)41 (Conspiring to commit a corrupt or fraudulent practice) might be relevant Rules here.
That is just your ‘suspicion’ you have no evidence to say a fraudulent act may have been committed or the horses were previously not run on their merits. Suspicion is not enough, even on the balance of probability. If some evidence is uncovered at a later date than that could change things. Even if there was a degree of collusion in the coup it doesn’t mean any of them did anything against the rules.
Kenh, I didn’t claim to have evidence of corruption. Once again, my balance of probability argument pertains to the
conspiracy
aspect. Whatever the 4 did, legal or otherwise, the likelihood that they acted entirely independent of each other is highly improbable, and I don’t think I’d be the only one to hold that view.
If I, or anyone else had evidence, then the balance of probability would not come into it.
In this case there doesn’t, as yet, seem to be any evidence at all that wrong doing was used. Just saying a person has used drugs before is no evidence to say it was used this time.
Possibly true Ken.
However, someone who has used the banned substance ACP before, surely means he/she is more likely than someone with a 100% clean record – to use it (again)?
Value Is EverythingIn this case there doesn’t, as yet, seem to be any evidence at all that wrong doing was used. Just saying a person has used drugs before is no evidence to say it was used this time.
Possibly true Ken.
However, someone who has used the banned substance ACP before, surely means he/she is more likely than someone with a 100% clean record – to use it (again)?
Yes, agree. This is the reason that previous offences shouldn’t be disclosed to the jury in criminal trials.
I am frankly astounded that posters are demonstrating shock and disbelief at this. Disguised ability is endemic within racing as I have pointed out repeatedly only to be derided by an arrogant clique who believe themselves infallible on racing matters on this board.
Some of them continue to defend the indefensible in recent posts displaying a touching naivety. You have been made fools of, your arguments that there is only a small amount of sharp practice in racing have been blown out of the water. Doping, stopping, not trying, have been in the news recently. Is it possible to rescue racing, or is it too toxic and fraught with criminality?
So far its CRAWthumpers 21 common sense 0 ….I am staggered at steeplechasing’s much over the top posts , the only saving grace is he has not invoked the threat of the RSPCA ( as yet ….as mostly he uses this old pony to beat up his opponents )
Lord what a dose of over reaction …..the bookies got caned by a group using the system that makes the same bookies billions
lets get over it shall we !!!
well done them …..if you can do it , Im sure others can
imo
I am frankly astounded that posters are demonstrating shock and disbelief at this. Disguised ability is endemic within racing as I have pointed out repeatedly only to be derided by an arrogant clique who believe themselves infallible on racing matters on this board.
Some of them continue to defend the indefensible in recent posts displaying a touching naivety. You have been made fools of, your arguments that there is only a small amount of sharp practice in racing have been blown out of the water. Doping, stopping, not trying, have been in the news recently. Is it possible to rescue racing, or is it too toxic and fraught with criminality?
Then answer these questions Woolfie, and don’t ignore them like you normally do!
Of course it goes on, nobody has said it doesn’t.
But if "disguised ability" is "endemic" how come every price wins pretty much exactly the percentage of races that could be expected?
Though for sure the amount of skulduggery that does go on is inevitably more prevalent in poorer classes. Which is one reason why I do not bet in that grade.
If it were "endemic" in racing how come I (and many others) make a good profit from solely studying form (without
any
inside information whatsoever)?
The person who is "naive" is you Woolfie. You don’t understand odds and therefore understandably don’t understand why outsiders win.
With this particular thread my opinion has changed since the start. Just wish your views weren’t so intransigent.
Value Is EverythingI don’t think Barney was involved with this at all, as he was over in Baden Baden looking to buy some Listed types at the time.
John Butler’s week just keeps getting better. He bought an unraced filly in Ireland back in August after it failed to reach a 35,000 euro reserve at Tattersalls.
Running her in his own name, he won a junior bumper with her at Newbury in December and off the back of that, he’s just sold her for £170,000 at Cheltenham sales this evening.
For the record she’s called Montana Belle.
John Butler’s week just keeps getting better. He bought an unraced filly in Ireland back in August after it failed to reach a 35,000 euro reserve at Tattersalls.
Running her in his own name, he won a junior bumper with her at Newbury in December and off the back of that, he’s just sold her for £170,000 at Cheltenham sales this evening.
For the record she’s called Montana Belle.
At this rate, Mr Butler’s going to need a butler
- Total Posts 764
To Mr. Curley himself – fair play, he played the system and worked it in his favor, making a load of money in the process.
However, I do not think under any circumstances he should be applauded, his blatant disregarded for fairness and lack of care for punters not in his bandwagon allow us an insight into the values this man has, or lack of them.
Incredibly surprised so many people on here seem to have defended him, I don’t care how much evidence anyone has, if you really look at this scenario and think that Curley didn’t purposely ran at least one of his horses marks down (and have this date in mind for a long time) then you need to take off the rose tinted glaases. Common sense is too-regularly overlooked in the modern world and this is another instance of this.
If someone knowingly miss-leads punters (irregardless of what grade race it is) over as many races as the ‘suspect’ horses raced in then the book should be thrown at them.
No one on here should be happy with a sport they love being so easily manipulated while those who keep the sport going (fans/punters) are so blatantly being slapped across the face.
No one on here should be happy with a sport they love being so easily manipulated while those who keep the sport going (fans/punters) are so blatantly being slapped across the face.
There are tons of mug punters out there Ben. Most of them probably don’t have a clue about how this particular coup was brought to bear. Racing is all about people making money out of those who bet armed with little idea of what they are doing. Be it bookies, genuine professional punters or "rogue" bettors plotting a takedown, the result is the same for the bulk of those placing bets in offices up and down the country. It won’t stop them having a punt on a pig of a selling race at one of the gaff tracks or on some low-level bingo race on the all-weather where a six length winner last time over C+D, is tailed off under a similar mark shortly afterwards.
I tend to avoid the dross and focus on races where there are less shady characters lurking in the shadows. Nobody is forced to bet on the "two slevers running down a wall" material, where the shady figures tend to ply their greasy trade.
Until there is evidence of the law being broken, it is all bluster about someone exploiting the system. Improve the system or grin and bear the fact that is open to be taken advantage of.
Tax Evasion/Tax Avoidance might be a similar comparison
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
- Total Posts 764
Steve I prety much agree with your entire post, however just because those losing money on these paticular races are indeed more than likely mug punters it still doesn’t make it right. Yes the people betting on them probably don’t have much of a clue about who the trainers/jockeys are it doesn’t mean they deserve to be (pretty much) robbed by deceitful and conniving trainers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.