- This topic has 104 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Don’t ashes usually get "scattered"?
If so, could you let us know, before you peg out, whether you will be getting scattered stand side or far side, so that we can adjust our views of the likely draw bias accordingly?
For similar reasons to Max, there’ll be a false patch of going somewhere at Cartmel when I finally buy the farm. I see his Double Decker and raise him a sticky toffee pudding, though.
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.
Clare Balding wrote that when you have a bet on a horse it then becomes ‘your’ horse for the duration of the race, and that’s how I feel when I put my pennies on. I also feel very excited to the point that I sometimes think I might have a heart attack when I’m watching a race having put my 25 pence each way on! Recently I’ve studied a lot of races in depth just so that I know the horses running and the background to them, but then end up having a bet because of the studying [eg last years Ebor; not knowing much about flat racing I spent hours on the ATR site, just so I would recognise the horses when I saw them in the paddock]. I like trying to work out if a horse has been laid out for a particular race, and was chuffed to bits when I spotted Sereth last year and backed him at a big price even though he didn’t even run in the end. I can see how easy it is for people to get addicted to gambling, and would actually hate it if either of my kids started betting on horses. I once applied for a job at a bookies which thanfully I didn’t get, because I could see myself asking the punters if they could really afford to put that amount on and had they paid their rent etc. I wouldn’t have lasted long…
" I can’t remember the last time I left a racetrack with less money than I came in with"
If that’s the case, far from betting small, you should be having thousands on….
Joncol –
I struggle to wonder why you post here – you have no faith that racing is straight, you clearly intimate that the jockeys are cheating, you haven’t had a bet for five years, when you do it loses and you now seem more disenchanted than ever, if that could be possible.
All that and every thread you start has a sneaky undertone of negativity to it. Every one a whinge (designed to extract even more whinges). All that bitterness can’t be good for a person.
That’s a shout. Doesn’t seem to make sense, unless he just likes a good moan
There isn’t a greater betting sport in the world when your 12/1 shot cruises up alongside some poor partnership running on the spot, with the the pair well clear…..My heart swells and the anticipation is just too much.
There isn’t a worse one when your 5/4 shot hits the lids and proceeds to pull for 5 furlongs before being swamped….
Win
. Lose The clue is in the name: "gamble"
gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
b. To play a game of chance for stakes.If the trainer/jockey/owner does not intend the horse to win, it is not an uncertain outcome and not a game of chance.
The clue is in the name: "gamble"
gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
b. To play a game of chance for stakes.If the trainer/jockey/owner does not intend the horse to win, it is not an uncertain outcome and not a game of chance.
How often does that happen though Aji?
Not very often.
What do you call "not intend"?
Mark Tomkins never has a 2 year old first time out winner (0% over the last 5 years). Because they are usually too green and needing the run. Is that "not intending to win"? Because in my opinion he’s still trying to win. If all the others were so unfit and green, Mark would be delighted if his horse passed the post first.It’s up to us to use every piece of information to find the value. Our intention should NOT be to GAMBLE, but to INVEST.
Value Is EverythingThere isn’t a greater betting sport in the world when your 12/1 shot cruises up alongside some poor partnership running on the spot, with the the pair well clear…..My heart swells and the anticipation is just too much.
There isn’t a worse one when your 5/4 shot hits the lids and proceeds to pull for 5 furlongs before being swamped….
Win
. Lose Indeed and there’s not a worse feeling than backing a horse who likes to race prominent, see it jump off well only for the jockey to then anchor it towards the rear of the field or see a jockey "find" trouble in running at Lingfield.
The first horse has six wins between the flags to his name with the following comments in running:
His Maiden "Cl up, ld from 5th, chall when lft with 2l adv 2out, so best"
Winners-of-One "Ld/disp until 3rd from 5out, ld aftr 3out, so up flat"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld 3out, alw in command"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 5out, hdd aftr 3out & sn 3rd, rallied from 2out, disp last,ro best"
Open Point "Made all, kow when chall from 2out, sow"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 3out, kow"
Switched to rules racing for a Beginners Chase at Tipperary and ridden by his usual top female amateur rider we get the following:
"Towards rear, kept on one pace from 4 out" beaten 36 lengths.
Hopefully they’d learnt that riding the horse prominently might help matters – since he has six wins to his name when doing this.
Limerick Beginners Chase
"Always towards rear, tailed off" change of jockey to a pro and a defeat by over 43 lengthsNow for a Novices Chase at Killarney – would expect something of the same given how the handicap system works, maybe not though – never can tell.
"Prominent, ridden in 4th before straight, soon no impression and kept on same pace" 4th beaten 29 lengths.
To the best of my knowledge nothing was said about any of the above rides surely there’s a case for at least notifying the Stewards on the day pre-race if any likely marked change in riding instructions from how the horse has been ridden previously?
Agree to an extent that there’s always been the skulldugerry element in racing – at least now nearly everyone can see it and now we can see that the authorities aren’t doing anything about it.
The clue is in the name: "gamble"
gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
b. To play a game of chance for stakes.If the trainer/jockey/owner does not intend the horse to win, it is not an uncertain outcome and not a game of chance.
How often does that happen though Aji?
Not very often.
What do you call "not intend"?
Mark Tomkins never has a 2 year old first time out winner. Because they are usually too green and needing the run. Is that "not intending to win"? Because in my opinion he’s still trying to win. If all the others were so unfit and green, Mark would be delighted if his horse passed the post first.It’s up to us to use every piece of information to find the value. Our intention should NOT be to GAMBLE, but to INVEST.
Spot on Ginge – it should be treated as an investment and not a gamble. Roulette is a gamble – there’s a chance it could be red, black or odd or even.
You can always look at racing as gambling – i’m sure there are plenty of betting shop punters who do just that, bet race by race on horses they like the names of or ridden by Adam Kirby, Richard Hills, Ryan Moore, AP McCoy, Ruby Walsh etc. but they’re gambling on all the other factors. I prefer to look at it as a calculated investment – similar to putting your money in a 1.5% interest bank account, are you likely to make £1.51 for every £100 that you bet?
Racing and betting is about looking at all the possible factors – ground, handicap mark, jockey, distance, course, trainer form, trainer/jockey combo etc. and calculating is a particular horse worth a bet at the respective price.
There isn’t a greater betting sport in the world when your 12/1 shot cruises up alongside some poor partnership running on the spot, with the the pair well clear…..My heart swells and the anticipation is just too much.
There isn’t a worse one when your 5/4 shot hits the lids and proceeds to pull for 5 furlongs before being swamped….
Win
. Lose Indeed and there’s not a worse feeling than backing a horse who likes to race prominent, see it jump off well only for the jockey to then anchor it towards the rear of the field or see a jockey "find" trouble in running at Lingfield.
The first horse has six wins between the flags to his name with the following comments in running:
His Maiden "Cl up, ld from 5th, chall when lft with 2l adv 2out, so best"
Winners-of-One "Ld/disp until 3rd from 5out, ld aftr 3out, so up flat"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld 3out, alw in command"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 5out, hdd aftr 3out & sn 3rd, rallied from 2out, disp last,ro best"
Open Point "Made all, kow when chall from 2out, sow"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 3out, kow"
Switched to rules racing for a Beginners Chase at Tipperary and ridden by his usual top female amateur rider we get the following:
"Towards rear, kept on one pace from 4 out" beaten 36 lengths.
Hopefully they’d learnt that riding the horse prominently might help matters – since he has six wins to his name when doing this.
Limerick Beginners Chase
"Always towards rear, tailed off" change of jockey to a pro and a defeat by over 43 lengthsNow for a Novices Chase at Killarney – would expect something of the same given how the handicap system works, maybe not though – never can tell.
"Prominent, ridden in 4th before straight, soon no impression and kept on same pace" 4th beaten 29 lengths.
To the best of my knowledge nothing was said about any of the above rides surely there’s a case for at least notifying the Stewards on the day pre-race if any likely marked change in riding instructions from how the horse has been ridden previously?
Agree to an extent that there’s always been the skulldugerry element in racing – at least now nearly everyone can see it and now we can see that the authorities aren’t doing anything about it.
In the point to point field it is comparitively easy to front run or race prominently every time. There are not many horses in each event.
When a horse starts out on it’s racing career, connections know they are far less likely to get their own way in front. Therefore, they might decide to hold the horse up in it’s first race under rules, to see what happens. Unfortunately, it is impossible for connections to tell the punters new tactics, without also telling their rivals. So they don’t. Why should all the other connections get an unfair advantage of knowing the tactics of another runner? They could easily react and do something to scupper those plans.When looking at past ways of running, it’s surely best to think, what is likely to happen, not what will happen. There can always be a change of tactics. I sometimes bet on a probable prominent runner, but no matter how infuriating, it is up to connections whether they ride it prominently, not me.
It should always be up to connections, not punters, or for that matter stewards. What if they inform the stewards of a change of tactics, they’re going to hold the horse up? And then there’s no pace. As it needs pace, there’s another change of plan and after just half a furlong he comes through to lead. What if there was a decent pace, yet the jockey thinks the horse does not like it in behind? So again, after just half a furlong he leads. What do the stewards do?
Value Is EverythingThere isn’t a greater betting sport in the world when your 12/1 shot cruises up alongside some poor partnership running on the spot, with the the pair well clear…..My heart swells and the anticipation is just too much.
There isn’t a worse one when your 5/4 shot hits the lids and proceeds to pull for 5 furlongs before being swamped….
Win
. Lose Indeed and there’s not a worse feeling than backing a horse who likes to race prominent, see it jump off well only for the jockey to then anchor it towards the rear of the field or see a jockey "find" trouble in running at Lingfield.
The first horse has six wins between the flags to his name with the following comments in running:
His Maiden "Cl up, ld from 5th, chall when lft with 2l adv 2out, so best"
Winners-of-One "Ld/disp until 3rd from 5out, ld aftr 3out, so up flat"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld 3out, alw in command"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 5out, hdd aftr 3out & sn 3rd, rallied from 2out, disp last,ro best"
Open Point "Made all, kow when chall from 2out, sow"
Open Point "Alw pr, ld from 3out, kow"
Switched to rules racing for a Beginners Chase at Tipperary and ridden by his usual top female amateur rider we get the following:
"Towards rear, kept on one pace from 4 out" beaten 36 lengths.
Hopefully they’d learnt that riding the horse prominently might help matters – since he has six wins to his name when doing this.
Limerick Beginners Chase
"Always towards rear, tailed off" change of jockey to a pro and a defeat by over 43 lengthsNow for a Novices Chase at Killarney – would expect something of the same given how the handicap system works, maybe not though – never can tell.
"Prominent, ridden in 4th before straight, soon no impression and kept on same pace" 4th beaten 29 lengths.
To the best of my knowledge nothing was said about any of the above rides surely there’s a case for at least notifying the Stewards on the day pre-race if any likely marked change in riding instructions from how the horse has been ridden previously?
Agree to an extent that there’s always been the skulldugerry element in racing – at least now nearly everyone can see it and now we can see that the authorities aren’t doing anything about it.
In the point to point field it is comparitively easy to front run or race prominently every time. There are not many horses in each event.
When a horse starts out on it’s racing career, connections know they are far less likely to get their own way in front. Therefore, they might decide to hold the horse up in it’s first race under rules, to see what happens. Unfortunately, it is impossible for connections to tell the punters new tactics, without also telling their rivals. So they don’t. Why should all the other connections get an unfair advantage of knowing the tactics of another runner? They could easily react and do something to scupper those plans.When looking at past ways of running, it’s surely best to think, what is likely to happen, not what will happen. There can always be a change of tactics. I sometimes bet on a probable prominent runner, but no matter how infuriating, it is up to connections whether they ride it prominently, not me.
It should always be up to connections, not punters, or for that matter stewards. What if they inform the stewards of a change of tactics, they’re going to hold the horse up? And then there’s no pace. As it needs pace, there’s another change of plan and after just half a furlong he comes through to lead. What if there was a decent pace, yet the jockey thinks the horse does not like it in behind? So again, after just half a furlong he leads. What do the stewards do?
I’m not sure which Points you have been watching (presumably some of the smaller field UK ones) but these were highly competitive events – 18 runners for his Maiden, 13, 10, 11, 13 and 10 for his others and the largest field that he’s faced under rules thus far is a 16 runner field on his first start (incidentally the winner led and was clear the whole way).
Of course it’s up to connections to decide how the horse is to be ridden but it’s up to the Stewards to ensure that racing is seen to be as straight and as open as possible and the old adage "if it ain’t broke…" springs to mind in this particular case.
The Stewards would then hopefully look into the riding instructions and sequence of events as reported by the jockey throughout the race and "note them" as they say or take appropriate action.
This horse is hardly starting out a racing career – he’s been racing between the flags for two seasons with 18 starts in that time (the first three being non-completions when held-up/racing mid div).
The horse is entered at Wexford on Friday night – be interesting to see whether they use the tried and tested (and successful) front running tactics with the horse for this handicap debut.
The clue is in the name: "gamble"
gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
b. To play a game of chance for stakes.If the trainer/jockey/owner does not intend the horse to win, it is not an uncertain outcome and not a game of chance.
Often the horse does not intend to follow the orders of the trainer/jockey/owner.
I’m not sure which Points you have been watching (presumably some of the smaller field UK ones) but these were highly competitive events – 18 runners for his Maiden, 13, 10, 11, 13 and 10 for his others and the largest field that he’s faced under rules thus far is a 16 runner field on his first start (incidentally the winner led and was clear the whole way).
Of course it’s up to connections to decide how the horse is to be ridden but it’s up to the Stewards to ensure that racing is seen to be as straight and as open as possible and the old adage "if it ain’t broke…" springs to mind in this particular case.
The Stewards would then hopefully look into the riding instructions and sequence of events as reported by the jockey throughout the race and "note them" as they say or take appropriate action.
This horse is hardly starting out a racing career – he’s been racing between the flags for two seasons with 18 starts in that time (the first three being non-completions when held-up/racing mid div).
The horse is entered at Wexford on Friday night – be interesting to see whether they use the tried and tested (and successful) front running tactics with the horse for this handicap debut.
Apologies Martin,
My knowledge of ptps is sketchy. You’re right, judging it from soft southern GB meetings.By "racing career" I meant under rules. In my mind ptps don’t count as proper racing. (I am going to get an earfull from Jeremy for that one
). Anyway, it is a change of career and connections may well want a change of run styles; to give more options in this more competitive field. No matter how many runners, they might be thinking of future assignments when trying new hold up tactics. To get the horse used to it. Though in your case, they might not have wanted to take another front runner on (if it was known to be so beforehand).I just can’t see how the stewards can separate one who’s held up for sporting reasons and one who’s "not trying". For the reasons I gave on my previous post it is nearly impossible to proove.
Even with horses like Yuratuni, it’s difficult for stewards to proove.
Value Is EverythingClare Balding wrote that when you have a bet on a horse it then becomes ‘your’ horse for the duration of the race…
This is why I love racing. It’s almost like having a child; for example there’s a horse that I back every time it runs & even though I’m becoming more & more convinced that, despite a run of seconds before the first win, he isn’t very good at all, I’ll keep the faith because one day he’ll win again & I can go, ‘look everyone, look what my horse did’ even though I’ve got nothing to do with him!
I’d love to be able to say that I’d enjoy racing as much without betting on it but I couldnt say it with any conviction. I enjoy watching races when I’ve got nothing on them but it’s not quite the same. That said, Snow Fairy running away with the Irish Oaks was pretty much as good as it gets & I had not a penny on her.
Another poster said something about making £1.50 profit on £100 of bets. I’d consider that to be a good year!
Apologies Martin,
My knowledge of ptps is sketchy. You’re right, judging it from soft southern GB meetings.Well that’s bound to give you a stilted impression. The South East Area regularly struggles to attract adequate numbers from about late March / April onwards. The pitiable turnout at somewhere like Peper Harow, year in, year out, shouldn’t be regarded as especially representative. Conversely, field sizes, overall turnouts, etc. were still very decent indeed in the South Midlands, Northern and Yorkshire Areas late into the recently completed campaign.
By "racing career" I meant under rules. In my mind ptps don’t count as proper racing. (I am going to get an earfull from Jeremy for that one
).Earful? Oh, no, no, no, no, no. Never. Wouldn’t dream of.
Have you met my new friend Mr Cricket-Bat-With-Nail-In-The-End yet, by the way?
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.
- Total Posts 17716
Todays events at Hereford might be the reason for many.
Horse racing is a great sport and everyone likes the odd punt but as a betting proposition for me its at the bottom of the list, not because the sport on paper is anyway less appealing than others but moreso because of jockeys/owners/trainers.
All betting has a degree of risk attached to it but in general the objective is to bet on your selection having and showing ability to win its event and you try to figure that out wether its racing,football,golf,Formula One etc.
However its very clear that horse racing is no longer about picking the best horse and there are far too many variables attached to jockey/owner/trainer now that just make it a complete no no for anyone wants to try and win money.
There maybe no case to answer with regard to todays events but the trainer coming out and saying that Richard Johnson might of been the reason the horse attracted money tells you everything you need to know about horse racing.
. Lose 
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.