The Sleeper Conspiracy

[Glenn]

I’ve been thinking today about the blobs that seem to have sprouted like mushrooms on our racecards over the last couple of years. You know the ones, they have corresponding footnotes at the bottom of the racecard with things like ‘will only run if the going is suitable’, ‘will only run if is given the plum draw’, ‘non-runner after someone took the trainer’s price yesterday’, ‘we’ll see what he opens up at on Betfair’ and ‘could run at Hamilton tonight, could run here at Chester, we’ll keep you uninformed until all Chesterbet scoop-pot bets are in’.

Why has this desecration of our racecards been allowed, where punters don’t know who’ll be running or who’ll be riding and there’s a daily non-runner list the length of War and Peace?

Ah yes, of course, media rights payments or some such. The details were always sketchy and never seemed to get spelt out, but the rumour was that there was a Keiser Soze figure, running a Turkish betting shop, who was going to reach into his sky-rocket and pull out, what was it now, err I think ONE HUNDRED MILLION POUNDS was the figure quoted for the subscription money he’d happily stump up for the twin delights of RUK’s Peter Naughton and Chapman from the ATR Booth. But there was a proviso. He demanded that he would get his racecards with lots of blobs on 48 hours before the race or the whole deal was off.

There’d be concessions made to trainers for this. You could basically treat overnight entries as speculative entries from now on. Don’t like your draw, don’t like the ground, don’t like the look of the opposition, don’t like the price and you can pull your horse out, at any point of your choosing, no questions asked.

The result is rafts of non-runners. The question is why the bookies haven’t been up in arms about this? Non-runners means refunds right? Turnover must have taken a massive hit with all those void bets. Surely the Council of Fourteen would have stepped in by now and had a word?

Why did that particular dog not bark? Well, you see, non-runners only mean refunds to those who ask for them and the books have experienced the biggest bonanza of uncollected sleepers in their history. Some might suggest that this has dwarfed any effect of falling turnover. Hell, even Scoop6 winners need national campaigns to locate them these days.

Was it deliberate policy? Did the Council of Fourteen plan it all out?

Look at the pincer movement that all happened around the same time. Around the time of David Ashforth (the sole journalist to tackle the issue of sleepers) initially retiring and the leading campaigner in the House of Commons losing his seat. While the cat’s away……..

– 48 hour decs
– trainers not given their share of the mythical money but instead placated by being allowed to do what they please, as long as it involved lots of non-runners. Effectively making 48hr decs a double-whammy.
– rule changes to increases non-runners. Burst throught the stalls? no second chances. Not wearing a type of headgear we’ve suddenly decided to publish on racecards? (giving punters more info should have been a clue) Sorry, back to the saddling box you go.
– grave-robbing clauses suddenly sprouting up across the board in bookies’ t&c’s for those who haven’t claimed their refunded stakes/winnings, so the internet sites could join in the shop bonanza

The next time you see a blob think of it as a special Council of Fourteen symbol for THEM eating very well.

[Glenn]

A dual wielding triple-blobber appears in our racecards today, and with blobs going for as little as eleven snarlers a pair who can blame them?

Could Sherjawy’s six blobs signify the end of days?

[Gingertipster]

Great post Glenn, articulate and funny.

…

But as a theory, cr*p.

Blobs (I would imagine) were introduced to allow connections the opportunity to tell us punters if there is a chance of the horse not running and why (usually ground concerns).

It’s (usually) easy to see why a blob has been issued because the horse is unproven on the probable surface – if it rains/does not rain. It also gives connections the best opportunity to run if at all possible.

The notion that non-runners are good for bookmakers is not always the case. If there are three 20/1 chances in a race all non-runners the bookie can not make any rule 4 deduction (being greater than 16/1). Yet those three 20/1 shots probably add up to around 11% of his "book". If we believe for a moment the market has got it right… 20/1 in fair odds terms = 4.76%, take away bookies mark up of probably 1% at those odds = 3.76%, multiplied by 3 (horses) = 11.28%. So the bookmaker will do well to break even on the race.

Of course the blob has been used by some as an excuse to pull horses out, for draw bias etc; but not that much. I’d like it to say what going they mean by "unsuitable". Sometimes where I see no reason for connections using a blob (eg form indicates a horse DOES act on the surface) I do wonder if the blob is there to put off punters – leading to a better price for those in the know. But on the whole it informs punters who might need informing.

I take little or no notice of them as far as my betting goes.

Value Is Everything

[tbracing]

Majala was a funny one at Haydock recently, he still hadn’t been withdrawn from his second preference by nearly mid day as connections waited for a clean bill of health for the Haydock going, would have been a tense drive down the m6 to get him to the last at Ascot.

[Author]

Posts