- This topic has 28 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
After 20 plus years of punting I have learned some harsh lessons along the way, who to trust [ if any ] who to back who not to back and so on, but there is one trainer who’s horses I never back even if there staring me in the face [ they usually get bet anyway ] is Dandy Nichols, even the CIA, FBI, former KGB couldn’t get the information out of him which one of his numerous entries is going to win [ if at all ]. Ditto Milton Bradley.<br>A dishonorable mention to the now retired Mary Reveley.<br>Anyone out there got a trainer that they totally avoid ???<br>
"but there is one trainer who’s horses I never back even if there staring me in the face [ they usually get bet anyway ] is Dandy Nichols, even the CIA, FBI, former KGB couldn’t get the information out of him which one of his numerous entries is going to win "
Dandy isn’t that difficult to read imo – you just have to think outside the box sometimes.
Unlike Amanda Perrett, who I don’t think has ever trained a winner that I have backed.
Emma Lavelle, Evan Williams, Jamie Osbourne, Charlie Byrnes amd Tony Martin are just a few
Quote: from madman marz on 11:15 am on May 28, 2007[br]After 20 plus years of punting I have learned some harsh lessons along the way, who to trust [ if any ] who to back who not to back and so on, but there is one trainer who’s horses I never back even if there staring me in the face [ they usually get bet anyway ] is Dandy Nichols, even the CIA, FBI, former KGB couldn’t get the information out of him which one of his numerous entries is going to win [ if at all ].
<br>Do you really believe trainers know which of their entries is going to win?
You say after 20 years……… Surely after 20 years you’d have learned to open your eyes a bit.
Most of Mr Nicholls horses run in big field sprint handicaps. The reason he enters a few is that he himself thinks they’ve all got a chance if the draw, ground or whatever idiosyncrasy is taking the prevalance on the day.
Niave is the only word I can think of – but after 20 years… I’m just not sure…
MM, I think you are giving too much credit to trainers. Most of them don’t have a clue about the chances of their runners. The trainers job is to keep the horse fit and healthy.
Mick Channon. In many ways i admire the way hes built his training career but when it comes to running them, its all a little bit too scattergun at times. He gives owners value for the training fees the amount he runs them, but doesnt translate to me backing them
- Total Posts 17716
Any stable worth its salt knows how to place their horses, whether to win, get them fit, or just get them a better handicap mark. <br>That doesn’t guarantee success, but it is naive to think it’s all a raffle.
I thought Dandy Nicholls wasn’t that hard to decipher.
Mich Channon, however, was always a mystery to me.
Steve<br>
Dandy is all too easy to predict at times, though I rarely find the ‘testicular fortitude’ to plunge in and count the cash.
Milton Bradley’s horses I avoid like the plague, much the same as Mark Johnston’s, Jamie Osborne’s, Evan Williams’s, Phillip Hobbs’s, Mick Channon’s (only short priced favourites though) and Micky Quinn’s. Oh, and there is of course Alan Swinbank with Dean McKeown up, and anything of Gary Moore’s or ‘Sir’ Prescott’s.
God I sound bitter….. :biggrin:
(Edited by LetsGetRacing at 9:19 pm on May 28, 2007)
Handicaps – Mick Channon<br>Non Handicaps – Tim Easterby
Appalling performance with 10/1 and below over the last few years.
I was expecting to see some comment from Seagull here.
Some time ago, he kindly let me have some trainer’s statistics for various courses and seemed to know quite a bit about their preferences – and, I suppose, their integrity and reliability.
It was very interesting, but I’m not really a ‘trainer’ punter myself. I tend to ignore what they say and presume that their horses are usually there to do their best given that the trainer might be well aware that their horses are not good enough or perhaps fit enough to win the race. Rather naive, you may say, but better than trying to second guess everything they do and coming up with various conspiracy theories. At least I’m consistent and I don’t trouble my mind with such thoughts.
<br><br>Do you really believe trainers know which of their entries is going to win?
You say after 20 years……… Surely after 20 years you’d have learned to open your eyes a bit.
Most of Mr Nicholls horses run in big field sprint handicaps. The reason he enters a few is that he himself thinks they’ve all got a chance if the draw, ground or whatever idiosyncrasy is taking the prevalance on the day.
Niave is the only word I can think of – but after 20 years… I’m just not sure…
You spouted some drivel there Sailing Shoes, oh Mister Nicholls knows alright, he’s a shrewd old cookie is our Dandy.<br>He runs numerous horses in races to shed pounds off their back, most of his horses are well down the field. Then when the time is right, they will strike, but only good old Dandy knows when.
Naive springs to mind alright, but you should use it to describe yourself Sailing Shoe’s.
(Edited by madman marz at 10:29 am on May 29, 2007)
It was very interesting, but I’m not really a ‘trainer’ punter myself
Completely the opposite here
Trainer form is vital and trainer comments are frequesntly an underrated factor. You have to know the trainer of course, but would you, say, ignore Elsworths Salford city comments over the last week ?
The trouble punters have with this area is that they expect 100% strike rates. If a trainer is bullish and gets it wrong (in the punters eyes) then the pocket starts talking. No trainer will ever be able too completely pinpoint a horses chances but then again no one will know the horse better (generally)
Trainer stats can be interesting too. Being creatures of habit (like most of us) there are certainly many patterns. The Timeform trainers stats books are one of the few that i buy
would you ignore a trainers first time out record or the fact that at certain times of year and certain meetings they habitually have their strings fully primed?
<br>Madman Marz,
The usual 100% I’m right, the rest of you are idiots garbage.
I had a horse that ran against a Nicholls winner called Gift Horse in a minor handicap at Doncaster. We all know what Gift Horse has done since. So if Nicholls knows everything, how come it started 16/1 that day and my ageing and fully exposed serial loser was almost favourite.
AP<br>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.