- This topic has 385 replies, 102 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
I think it depends by what you mean by Bent…
Does everything go by the book? No . Are horses stopped….definitly but mostly not to defraud people but to beat the handicap system which many people feel is rather unfair in a lot of ways. This is where someone who knows nothing about racing can lose money though. This kind of carry-on is really more of a factor at grass roots level.
I don’t believe horse doping in widespread at all…at least not in my experience.
I think the main reason many people tend to view it as being corrupt comes down to the fact that they dont understand it. They dont understand that horse A beating horse B this week can be no where in the same type of race the following week. They also still believe in "tips" and that there is little point in trying to bet without them because they dont understand the complex nature of the sport, the work and the luck that is required to back winners on a consistent basis.
SHL
Thanks for your opinion there, Fists.
I haven’t seen the race at all, but, from what I can gather, the jockey rode hard and was not the weak link.No way was the horse stopped Sean.
If a jockey wants to stop a horse, especially on the flat the easiest way is to tuck him in behind and just make sure he doesn’t see any daylight. They stick him up another horses backside that’s going backwards rather than forward andwhen they do give them some daylight it’s way too late.
It’s very difficult for the Stewards to say anything more than the jockey gave it a bad ride and provinghe stopped it is very difficult.
Just blatantly not trying on a horse who is obviously travelling well will get you in jail quicker than you can say Jack Flash…..It doesn’t take a genius to look at a race and know when your horse is going well.
Sometimes a jockey who isn’t too busy will flap his elbows like wings and even smack fresh air when he’s not off…….I could mention one northern jockey attached to a stable in the borders who was so bad at it we used to laugh and wonder why the stewards never spotted it….the trainer was warned off at one point so enough said.
Winston did none of the above…..the leader/winner was cantering up front and he was behind having to ride for his life. The most likely reason was he simply didn’t like the surface…I have no idea what the vet said but doubt if he was unsound as it was immediatlly he came out the stalls he was in trouble.
The fact he drifted could simply be the owner, trainer or jockey voiced their opinion that the horse might not act on the surface and word got around.
it was reported by the trainer and vet that the horse was distressed and had a irregular heart beat.. swinbank is a very shrewed trainer he is also a punter as he used to bet with the owner of a betting shop i used to work in, i remember one day he phoned the shop 3 minutes before his horse PEARSON GLENN was about to run and told the owner of the shop who he had a good relationship at the time "get as much money on this horse as you can it wont get beat", the horse won and has never won a flat race since. this was back in 2002. i havent seen the race so cant comment if there was something going on but nothing would surprise me with him.
I’m aware he enjoys a tilt the market which is common knowledge but on this occasion definately nothing amiss…no doubt the horse was also dope tested…If he was going to stop one I doubt if it would be at a meeting of this standard…..he’s hardly going to make a fortune whether he lays his or punts the winner, he way too shrewd for Mickey Mouse stuff like that.
I only used the Grand National because it has more runners than any other race. So more likely to have 30 runners at 20/1 or more.
But call it a 30 runner Stewards Cup with 20 starting at 20/1 or more. So in the same way as above 20 x 1.69% = 33.8%. The chances of a 20/1 plus winner is around 2/1. Not really a surprise at all.
Yes, I agree about the once a year punters making the Grand National a good race to bet in. If a punter looks for stamina without needing very soft or extreme test (unless it is very soft), acts on the going and jumps well, Preferably a prominent runner, he can usually pick the winner. But do think the often quoted stat about low weighted horses is a coincidence.
Seemingly the biggest value has gone by day of race time. You would think with 40 runners last year there would be quite a few early prices to qualify in my system. But not one horse was thought to be value by any other bookmakers odds compiler (judging by my figures). With the difference between all bookmakers early prices negligable.
Mark
The Ginger PreacherValue Is Everything
- Total Posts 17716
Ginger
I’d say the odds of a 20/1+ shot winning either a Grand National or a Steward’s Cup would be much bigger than evens or 2/1 respectively?
I’d certainly lay them for you!A quick glance at the last 40 winners of the Grand National shows 10 at 20/1 or more. Thus by observation it’s 3/1 against the winner of the Grand National having an SP of 20/1 or more.
The best list I could find for the Stewards Cup gave the last 23 winners of which 5 were 20/1 or over, hence the odds are 18/5 or 3.6/1 against a winner at 20/1+.
Given a smaller field but that everything finishes in the Stewards Cup, whereas many outsiders ismply won’t get round in the Grand National, then the difference between the two seems reasonable.
Rob
Ginger
I’d say the odds of a 20/1+ shot winning either a Grand National or a Steward’s Cup would be much bigger than evens or 2/1 respectively?
I’d certainly lay them for you!Depends how many 20/1 + shots run Reet. Possibly there aren’t as many 20/1 plus shots in an average National / Stewards Cup as my example.
My point really is that these 20/1 plus shots add up. And it should not be seen as a surprise when an outsider wins.
Let’s say there are six 20/1 shots in a race (does not matter what race). If we were talking true odds 20/1 = 4.76% but the bookies have added their mark up. I’d say around 1.25% per horse 4.76 – 1.25 = 3.51. So 3.51% x 6 = 21.06%. So these 6 20/1 shots together have a greater chance than one horse at 4/1.
Mark
Percentage PoliceValue Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
Ginger
I’d say the odds of a 20/1+ shot winning either a Grand National or a Steward’s Cup would be much bigger than evens or 2/1 respectively?
I’d certainly lay them for you!Depends how many 20/1 + shots run Reet. Possibly there aren’t as many 20/1 plus shots in an average National / Stewards Cup as my example.
My point really is that these 20/1 plus shots add up. And it should not be seen as a surprise when an outsider wins.
Let’s say there are six 20/1 shots in a race (does not matter what race). If we were talking true odds 20/1 = 4.76% but the bookies have added their mark up. I’d say around 1.25% per horse 4.76 – 1.25 = 3.51. So 3.51% x 6 = 21.06%. So these 6 20/1 shots together have a greater chance than one horse at 4/1.
Mark
Percentage PoliceFrankly, I’d say you’re talking bollox and, as Rob’s figures show, it is a surprise when an outsider wins.
If you doubt it, perhaps you’ll take up my offer?A quick glance at the last 40 winners of the Grand National shows 10 at 20/1 or more. Thus by observation it’s 3/1 against the winner of the Grand National having an SP of 20/1 or more.
The best list I could find for the Stewards Cup gave the last 23 winners of which 5 were 20/1 or over, hence the odds are 18/5 or 3.6/1 against a winner at 20/1+.
Given a smaller field but that everything finishes in the Stewards Cup, whereas many outsiders ismply won’t get round in the Grand National, then the difference between the two seems reasonable.
Rob
Reet, calm down.
As you can see Rob says that in the last 40 years it has been 3/1 (or a 25% chance) a 20/1 plus winner of the National. Hardly a surprise Reet is it?What offer?
Take a look at my 100% book on the 2:05 at Newbury (in Systems) Reet.
You will see the percentage chance I believe each horse has got of winning the race. Then the equivalent price in true odds terms. Then (in brackets) my price plus a bookies mark up.If you add all the 20/1 plus prices of my 100% book you come to a figure of 22.5%. The chance of all the 20/1 plus horses added together is 22.5% or 7/2. Which together would make them second favourite in my 100% book. So again, it will not be a surprise to see a 20/1 plus horse win the 2:05.
If you say it is a surprise when 20/1 plus horses win. What price will you give me for any horse at an SP of 20/1 or more winning this race?
Mark
The Ginger PreacherValue Is EverythingInteresting stuff, though I very much doubt that the key to successful punting is within all these numbers above. Similarly, I doubt whether top bankers could run a penny bun stall properly, so perhaps my views are extreme.
Perhaps, betting rank is more important than actual prices? I was told and believed for years that the winner of the GN would usually be found in the top six of the morning’s betting forecast. Of course, "usually" doesn’t mean "always", as we all know.
Finally, may I just ask Ginger a question about the Exchange prices, which, so many folk consider, to be accurate guides?
Many of these 20/1 shots you mentioned seem to be available at much longer odds on the Machine: do you still convert these to percentages and then multiply by the number of runners in each price bracket?I think I’m a little confused.
.Interesting stuff, though I very much doubt that the key to successful punting is within all these numbers above. Similarly, I doubt whether top bankers could run a penny bun stall properly, so perhaps my views are extreme.
Perhaps, betting rank is more important than actual prices? I was told and believed for years that the winner of the GN would usually be found in the top six of the morning’s betting forecast. Of course, "usually" doesn’t mean "always", as we all know.
Finally, may I just ask Ginger a question about the Exchange prices, which, so many folk consider, to be accurate guides?
Many of these 20/1 shots you mentioned seem to be available at much longer odds on the Machine: do you still convert these to percentages and then multiply by the number of runners in each price bracket?
I think I’m a little confused.
.You are confused, I am confused, what exactly do you mean by your question?
Mark
Value Is EverythingMark wrote
You are confused, I am confused, what exactly do you mean by your question?There you go PJ causing confusion again
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.