- This topic has 120 replies, 45 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Anyone know if his fellow director from Bodugi, Michael Wilson (ex RUK) has been welcomed back to the fold as well?
I must say I have a total blind spot where this Wilson character is concerned, even though I have subscribed to RUK from the get go. Was he merely a voice over as opposed to presenter?
I found this presentation he did about Bodugi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hdSbK3J7JU
He doesn’t exactly come across as a passionate or finely tuned and slick presenter, so one wonders how he ever got to present for RUK?
It sounds like the business was set up on a whim and as such was doomed to certain failure.
I mean come on, "somewhere you can bet and interact socially" – term, anyone heard of Betfair???
The fact they appear to have left their gullible punters out of pocket is concerning and RUK really ought to reconsider using either of these two in the future.
Try Radio Paradise – http://www.radioparadise.com/rp_2.php#name=Home – diverse range of music and so laid back!
Thank you Matron, nice site
I like Nev – though I never see RUK. Was wondering what happened to him. Last time I saw him he was in the Premier Bar at Brighton dressed like a teenager.
A Bloody Good Winner is a bloody good book.
Presumably there was a time in the not too distant past where daily horse racing was not available into peoples homes at all, which, for a minority sport, we should probably be grateful the opportunity is now here to take advantage of, if you can stump up the cash to get it into your home or elsewhere of course.
The criticism i’d put forward of RUK and ATR is for the big race meetings there is no deviation in the quality of camera work or presentation from any of the ”lesser” meetings the channels cover daily. Sure, other things go on like meandering talk and preview which adds filler to the so called build up but to be brutally honest its generally garbage. A panoramic view and multiple HD angles aside, for all the criticism you could level at BBC / Channel 4 / RTÉ when they cover a big race they generally come close to doing just that with a combination of historical coverage / camera work
BBC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSL55DNJZDA
RUK
Anyone know if his fellow director from Bodugi, Michael Wilson (ex RUK) has been welcomed back to the fold as well?
I must say I have a total blind spot where this Wilson character is concerned, even though I have subscribed to RUK from the get go. Was he merely a voice over as opposed to presenter?
I found this presentation he did about Bodugi:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hdSbK3J7JU
He doesn’t exactly come across as a passionate or finely tuned and slick presenter, so one wonders how he ever got to present for RUK?
It sounds like the business was set up on a whim and as such was doomed to certain failure.
I mean come on, "somewhere you can bet and interact socially" – term, anyone heard of Betfair???
The fact they appear to have left their gullible punters out of pocket is concerning and RUK really ought to reconsider using either of these two in the future.
http://www.qatarracingltd.com/about-us/the-team/?memberID=13
No mention of Bodugi
I see Neil Channing re-appeared last Wednesday and despite getting plenty of credit the first time, he did not follow up with his pro bookmaker comments here which of course received the nodding dog response from Angus McNae.
The channel should be re-named the RUK Bookmakers Channel and the Betting Lab is a sham unless they are going to tackle head on parasitic bookmakers who wont lay bets.
They are turning people and punters off the sport which should be positively thriving. If only we had a Tota/ Exchange monopoly run for the benefit of racing.
Thanks for the link Eddie , must admit I dont subscribe to them , in fact I think apart from a few notables , the channel is a bit mediocre , it’s not as blatantly bookie friendly as ATR , but its getting there
Pay 23 quid a month to listen to this tosh ….I think not ,
As someone who has just written a book – Sectional Timing: A Guide by Timeform (out in March) – and appeared briefly on RacingUK’s Betting Lab (for no remuneration), I would like to offer an alternative view.
Some of us are motivated by things other than making as much money as we possibly can from betting, jealously guarding any "secrets" we may feel we have while basking in smug satisfaction about our imagined superiority over our peers.
I did the whole punting for a living thing for a couple of years: it was fun and liberating, at least to begin with, but it contributes next to nothing to anything other than one’s self.
I got into racing analysis because of the fun of puzzle-solving. The most obvious "puzzles" in racing are the races themselves, but there are also the fundamentals of the sport, of athletic performance and of market dynamics. The sort of stuff Betting Lab (and maybe a book) is attempting to tackle, in other words.
There is a hideous leakage of knowledge in our sport due to the absence of written material, so that you get situations like the one whereby the Head of Handicapping at the BHA does not begin to understand aspects of the discipline of which he is a figurehead. That is not entirely his fault, for little of consequence exists in written terms about the subject.
Fortunately, not all areas of human enquiry operate in this manner. "Science" and "philosophy" and so on share ideas, and feedback on those ideas, so that the entire subject matter can advance. Clever chap that Einstein, but did he become a billionaire? No. Instead, he wrote about his ideas, and spoke about his ideas, and those ideas improved as a result. Others cashed in more as a result of those initial ideas, of course.
Jealous guarding of knowledge in an environment where knowledge is power is understandable, but ultimately it corrodes that environment itself. Racing needs more people to engage with it as a set of intriguing puzzles, rather than as a crap shoot, and that is not happening in part because it appears to the outsider at times to be an intellectual wasteland.
Whether it is prompted by vanity or altruism, I, for one, would like to see that change.
Simon Rowlands
Pru, good post , no doubt you and your intentions are entirely honorable ,,,even admirable …however sadly the rest of the cretins appearing on that program are pretty much in a polar opposite direction …
Hence the angst ….
Good luck with the book , I will buy it and look forward to it ,
Thanks.
You won’t be buying the booklet: for it will be free to download.
Now, that’s selfless/stupid (or is it…..?!)
That is so typical of this sport.
I hope from his presumably big salary from Qatar racing he will be refunding all of the out of pocket punters fro his previous venture. No, didn’t think so.
Mind you knowing that he is their "form expert" I presume it would be a good angle to start a lay strategy where Qatar horses are concerned!
Thanks.
You won’t be buying the booklet: for it will be free to download.
Now, that’s selfless/stupid (or is it…..?!)
Ah, the old free sample outside the school gates to get ’em hooked gambit.
Give it two weeks and Ansell will be begging for some more of that sweet sectional stuff.
I think the perennial problem is that those who REALLY know what they are doing when it comes to betting don’t want to share their secrets and edges for a relatively derisory TV appearance fee.
So these programmes tend to attract those who, well, need the TV appearance money because, tbh, they are not THAT great at betting.
The sad truth finally exposed.
Post of the year to date.
You can add to the list those that write books about racing and betting. They hope by writing something down some clues will appear to them for understanding a profession that leaves them totally bewildered.
Then there are the pub-quiz types who can name every Derby etc winner and delude themselves that they really understand everything to know about racing.I have written my "secrets" down (How I Bet) and have thought about sharing it. But if a significant number copied my edge and/or bookies took aspects more in to account – then more people would be reaching the same "value" conclusions as myself, resulting in it being even more difficult to get on. Odds would shrink together with my edge. As my way of betting relies mostly on "Early" value might need to find a different way of finding value selections.
However, anyone who’s tried betting for a living knows it is bloody hard. Everyone – no matter who they are – will go through losing runs from time to time, including long losing runs. Therefore it is understandable some seek a "job" on RUK or writing books etc. Any regular income takes the presure off (that’s if they get paid).
Then, there are punters who think they know it all and criticise others for thinking they know it all.
Value Is EverythingThanks.
You won’t be buying the booklet: for it will be free to download.
Now, that’s selfless/stupid (or is it…..?!)
Look forward to it Simon.
Value Is EverythingThe only guaranteed way to make money in a gold-rush is to be the guy selling the picks and shovels. Not many let others know where the gold seams are.
I am with Simon in as much as one of the great attractions of racing, for me, is the idea of the puzzle. The academic exercise of finding keys to unlock that puzzle can be absorbing and worthy in its own right, regardless of whether one benefits financially from the exercise.
So, the proposition that someone can’t have a valid opinion on an aspect, or indeed several aspects, of betting/winner finding, because they themselves don’t make money from it is flawed. Understanding the dynamics of racing and punting profitably are vastly different disciplines and someone can be good at one and hopeless at the other.
The insightful analyst whose mentality doesn’t lend itself to disciplined punting may still be well worth listening to. But the intuitive and successful punter who has never looked at the time a race has taken to complete in his life (for example) may be someone to admire but may also be someone from whom you are unlikely to learn a single thing.
I might have to find my own seam of gold in the end, but I’ll be wanting some decent tools to bash away at the barren rock in the meantime.
As someone who has just written a book – Sectional Timing: A Guide by Timeform (out in March) – and appeared briefly on RacingUK’s Betting Lab (for no remuneration), I would like to offer an alternative view.
Some of us are motivated by things other than making as much money as we possibly can from betting, jealously guarding any “secrets” we may feel we have while basking in smug satisfaction about our imagined superiority over our peers.
I did the whole punting for a living thing for a couple of years: it was fun and liberating, at least to begin with, but it contributes next to nothing to anything other than one’s self.
I got into racing analysis because of the fun of puzzle-solving. The most obvious “puzzles” in racing are the races themselves, but there are also the fundamentals of the sport, of athletic performance and of market dynamics. The sort of stuff Betting Lab (and maybe a book) is attempting to tackle, in other words.
Simon Rowlands
Perfectly reasonable for betting not to be a necessity to solving the puzzle but would you be doing it for no financial gain if you didn’t work for Timeform etc. And it is called the “Betting” lab after all.
Last Wednesday James Willoughby objected ferociously to what he described as a “petty” email from a “Mike” that perfectly reasonably stated that James never puts into practise all his backdated stats and figures. He’s well named as Professor Hindsight.
Dave Nevison is the “expert” this Wednesday, looking forward to one or two nuggets from him. Think he said last week he’s backed Willie Mullins for Cheltenham top trainer.
”while basking in smug satisfaction about our imagined superiority over our peers”
I don’t think it is necessarily about smug superiority, imagined or otherwise.
I just think that, if you make betting into your JOB, your PRIMARY source of income, in an era of exchanges and arguably more efficient betting markets than ever, it is very hard to find edges, many of which are ephemeral anyway.
It therefore makes no sense whatsoever to put them into the public domain.
Markets react and are ever adjusting to the various factors we look at when trying to determine future winners and identify betting value.
We can’t all win – in fact for some to win, most must lose, so tbh things like public domain betting labs are the great futility – even if they provided decent levels of thinking the markets would react until their input no longer yielded a profit.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.