- This topic has 46 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
However, Vautour aside: Mullins entering his Exceptionals in top races with encouraging words attached – which has the affect of discouraging rivals from running – allowing his Lesser Exceptionals a much greater chance to clear up. Seems to happen too often to be just coincidence.
GR, if this is indeed the case, surely it’s up to other trainers to wake up?
If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar when he was pulled last weekend. Withdrawn from Leopardstown Sunday morning having been ‘declared in error’. So de Bromhead jocks up the horse on Friday morning and nobody realises until Sunday?
There does seem to be a strong anti-Mullins bias on forums and social media.
However, Vautour aside: Mullins entering his Exceptionals in top races with encouraging words attached – which has the affect of discouraging rivals from running – allowing his Lesser Exceptionals a much greater chance to clear up. Seems to happen too often to be just coincidence.
GR, if this is indeed the case, surely it’s up to other trainers to wake up?
If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar when he was pulled last weekend. Withdrawn from Leopardstown Sunday morning having been ‘declared in error’. So de Bromhead jocks up the horse on Friday morning and nobody realises until Sunday?
There does seem to be a strong anti-Mullins bias on forums and social media.
You can say “If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar”, THM… But does de Bromhead make a habit of declaring in error?
Does he make a habit of doing other stuff that looks suspicious or ungenuine? That’s the point. Anyone can point out things that another trainer has done that Mullins has been criticised for, but it’s the regularity of it happening that matters. Personally, if a trainer does something once or twice I am inclined to believe the trainer that it’s accidental. If it’s happening regularly then it’s less likely to be accidental.Value Is Everythingi find it funny the hate mullins gets, he released the injuries on AP, faugheen and min immediately, twice in faugheens case, people start to make accusations up hes done this and that etc
Gary moore does the same thing
One is right one is totaly wrong and the biggest liar in the game
When 95% of your horses are highly anticipated, your never going to please people
When your another trainer with 5% highly anicipated horses and 95% mediocre, you do the exact same things just on a smaller scale because no one gives a ****
The vautour situation was a year ago, it was ricci…… get over it… dont back antepost if you cant take those situations….. henderson just rerouted bvd and ballsed up alot of antepost bets…. how dare he…
However, Vautour aside: Mullins entering his Exceptionals in top races with encouraging words attached – which has the affect of discouraging rivals from running – allowing his Lesser Exceptionals a much greater chance to clear up. Seems to happen too often to be just coincidence.
GR, if this is indeed the case, surely it’s up to other trainers to wake up?
If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar when he was pulled last weekend. Withdrawn from Leopardstown Sunday morning having been ‘declared in error’. So de Bromhead jocks up the horse on Friday morning and nobody realises until Sunday?
There does seem to be a strong anti-Mullins bias on forums and social media.
You can say “If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar”, THM… But does de Bromhead make a habit of declaring in error?
Does he make a habit of doing other stuff that looks suspicious or ungenuine? That’s the point. Anyone can point out things that another trainer has done that Mullins has been criticised for, but it’s the regularity of it happening that matters. Personally, if a trainer does something once or twice I am inclined to believe the trainer that it’s accidental. If it’s happening regularly then it’s less likely to be accidental.GT, Mullins enters all his horses up everywhere, everyone knows that’s no guarantee whatsoever that they will run. Have you examples of where Mullins entered his big guns, frightening off opposition and making things easier for ond of his lesser lights?
Even if this is the case, which I’m doubtful of, what is wrong with it? if other trainers are naive enough to take Mullins’ entries with anything other than a grain of salt then they’re probably not paying much attention.
The whole Vautour incident is such a tiresome crock of sh**.
Vautour was working poorly at home and Mullins, – who made no comment on where he would run – made a late judgement call and did what was best for the horse. As we know the Gold Cup can really take its toll on a horse, especially an ill prepared one.
Ricci, who admits himself has very little say in how his horses are handled, stupidly decided to say its Gold Cup or broke, which is understandable in all the excitement and flurry of the build up. Especially with a horse like Vautour. He didn’t know he wouldn’t run.
Now for some people to still be banging on about money they lost a year later on an ANTE POST bet – a bet which upon placing, you are fully aware will go down as a loser if the horse doesn’t run in the race – is incredibly pathetic. Its really quite simple, don’t back ante post if you can’t accept the inherent risks of such a bet. CAVEAT EMPTOR.
I should probably add rant over.
However, Vautour aside: Mullins entering his Exceptionals in top races with encouraging words attached – which has the affect of discouraging rivals from running – allowing his Lesser Exceptionals a much greater chance to clear up. Seems to happen too often to be just coincidence.
GR, if this is indeed the case, surely it’s up to other trainers to wake up?
If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar when he was pulled last weekend. Withdrawn from Leopardstown Sunday morning having been ‘declared in error’. So de Bromhead jocks up the horse on Friday morning and nobody realises until Sunday?
There does seem to be a strong anti-Mullins bias on forums and social media.
You can say “If Monalee had been trained by Mullins I’m guessing there would have been uproar”, THM… But does de Bromhead make a habit of declaring in error?
Does he make a habit of doing other stuff that looks suspicious or ungenuine? That’s the point. Anyone can point out things that another trainer has done that Mullins has been criticised for, but it’s the regularity of it happening that matters. Personally, if a trainer does something once or twice I am inclined to believe the trainer that it’s accidental. If it’s happening regularly then it’s less likely to be accidental.GT, Mullins enters all his horses up everywhere, everyone knows that’s no guarantee whatsoever that they will run. Have you examples of where Mullins entered his big guns, frightening off opposition and making things easier for ond of his lesser lights?
Even if this is the case, which I’m doubtful of, what is wrong with it? if other trainers are naive enough to take Mullins’ entries with anything other than a grain of salt then they’re probably not paying much attention.
I cannot agree more. People go on as if Mullins is some state-owned body competing in a private industry, using its position of power unfairly. He is just another private company! Terrible analogy but it is ridiculous that people feel Mullins needs to adjust his own, clearly effective, strategy to suit the other trainers. He has built his position of power from the ground up and deserves every bit of success he has. I am loath to say it, but one can’t help but feel it boils down to British frustration at Irish dominance.
The whole Vautour incident is such a tiresome crock of sh**.
Vautour was working poorly at home and Mullins, – who made no comment on where he would run – made a late judgement call and did what was best for the horse. As we know the Gold Cup can really take its toll on a horse, especially an ill prepared one.
Ricci, who admits himself has very little say in how his horses are handled, stupidly decided to say its Gold Cup or broke, which is understandable in all the excitement and flurry of the build up. Especially with a horse like Vautour. He didn’t know he wouldn’t run.
Now for some people to still be banging on about money they lost a year later on an ANTE POST bet – a bet which upon placing, you are fully aware will go down as a loser if the horse doesn’t run in the race – is incredibly pathetic. Its really quite simple, don’t back ante post if you can’t accept the inherent risks of such a bet. CAVEAT EMPTOR.
I should probably add rant over.
Hmmm. I did back Vautour for Cheltenham, but only for the Ryanair!
How does that figure in your theory?
It is possible to have an opinion that has nothing to do with money. Value Is EverythingGT, Mullins enters all his horses up everywhere, everyone knows that’s no guarantee whatsoever that they will run. Have you examples of where Mullins entered his big guns, frightening off opposition and making things easier for ond of his lesser lights?
Even if this is the case, which I’m doubtful of, what is wrong with it? if other trainers are naive enough to take Mullins’ entries with anything other than a grain of salt then they’re probably not paying much attention.
It’s not only Mullins, it’s Team Mullins, THM. It’s not that he enters horses for races, it’s what’s said in the lead up.
eg the Morgiana:
“Faugheen will run in the StanJames.com Morgiana at Punchestown next Sunday,” said Mullins.
So from some way out Mullins gave plenty of notice Faugheen was going to run in the Morgiana,.
Then on 18th November (just two days before the Morgiana)
“Faugheen has a bruised foot and it hasn’t come right in time for him to run this weekend and we’ll have to wait a bit longer before starting him off,” explained Mullins.
So if Faugheen had a bruised foot which didn’t “come right in time for him to run” why didn’t we hear about it before he was ruled out? Could’ve said instead – as soon as it happened – “he’s got a bruised foot but we’re hoping to run in the Morgiana”. But no, we didn’t hear until ruled out two days before the race.
Stable companion Nichols Canyon won a poor quality race at long odds-on.…And No Voleur, I didn’t have a bet in the race.
Another similar example was the Tingle Creek…
Value Is EverythingPerhaps he bruised his foot in-between the comments…..?
Blackbeard to conquer the World
Am sure it did Nathan point is he said “it hasn’t come right in time for him to run this weekend”. That means the bruised foot happened quite a while before he was ruled out. Mullins should’ve told everyone about the bruised foot as soon as it happened; not after he’d been ruled out.
Value Is EverythingGingertipster those comments were not directed at you mate, there was a post by another member upset about his ante post bet.
The Tingle Creek was largely down to some poor choice of words from Ruby and Bookmaker spokespeople, deliberate or not? Who knows.
Personally I cannot imagine why the greatest National Hunt trainer and jockey of the modern era would risk their entire reputation and accomplishments for a few quid off Boylesports.
Ruby poor words … just him … Mullins … great trainer but given given the ammunition he has had up to now .. greatest thats a bit of a statement. The older ones amoungst us have known some very good ones over the years.
Maybe its the 4 day rather than the 3 day that spreads the horses … more speculation etc. But at the end of the day the races his horses run in has developed into a complete circus. No other trainer does it to that extent. Just an observation, not bashing any poster/irish trainer/english trainer/ or the dog.
Haha fair enough that is certainly up for debate. Personal opinion though, and I believe he will definitely be remembered as the greatest of the modern era by the time he’s said enough is enough!
But when would u want him to make up his mind? Why would he tell us all in Christmas where his horses will run in march? He obviously likes to leave things as long as possible so he can have as much evidence as possible before making a decision and I think to be fair any of his late decisions or decisions which might have surprised people have by and large turned out to be the right decisions, so its a system that he is comfortable and good with.
If I trained a horse and said all season that he would run in the RSA for example and his next few runs were poor over that distance, I’ve backed myself into a corner because I’ve committed the horse to a race. I’d either have to face a barrage of abuse for changing targets or I’d have to leave my horse run over the RSA trip and have no chance. That’s why it makes sense to leave decisions on horses until the last minute and maybe if more trainers did it, they might be more successful
Gingertipster those comments were not directed at you mate, there was a post by another member upset about his ante post bet.
Fair enough if you did not mean me, Valour.
However, I don’t see much difference between my point of view and those that had a bet. Just because someone lost money does not make someone’s opinion invalid.Team Mullins (including Walsh and Ricci) could easily be more careful in what they say and/or how they say it. If Mullins was not ok with Ricci saying Vautour was going Gold Cup or nowhere… Then he should’ve said something immediately. If Mullins makes all the decisions then Ricci had no business saying what he did, especially when he’s Chairman of bookmaker Betbright. Don’t give me that bullXXXXt about the horse not working well, that was almost certainly not true. Had it been true Vautour would not have started the price he did for the Ryanair and wouldn’t have won as he did. Everyone – Ricci and Mullins included – could see Vautour was at least as good as ever.
May be a top rider, but Ruby Walsh’s words about Douvan’s 5/1 being value for the Tingle Creek were stupid and misleading. Fact is if a horse is not going to run then any price is a poor one. Walsh’s words made it look as though Douvan was going to run. Bookmakers knew the horse was a highly unlikely runner and that was why they were offering 5/1 in the first place (if it was a probable runner he’d have been 1/5). What’s more, Un De Sceaux who had been ante-post favourite drifted badly; which could allow those in the know to profit. Ruby had no business saying that unless having Mullins ok.
Value Is EverythingBut when would u want him to make up his mind? Why would he tell us all in Christmas where his horses will run in march? He obviously likes to leave things as long as possible so he can have as much evidence as possible before making a decision and I think to be fair any of his late decisions or decisions which might have surprised people have by and large turned out to be the right decisions, so its a system that he is comfortable and good with.
If I trained a horse and said all season that he would run in the RSA for example and his next few runs were poor over that distance, I’ve backed myself into a corner because I’ve committed the horse to a race. I’d either have to face a barrage of abuse for changing targets or I’d have to leave my horse run over the RSA trip and have no chance. That’s why it makes sense to leave decisions on horses until the last minute and maybe if more trainers did it, they might be more successful
Who’s complaining about that type of thing?
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.