- This topic has 59 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Like I said, I haven’t been on here since Cheltenham, I don’t know how else to say it.
Scroll up to the top right of your screen – try and tell me how calling people cockroaches and liars forms any part of ‘intelligent horse racing discussion’. What is intelligent about getting your facts wrong and being an idiot? Are you than starved of attention in your day to day life that you have to come onto a racing forum to get some type of reaction? (Which i resent giving keyboard warriors like you because its what you want).
If you genuinely find aftertimers ‘the scum of humanity’ then you probably have far more weaknesses than you would ever care to admit. Lacking any form of life perspective being the first one that springs to my mind. So yeh, you are a joke, no more time wasted on you.
‘It seems like you are giving away your modus operandi here – backing more than one horse’. You caught me. I must be the only punter backing more than one horse in a 25+ runner handicap. As for the Neptune, I backed Finians Oscar (14’s) and Willoughby Court (16’s, 14’s and 12’s) – what a mug punter I am
Like I said, I haven’t been on here since Cheltenham, I don’t know how else to say it.
Scroll up to the top right of your screen – try and tell me how calling people cockroaches and liars forms any part of ‘intelligent horse racing discussion’. What is intelligent about getting your facts wrong and being an idiot? Are you than starved of attention in your day to day life that you have to come onto a racing forum to get some type of reaction? (Which i resent giving keyboard warriors like you because its what you want).
If you genuinely find aftertimers ‘the scum of humanity’ then you probably have far more weaknesses than you would ever care to admit. Lacking any form of life perspective being the first one that springs to my mind. So yeh, you are a joke, no more time wasted on you.
‘It seems like you are giving away your modus operandi here – backing more than one horse’. You caught me. I must be the only punter backing more than one horse in a 25+ runner handicap. As for the Neptune, I backed Finians Oscar (14’s) and Willoughby Court (16’s, 14’s and 12’s) – what a mug punter I am
I’m not a troll I’m just genuinely sick of aftertimers. Sorry if that offends people, but it needs saying. Other forums are now unreadable because of the amount of aftertiming that goes on, this seems one of the few safe refuges, well it did…
You claim you haven’t been on since Cheltenham, but you’ve managed to reappear AFTER the races at Royal Ascot.. where have you been all this time, Mars?
And you managed to find the time to back all these big priced winners but couldn’t find the time to tell us about it beforehand, only wishing to come on and gloat about it afterwards…
As I said I put up tips on here BEFORE the races so I feel you accusing me of being a keyboard cowboy and a troll is quite laughable.. I’d say it was the other way around
Well done if you did manage to back only one per race (in which case your stats are very, very impressive) but perhaps you’d be honest enough to admit that these were not your only bets in these races? and post your other bets in these race as well? ante-post or otherwise. If not and you genuinely only backed one per race that all I can say is well played sir
If not I would suggest that at best you’re a cherry picker and at worst just an aftertimer… a 20-1 winner suddenly becomes much less impressive if you’re backing 1 or 2 in the race at the same time, in which case it becomes a 10-1 or 5-1 shot..
I agree, in principle, that after timing is an easy game to play and whilst you may find it frustrating, it shouldn’t annoy you that other people have done well and not shared their bets or research into why they have made those bets. Of course places like this exist so those conversations can take place and I am all for it, but I haven’t been around since Cheltenham for reasons that are no concern of yours.
My issue is this sense of entitlement you have in what you are saying. An attitude of ‘if you have winners and don’t share them then they either didn’t happen, you were not decent enough to tell us beforehand, and you probably backed every horse in the race’.
Think what you want to think
Who really cares lol
Just believe what people say they done on here, it makes no difference AFTER the race what someone sais
Charlie may very well have did everything he said, so i think its wrong to be verbally slamming him
Pretty sure youv had sly digs at my posts before about never posting losers even after extensive pre race posts proving losers…..
So like i said its easier to just believe the winners, the posts dont really matter AFTER the race unless its from an analytical perspective
Youll never know who is or isnt being truthful so your better taking it as everyone is than everyone isnt
Who really cares lol
Just believe what people say they done on here, it makes no difference AFTER the race what someone sais
Charlie may very well have did everything he said, so i think its wrong to be verbally slamming him
Pretty sure youv had sly digs at my posts before about never posting losers even after extensive pre race posts proving losers…..
So like i said its easier to just believe the winners, the posts dont really matter AFTER the race unless its from an analytical perspective
Youll never know who is or isnt being truthful so your better taking it as everyone is than everyone isnt
Well said.
Personally I don’t mind posts like Charlie’s, hasn’t done anyting wrong that I can see. It’s only natural for punters who’ve had a good week to want to tell people about it now and again. Am sure most tell the truth about this sort of thing. However, when others (rightly or wrongly) only remember/see a punter putting up winning bets after the event; you can’t blame them for being sceptical. Especially about the number/amount lost in bets we don’t hear about. Of course there are profitable punters out there who don’t put their bets up beforehand. But screenshots only prove that particular bet, they do not prove he’s a successful/profit making punter, neither does it prove he/she has not had many more losing bets.
“Aftertiming” is not always about telling porkies about claimed winners, it’s often about the punter giving a false impression of being a better punter than he actually is (what’s missing). Although am sure many gamblers do this unintentionally. Part of the psychology of a gambler is to convince himself winning bets are his skill and losing bets are luck and/or forgotten.
Value Is EverythingSurely this has gone on too long?
Personally, I haven’t got any problem with people listing their winners before or after the race. What is there to gain from making up winners?
I have much more difficulty with the continued rants about after timing. Only one person appears to be bothered to the point of raising the issue over and over again.
It is effectively suggesting contributors are liars with no proof. Is that really the way a forum should be operating?
I agree, in principle, that after timing is an easy game to play and whilst you may find it frustrating, it shouldn’t annoy you that other people have done well and not shared their bets or research into why they have made those bets. Of course places like this exist so those conversations can take place and I am all for it, but I haven’t been around since Cheltenham for reasons that are no concern of yours.
My issue is this sense of entitlement you have in what you are saying. An attitude of ‘if you have winners and don’t share them then they either didn’t happen, you were not decent enough to tell us beforehand, and you probably backed every horse in the race’.
Think what you want to think
But you haven’t answered my question, about whether you backed more than one in each race?
Personally I don’t mind posts like Charlie’s, hasn’t done anyting wrong that I can see. It’s only natural for punters who’ve had a good week to want to tell people about it now and again. Am sure most tell the truth about this sort of thing. However, when others (rightly or wrongly) only remember/see a punter putting up winning bets after the event; you can’t blame them for being sceptical. Especially about the number/amount lost in bets we don’t hear about. Of course there are profitable punters out there who don’t put their bets up beforehand. But screenshots only prove that particular bet, they do not prove he’s a successful/profit making punter, neither does it prove he/she has not had many more losing bets.
“Aftertiming” is not always about telling porkies about claimed winners, it’s often about the punter giving a false impression of being a better punter than he actually is (what’s missing). Although am sure many gamblers do this unintentionally. Part of the psychology of a gambler is to convince himself winning bets are his skill and losing bets are luck and/or forgotten.
Totally agree ginger. You said it much better than I said it.
Surely this has gone on too long?
Personally, I haven’t got any problem with people listing their winners before or after the race. What is there to gain from making up winners?
I have much more difficulty with the continued rants about after timing. Only one person appears to be bothered to the point of raising the issue over and over again.
It is effectively suggesting contributors are liars with no proof. Is that really the way a forum should be operating?
Well I agree I have probably gone on about it too much, however if you look on the betfair forum there is a whole thread devoted to aftertiming, so I’m not the only person to be bothered by it.
Anyway I apologise if I offended anyone, it’s not my business to be a “troll,” comments like “cockroach” are probably going too far, but I just wish people would stop aftertiming winners
According to my poor use of maths Charlie is claiming +£73 to a level stake for the royal ascot meeting, forgive me for being sceptical when he’s posted no tips before the meeting, lol.
Surely this has gone on too long?
Personally, I haven’t got any problem with people listing their winners before or after the race. What is there to gain from making up winners?
I have much more difficulty with the continued rants about after timing. Only one person appears to be bothered to the point of raising the issue over and over again.
It is effectively suggesting contributors are liars with no proof. Is that really the way a forum should be operating?
I only come in here every so often, but every time I do come in it appears to be the same person calling people out for their bets or aftertiming, and very obviously singling certain posters out for criticism. What is also very noticeable is that he will dish out praise to one certain poster to the point of it being sycophantic, and that will actually congratulate that poster on his own aftertimes. This was particularly noticeable during the Cheltenham discussion, I commented on it and got called a troll for my troubles. I find it all very intriguing to say the least.
As someone who can only aftertime losers, I think it is worth pointing out that aftertiming is a natural occurrence where there is talk of gambling, it is unavoidable, and far less a crime than the trolling which this poster is continually guilty of.
Personally I don’t mind posts like Charlie’s, hasn’t done anyting wrong that I can see. It’s only natural for punters who’ve had a good week to want to tell people about it now and again. Am sure most tell the truth about this sort of thing. However, when others (rightly or wrongly) only remember/see a punter putting up winning bets after the event; you can’t blame them for being sceptical. Especially about the number/amount lost in bets we don’t hear about. Of course there are profitable punters out there who don’t put their bets up beforehand. But screenshots only prove that particular bet, they do not prove he’s a successful/profit making punter, neither does it prove he/she has not had many more losing bets.
“Aftertiming” is not always about telling porkies about claimed winners, it’s often about the punter giving a false impression of being a better punter than he actually is (what’s missing). Although am sure many gamblers do this unintentionally. Part of the psychology of a gambler is to convince himself winning bets are his skill and losing bets are luck and/or forgotten.
To be fair to Judge, my immediate reaction when seeing Charlie’s list of big price winners was ‘I don’t remember him putting any of these up on the actual threads’
Perhaps he’s gone on about it a little too much, but I think his actual point is a valid one in that it just comes across as boastful aftertiming.
However, when others (rightly or wrongly) only remember/see a punter putting up winning bets after the event; you can’t blame them for being sceptical.
MOM,
My post wasn’t criticising Judge.Value Is EverythingMy highlight:
Quality of sprints and group races generally.
Genuineness of Big Orange and Highland Reel.Low points:
Uneven watering.
Media sweeping under the carpet of the USA runners/Clenuterol issue.
Coolmore’s questionable team tactics.Value Is EverythingSurely this has gone on too long?
Personally, I haven’t got any problem with people listing their winners before or after the race. What is there to gain from making up winners?
I have much more difficulty with the continued rants about after timing. Only one person appears to be bothered to the point of raising the issue over and over again.
It is effectively suggesting contributors are liars with no proof. Is that really the way a forum should be operating?
I only come in here every so often, but every time I do come in it appears to be the same person calling people out for their bets or aftertiming, and very obviously singling certain posters out for criticism. What is also very noticeable is that he will dish out praise to one certain poster to the point of it being sycophantic, and that will actually congratulate that poster on his own aftertimes. This was particularly noticeable during the Cheltenham discussion, I commented on it and got called a troll for my troubles. I find it all very intriguing to say the least.
As someone who can only aftertime losers, I think it is worth pointing out that aftertiming is a natural occurrence where there is talk of gambling, it is unavoidable, and far less a crime than the trolling which this poster is continually guilty of.
Well as I said earlier I don’t like to offend anyone, perhaps if you could name the poster that I was being a sycophant towards that would be helpful, that’s the first time I’ve ever been accused of that lol
Personally I don’t mind posts like Charlie’s, hasn’t done anyting wrong that I can see. It’s only natural for punters who’ve had a good week to want to tell people about it now and again. Am sure most tell the truth about this sort of thing. However, when others (rightly or wrongly) only remember/see a punter putting up winning bets after the event; you can’t blame them for being sceptical. Especially about the number/amount lost in bets we don’t hear about. Of course there are profitable punters out there who don’t put their bets up beforehand. But screenshots only prove that particular bet, they do not prove he’s a successful/profit making punter, neither does it prove he/she has not had many more losing bets.
“Aftertiming” is not always about telling porkies about claimed winners, it’s often about the punter giving a false impression of being a better punter than he actually is (what’s missing). Although am sure many gamblers do this unintentionally. Part of the psychology of a gambler is to convince himself winning bets are his skill and losing bets are luck and/or forgotten.
To be fair to Judge, my immediate reaction when seeing Charlie’s list of big price winners was ‘I don’t remember him putting any of these up on the actual threads’
Perhaps he’s gone on about it a little too much, but I think his actual point is a valid one in that it just comes across as boastful aftertiming.
I’m glad I’m not alone here, noone likes to be the lone voice crying in the wilderness
+£73 on one meeting is astounding, I think most gamblers would be luck to make those sort of numbers in a year
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.