Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I’m not sure who an early abandonment helps especially if the course could be fit on the day, if it’s abandoned you don’t go so if in doubt and don’t want to take the risk don’t go.
Don’t like Big Macs idea, what if covers are down? You can’t beat local knowledge and prefer them to give it every opportunity within reason.
In any case an early abandonment would allow the BBC to re schedule some crap film early.Since my analogue signal was switched off about 4 weeks ago C4 coverage has become obsolete, there’s no point in watching it now, the pictures are several seconds behind RUK & ATR and the picture quality is lower eg I saw some recorded C4 coverage from Saturday and when Nomecheki fell at the first this could not be seen on their coverage and was called some time after the event by a very hesitant Simon Holt, meanwhile on RUK coverage it could be clearly seen and was immediately called by Richard Hoiles.
I would imagine C4 coverage will have a natural progression to ending in about 2012 to co-incide with the end of analogue terrestrial coverage throughout the country.
Hopefully the BHA will pull their finger out by then
As a side issue, not one that should neccesarily concern the BHA, as it quite rightly didn’t for the posters excellent revised schedule above there were also 2 excellent Irish meetings which co-incidentally went off at the same times as the British meetings.
This meant that viewers were denied the pleasure of a lot of action and this would have a knock on effect for the levy.
I concentrated on the British action and failed to see any of the Irish apart from the opening and closing races, I’m sure some viewers and punters though concentrated on the Irish action at the expense of the British.
I’ve no doubt that if the revised schedule above had been in place not only would it have been better for British racing it would have allowed a certain amount of action from Ireland to be viewed instead of hardly any.However we need a Stewards Enquiry – how did Alan Homes move from three votes to one on the final day?
I’m surprised he got any votes, never heard of him!
After that motley effort from the BBC last night it deserves a few more votes, a few seconds voice over from I think Hugh McIlvaney and a few words from Robert Winston (the eminent professor not the jockey) plus no mention of Mick Kinane’s retirement.
After this event, snooker even made the main news on BBC1 with an update and latest score, don’t know what championship it was but must have been important as it was on BBC2 at the time.
What has racing done to deserve such treatment?
For God’s sake take The National off them.Therefore he was always going to nit-pick and find fault.
I suspect his opinion is based on slightly more facts than yours unless you’ve heard differently.
I’ve heard similar stories about these "visits" from others and you may find it acceptable that an integrity chief is going around with no basic understanding of the sport and the assumption that trainers are likely to know how their horses are going to run, I don’t.Mark Johnston states his stable received a visit from the woman for some "coaching" regards inside information etc and she made a complete fool of herself with absolutely no basic understanding of what she was talking about or the sport of racing horses.
Regards setting up an integrity business with Apiafi, Johnston finds it hard to believe why anyone would want to consult her regards integrity as she was clueless.
Another embarrassment I’m afraid for the BHA.Think the guy (Alan Lee) is overrated, comes out with some right crap when on the ATR Sunday Forum. I would hazard a guess that his assumption that the Fallon/Balding interview will be one of racing’s must see highlights of the year is well wide of the mark.
The games easy after the event, unfortunately we can’t bet based on hindsight, most of us would be millionaires if you could
For anyone who didn’t fancy the beast there was plenty to lay at his prohibitive odds.A rule Venetia Williams has been rather good at exploiting, along with the strange rule (IMO) that the winners of amateur-only handicaps don’t incur a penalty nto in open company.
Also applies to apprentice & conditional races. Yet, despite receiving no penalty they still go up the handicap the same as winning any other race, a strange contradiction, surely it should be either both or neither.
No penalty can hardly be an incentive to run in these races as I have heard put forward by some, as only one horse can win them, the prize money is peanuts and not every horse is suited by running again quickly.Back Among Friends at Chepstow on the way from the paddock gets rid of his jockey, bolts, runs into rails and a lorry and has to be put down yet while all this is going on bookies manage to get his price down to 14/1 to enable a 5p deduction, wouldn’t you expect it to drift like it did on Betfair? Wonder what fraction of the odds they were going a place as well.
Well done lads, hope you enjoy it.Meanwhile, the BHA, racecourses and the racing media say and do nothing.
Presumably the BBC chose the system of balloting the sports editors for the nominees, a good idea? probably not.
Didn’t think there was much wrong with the system they used for many years and worked well just based on viewers votes.
We all know where the BBC stand on racing, did it get 30 secs coverage in last years programme.
At least with AP not in the running we don’t need to waste our time watching the rubbish.Yes, I think so. There should be a false running rail rather than arrows with big gaps around them. You yourself said cones were unacceptable but find arrows acceptable it seems.
Rob and AP have highlighted much of what I would have said but in addition:
1 – The H marker is pretty clear if you ask me. Indeed, every other jockey that has ridden there since the track realignment seems to agree in that no one has gone the wrong way before. Since the reconfiguration of the track prior to the start of the 2008/09 season, there have been 72 hurdle races with a total of 821 declared runners and 6 NHF races with 88 declared runners. Only one jockey has taken the wrong course.
2 – The ‘head down’ argument used by some on here suggests the tape would make no difference.
3 – Jockeys are paid professionals. You don’t see loads of tape all over a showjumping arena to denote the right course
4 – Cones are a nightmare – potential danger of being kicked up, horses stepping slightly inside them and therefore taking the wrong course etc.Who should we blame for the Folkestone fiasco Paul?
The Jockey? The Horse? Both? The Course?
Where was the false running rail?Turning it round what right do the racecourses have to tell the bookmakers what terms to offer – that would effectively be a constraint of trade. At the end of the the day "customers" have a choice – they don’t have to bet if they feel they are being ripped off. If enough punters voted with their feet the bookmakers would soon review their policies.
I wouldn’t know what power racecourses have, presumably they can refuse bookmakers permission to bet or install some Betfair terminals for that choice you suggest?
Are you saying enough punters are not voting with their feet? Do the "crowds" at Kempton and other all weather tracks not tell a story?
What about the millions of punters being ripped off in betting shops having to accept 4/6 not knowing it was 7/4 on Betfair or 8/1 when 24/1 on Betfair?
Has betting on horses not gone down in recent times?
It cannot be good for the sport when it is trying to attract people to the game that they are ripped off if they do turn to the sport."Come racing get the value".
In the 6.20 at Kempton last night Sandy Par ran loose for miles and it was highly questionable that he should be allowed to run yet is price remained unmoved at only 8/1 with the thieves while 3 times that price for good money was available on Betfair at the off.
Why are the BHA & Racecourses allowing their customers to ripped off by this scum, if they can’t even be bothered to get the basics right why bother with "Racing for Change"? It’s laughable.
