Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Craig
If you are not already familiar with his endeavours, Google Robert Tracinski. In my view the most consistent libertarian currently writing and an excellent commentator on US politics.
(I entirely share your view of President Obama. Some, of course, dislike him – or indeed support him – because he is black. That is utterly irrelevant to his worth. What makes him everything you say is that he is a collectivist with highly dubious associates.)
Maxilon
"It’s noticeable that hasn’t been an interesting book on gambling on horse racing – bar Nevvo’s brace of Marmite hagiographies – in a decade."
"Interesting" is of course not a quality of a publication per se, but a matter of the relationship between the reader’s mind and what is read.
Amusement, thrills, delight at an author’s ability to describe, etc. are all ways in which time spent reading can be repaid positively. But in respect of books on betting on horses arguably the most important is whether they provide the reader with insight which changes the way he or she bets.
From this last, specific, perspective, I agree with you but would go further and not make your exceptions – I’ve read nothing in the last ten years of any worth. Indeed, looking back over the thirty plus years I’ve been interested in backing horses, there has only been one book which has changed the way I bet, a compilation of letters and articles written under the pseudonym Che Van der Wheil, originally published in the Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book, and brought together in 1993 under the title "The Golden Years of Van der Wheil".
I first met Bernard Donoghue, as he was then, in the late 1960s when he was a lecturer in the Government Department of the London School of Economics and I was one of his students. He was a lively and interesting lecturer and had just co-authored a book about Labour politicians with Bill Rogers.
After that, like many Labour people, he found the lure of personal wealth irresistable, and with him it culminated in getting into bed (metaphorically speaking) with the crook Robert Maxwell. Since then he has continued on the same tack and as a result now has no reputation left worth a penny.
But he is no worse than many other Labour people, of whom the Home Secretary is the latest sow to have her snout in the public trough, even if it has been "within the rules".
The Tories are no better, but to someone whose relation was actually among those at the meeting in 1900 which founded the Labour Party as the Labour Representation Committee, one doesn’t expect any better from them. But the sight of those in theory trying to make life a little better for the ordinary man and woman enriching themselves dubiously turns my guts.
Incidentally, Donoughue may for all I know offer economic advice, but he is not an economist. He’s just a chap whose influence flows from being yet another fly around the dung heap that is New Labour – a peddler of pull.
Clivex
Another clear out at Chelsea as the Russian prat demonstrates his incompetence. Another potless season still looks a good bet to me. I’m not even certain Chelsea will finish in the top four.
Formath
Cheers.
I think the biggest problem with VDW is the tendency of those who haven’t studied it at all (judging by their comments) to offer trenchant comments about it – still, in many areas of life the ignorant are not slow in sounding off. On here, on the thread started by Mtoto, it seemed to be principally those who have given up trying to find winners and instead look for something called "value" (which of course exists, but not in the way most value-hunters misguidedly believe – "true" odds and all that rubbish).
Formath
"I have no idea as I was never part of the ‘VDW circus."
Surely you wrote one of the booklets on VDW published by Tony Peach? If so, doesn’t that make you one of the principal performers?
Goodlife
Thanks very much. It seems there are several ways of achieving what I want to do.
I’ve come across a problem with the site which I suspect may be down to my ignorance rather than the Post.
I access the site via Firefox, and currently it is loading all right. I then click on "result" for one of today’s races and the details pop up in a new window. But I cannot see a way to print out what is displayed in that window. Probably I’m missing something obvious, and would be grateful to be told how to do it.
Firefox
Thanks. I shall be adding my two pennyworth. A decent site replaced by one which is, in my experience so far, literally unusable.
Firefox
I tried emailing the RP at the address you’ve put up – info@racingpost.com – but the message came back as undeliverable! Maybe they are getting too many adverse comments.
"Liverpool vs Fulham
5-0"Equitrack
You clearly haven’t cottoned on to the fact that Fulham have one of the best defences in the Premiership. Certainly the best outside the "big four".
Having said that, they will no doubt get slaughtered at Villa next weekend!
MDeering
"Does one need a thick, hard skin to cope with tremendous loss?"
Isn’t the key in your penultimate word? Surely one should stake proportionately all the time – proportionate both to one’s wealth/income (of course) but also to one’s betting, so that no losing bet creates a problem. No point steadily achieving a doubling of one’s bank with, say, a 5% of bank staking strategy and suddenly putting 50% of that bank on a horse one feels has an especially good chance of winning and, when it loses, seeing the returns for several weeks or months careful betting lost in a minute or two.
Maxilon
It is not all bad news. Those who live within their means, save responsibly, and are competent in their jobs will be fine, though some may have to change employers and all will have to bear part of the burden of bailing out the feckless through higher taxes.
The real crime is that those few in SOME of the banks, and those who thought it "clever" to put their savings in foreign banks for an extra percent or two interest over what the Chelsea or Skipton Building Societies and similar, well run UK financial institutions offer will demand to be bailed out by the responsible majority. And this principle-less, gutless government, led by the man who, single-handedly, is the architect of most of the UK’s economic difficulties by years of socialist spend, borrow and tax policies, is so desperate for votes that is responding to these demands rather than letting people bear the consequences of their decisions. (Not that the chinless wonder who leads the Conservative Party wouldn’t do exactly the same – another opportunistic "Blair" type without principles, though in fairness probably more honest. But there again, who isn’t more honest than Blair?)
Aragon
Yes, it is quite large and, being a bungalow, more expensive to heat than a house with a similar number of rooms. I suspect British Gas have gone over the top with £139 a month, as I am currently in credit with them for £168. But with the two most expensive quarters coming up, they may be right. If I’m in significant credit come April, though, I’ll be seeking a refund and a drop in the monthly sum.
Two personal observations.
Yesterday I received a letter from British Gas advising me that my monthly standing order for gas supply, which was £70 until a year or so ago and then was increased to £82, needed to be increased to £139. That makes something of a hole in my "discretionary spending", and I have no reason to think British Gas are picking on me.
A few Saturdays ago I was in Southend for the day and found the public convenience in the shopping mall closed. The first suitable alternative was not MacDonalds (whose loos I alway find clean) but a betting shop. After using their facilities I thought I ought to have a token bet, and duly lost £2 on the big handicap of the day. But the point of all this is that at around 3.30pm on a Saturday, when I entered the betting shop (at the sea end of Southend’s main shopping street) I increased the number of clients from three to four. By the time I had used the facilities, glanced at the runners, placed my bet and sat on a stool to watch the race, there was only one other client in the shop. Now, maybe they bet big, and bet early in Southend, but the amount of business transacted mid afternoon wouldn’t have gone close to covering the salaries of the staff.
As the recession bites, I think the consequences for racing will be the obvious – a drop in owners’ investments, marginal trainers going out of business as a consequence, and a cut back in betting leading to the closure of many betting shops.
I don’t see how any blame can fairly be laid at Faldo’s door.
First, his picks. Casey, who had an ok Ryder Cup but should have won his singles, was almost every golf commentor’s first pick, and uncontroversial. Poulter justified his selection in full, and it is extremely unlikely that Monty or Darren would have done as well.
Second, the reasons we lost. Principally because two of the top European players, Garcia and Harrington, were well below their best. Reasons have been advanced – Garcia recently not well, Harrington knackered after his performances in the Majors – but clearly neither felt he should withdraw and give fitter/less knackered players a chance. No way Faldo can be held accountable for such sub-standard performances. Secondarily, superb play by several of the US team in the singles – Oliver Wilson, for example, played very well but was down by the turn to an opponent who played the first nine in 29. Faldo, Monty or Seve at their best would have had difficulty living with that.
I thought it was an excellent, competitive Ryder Cup after a couple of one-sided ones, and see no reason for embarrassment at the result or recriminations about Faldo’s captaincy.
