Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Agree re- missing the spectacle. Mind you, some dross used to turn up in it…
It was all dross last year.
And Main Sequence gets beaten by a horse who barely seemed Listed class, with an OR of 101.
Just how bad were the fields beaten by Camelot in the classics last year?
Apparently the attack happened at about 8.30 but he wasnt found until about 10pm.
The attack was at 8:30am and the body discovered at 10am, not pm.
There have been several attacks on bookmakers in south east London of late- one Paddy Power branch was robbed twice in the space of a month. Both incidents came at closing time. Another Paddy Power shop and a Hills both had attempted robberies as soon as they opened. A Stan James was robbed at half eight in the morning, too.
The trend appears to be that robbers are targeting shops either as they open or close, as there are fewer people around at that time. Perhaps if bookmakers opened and closed at more sensible times, such incidents wouldn’t occur. I remember when bookies were only open from 11:00 until 18:00; those days are long gone, thanks to the arrival of FOBTs.
By the way, did anybody else read the piece on the wretched FIXED odds betting terminals in the Grauniad the other day?
Heard they told staff not to talk to anyone about the incident in hope it wouldn’t reach the papers, some despicable people in the betting industry.
Indeed.
I thought it odd that a man being mauled to death by dogs made the national news, yet another killed by his fellow human didn’t. The murder in Morden only made the local paper and the Racing Post- the main news channels, both on television and in print, completely ignored it.
Now why would the bookmakers want to keep this quiet, I wonder?
Greedy bookmakers update:
Corals expect a manager or deputy manager to open a shop and single man until 1pm, at which point another member of staff comes in. You have two workers until four o’clock. The person who opened the shop then goes home and the other is left to single man until 18:30, at which point a cashier comes in. So there is one member of staff on their own from four until half six. Makes sense, especially as the evening meetings overlap with the afternoon ones at this time of year.
Even better is Paddy Power’s new scheme, "Operation Panther". Shop managers are being asked to visit rival betting shops, pose as normal customers and target big-spending FOBT customers. The latter group are to be offered Paddy Power’s VIP gold cards (a bit like Ladbrokes’ Odds-On cards, but limited to machine players) and- wait for it- free carbonated drinks if they defect to Paddy Power. Already, several managers have been either threatened with physical violence or actually hit.
Cityscape palpably failed to give his true running, while the rest of them were just Group 3/ Listed class performers, so this was hardly the strongest Group One race ever run.
However, Farhh could do no more than win as he liked and looks set for a successful season, given that last year’s crop of three year olds was moderate; he’ll take a lot of beating if, as expected, he’s kept away from the same owners’ Dawn Approach later in the season.
I’ve decided to watch it on mute today, apart from when O’Brien and Gosden were being interviewed. It’s been far better without having to listen to the constant drivel from the presenters.
Perhaps it has something to do with UK racing taking precedence in the event of race times clashing? It may be in their respective contracts, although I’m only guessing.
They have now been asked to spy on competitors shops during the day.
The worst thing is that Ladbrokes are perceived to be falling behind in terms of customer service, yet their policy on staffing is no different from that of their rivals: have a manager or assistant manager on their own, with a cashier only during peak periods. How having such skeletal staffing is meant to improve customer service, I have no idea. As robert99 implies in his post, surely the firms out to be spending more on frontline staff than on completely needless and unjustified executive bonuses.
The only reason why bookmakers don’t have three members of staff all day, every day, is because of corporate greed. Still, what’s new?
There’s no way in hell bookmakers should be manned by only one person. Seems that numbers behind the counter is far from being a priority.
I have taken a great deal of interest in the way bookmakers treat their staff over the last couple of years (since I started dating a girl employed in a betting shop) and I’m not too impressed by the demands placed on shop staff.
Many shop staff work on their own ("single man", in the bookies’ lingo) for several hours per day. With Corals, Hills and Paddy Power, this tends to be in the morning, while Ladbrokes seem to have staff on their own in the evening. As well as taking bets and then translating them onto the system, staff are expected to make tea and coffee, keep the shop tidy and intercept any potentially underage customers, all while mingling with customers on the shop floor.
As if this wasn’t enough with which to contend, Paddy Power run their "Happy Hour" (all bets are best odds guaranteed) between noon and 1pm, with cashiers generally not starting until 13:10. So shop managers have a queue of customers who want prices on all of their Lucky 63s, plus others waiting to be paid their FOBT tickets, all during the peak lunch-time period and whilst working on their own- and then staff get sacked for not noticing a teenager entering the shop.
Utterly ridiculous.
What were the names of the 3 horses who got beat at the same Chester May meeting and then, one went on to win the Derby, another the Arc and the third was a St Leger winner?
I’d say we’re looking at Quest For Fame (beaten by Belmez in the Chester Vase), Saumarez and Michelozzo in 1990.
… input from Cunningham, on the other poorly researched content aimed at children.
I thought that Cunningham’s analysis
was
aimed at children.
Insomniac ones.
Not sure about the stable’s poor form? Strikes me they have been winning some decent races with outsiders and losing with the seemingly more fancied ones. This has prompted some commentators to suggest the stable was in flying form.
Said commentators need shooting. No winners from the stable’s last twelve runners, with
both Noble Mission and Kyllachy Rise (the latter admittedly in the face if a very stiff task, although that is balanced by Noble Mission going off favourite) both last in their respective races yesterday, doesn’t exactly constitute "flying form". The stable’s last winner was on 26th April.Hot Snap was well supported today
She was backed this morning but drifted on course.
So you’re ignoring the fact that she was green, backward and still beat the Guineas first and fourth comfortably on only her second racecourse appearance? As I said, she may have been flattered but I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt for now, given the stable’s poor form.
I would suggest the runner up is probably the one to take out of the race.
I’d say that Hot Snap is the one to watch in the future.
While there’s a possibility that she was flattered by her Nell Gwyn success, the fact that Sky Lantern has won today, with Winning Express beaten a nose for third, serves to underline the strength of that particular classic trial. Maybe the favourite found this race coming too quickly or perhaps the ground was too firm; it must be noted that both of Cecil’s runners at HQ yesterday finished last so, despite Chigun’s fine effort in the Dahlia Stakes, the yard may be under a bit of a cloud.
Whatever the reasons for her disappointing showing today, I’m more than willing to give Hot Snap another chance.
Just had a look at the five-day entries and the intriguing one is Kyllachy Rise. He travelled very well in his maiden at Newbury until blowing up in the final furlong but, even so, he has plenty to find on the book; surely Sir Henry Cecil hasn’t lost his marbles? I remember the great trainer sending out Distant View as a once-raced maiden (Kyllachy Rise has had two starts) and that subsequent Sussex Stakes winner ran creditably to finish fifth to Mister Baileys, so perhaps a small each-way investment may be prudent.
