Forum Replies Created
- Posts
It’s easy to bet at William Hill? Not if you want to get more than £25 on, it isn’t.
Y’all might as well legalize slot machines and turn your less successful tracks into racinos.
We’ve already tried that with our betting shops. It’s been great for the bookmakers, but not so beneficial to racing.
In other words there was an element of everyone, management and staff, all working together with give and take on both sides. On the other side there was flexibility when we did want time off – I considered it an adult approach to working hours.
Your erstwhile employers sound like a paragon of virtue compared to the bookmakers, judging by what my chats with betting shop employees have revealed.
It’s interesting that you mention (and represent) USDAW, Kenh.
My partner is an assistant manager for one of the big three bookies and she has found that many of her colleagues have joined a different union, Community.
Obviously, this fragmentation of the workforce is not a good thing for employees.
Quite why there should be no all-weather racing once the turf has started I don’t understand.
The most obvious reason is because the already meagre levy funding has to be stretched even further to subsidise these meetings, with their pitiful attendance levels.
A liberalisation of gaming regulations has allowed punters to put money on sports and lotteries of all kinds, and the cash has just drained away from the horses.
And the same thing is going to happen here in a few years’ time.
….In the words of Channel 4 mock Japanese Gameshow "Banzai" – "BET….NOW!!!"
How long before one of the major bookmakers has Mr Cheeky Chappie imploring us all to do just that?
The traditional two day Kempton Easter meeting has been broken up with the Magnolia and Rosebery being run last Saturday and, as far as I’m aware based on last year, the Queen’s Prize, Snowdrop and rebranded, watered-down Easter & Masaka due to be run on Saturday 13th April
Thanks for the response, Drone. It’s a pity that the early Classic trials have withered so badly over the last couple of decades, but switching them to the artificial surface can’t have helped.
I think it was something to do with the bookmakers saying there were too many meetings
Any evidence to support that statement?
I would agree that the field for the world’s richest race was very average. But to say that the race has therefore failed in it’s ambition is to misunderstand that ambition.
The problem is that if the race continues on its current downward spiral in quality terms, there will come a point where nobody pays any attention to Dubai on its most prestigious raceday.
It’s my assertion that with the plethora of alternative betting ‘opportunities’ now available, bookmakers will shortly find it beneficial to distance themselves from racing.
I concur wholeheartedly, betlarge; in fact, I have been asking all my friends and colleagues to refrain from betting on virtual racing and FOBTs because we can’t be too far from the day when bookies decide that paying to show live racing in their shops isn’t worth their while and stop showing live racing pictures.
Being a racing fan first and foremost, as opposed to a punter, I would rather see racing find a way of funding itself without the levy; the question, as it has been for the last few decades, is exactly how this can be done.
Gladiateur
Frankel has never traveled outside GB, nevermind to the desert.He has never raced against the best in the world and he has never races beyond 1&1/4 miles on GRASS.So we cannot answer your question; much as we would like to support your fellow against "that lot"You don’t half post some rubbish.
The point of my post was to illustrate what a bad renewal of the world’s most valuable race we had just seen; the Dubai World Cup hasn’t featured the world’s best horses on a regular basis and has, therefore, failed in its ambition, in my opinion.
Far too many meetings with far too many races all on Saturday afternoon, 8 including Dubai.
Races clashing, split screens and races missed aplenty.Welcome to racing coverage run by bookmakers.
Walk into any high street bookies’ on any day of the week and you’ll see the same thing- non-stop virtual races and other "gambling opportunities" to fill the gaps in between the real races. Why? So that punters have neither the time to assimilate what has gone before nor to prepare for races to come. An ill-prepared punter is a losing punter, and that’s exactly what those nice bookmaker chaps want us all to be.
The sooner racing distances itself from these leeches, the better.
<!– m –>http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-ra … t7DaysNews<!– m –>
Progress? Heresy? Is nothing sacred any more? Or does racing have to move with the times?
Insomniac, that’s a very interesting and thought-provoking post.
Let us assume that racehorses are genetically pretty much the same as they were a century ago. Let us also assume that any development in their performance has been brought about by advances in feed, training methods, medication, etc. If the true champions elevate themselves by being far superior to their contemporaries, then surely the champions of today are better than those of the past?
