Forum Replies Created
- Posts
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.
It is now being reported that Keiran Burke has requested that the owner remove Hunt Ball from his stables.
I wonder if Paddy Power is going to reimburse Mr Burke for loss of income, too?
… his instinct is to just keep talking rather than picking out a telling detail or insight and allowing viewers to digest it.
I strongly suspect that he’s "riding to orders" there; it’s probably an offence punishable by death to have periods of silence on TV these days.
How interesting that this week’s biggest racing topic hasn’t got a dedicated thread on this forum.
The British racing industry thinks that Fixed Odds Betting Terminals should remain untouched.
Think about that for a minute or two. Those who run this venerable sport, responsible for its long-term survival, genuinely believe that having B2 machines in betting shops is in the best interests of the sport. This is as blatant a case of short-term thinking as you’ll ever find.
Bookmakers pay substantial amounts of money to show live racing in betting shops (none of the betting shop managers to whom I have spoken knows exactly how much this figure is and calls/emails to their head offices didn’t elicit much response, sadly). The major high street bookmakers have all revealed that they make more money from FOBTs than they do from betting on horse racing.
Throw in the incessant barrage of virtual racing (no thought required from the punter’s perspective- just pick your lucky number and go) and the interminable increase in Self Service Betting Terminals (pop into your local Paddy Power shop and see how much space which was once dedicated to the Racing Post shop display has now been given over to SSBTs and virtual racing screens) and it is clear that bookmakers are placing less and less importance on racing.
Apart from during a dedicated racing programme, when did you last see betting on horses advertised? All the bookies’ ads are for online roulette and football betting. There is a reason for this: these are products with a high profit margin, certainly higher than horse racing can provide. The final win/loss figure is why any successful punter will soon find his bets limited, as has been discussed in various threads on this forum. Bookmaking is dead: the industry is now run by accountants and slave drivers (why are betting shop staff often pressurised into working 14 or 15 hour shifts?)
There will inevitably come a time when the bookmakers will turn around and say that betting on horse racing does not justify the outlay on live pictures. If punters are spending more money on FOBTs, virtual racing and football coupons (which very rarely win- how many times has one team let you down on an acca?), why should the bookies pay to have live racing shown?
It is most disconcerting that those responsible for safeguarding the future of our sport are naive enough to think that this day will never come. Mind you, most of them will have made their money by then and probably couldn’t care less.
Money.
Cecil without the old owner-breeders and Sheikh Mohammed? Nada.
Stoute without the above and HRH the Aga Khan? Ditto.
Aiden O’Brien sans Coolmore? Don’t think so.The only trainers to have truly changed the game since WWII are Vincent O’Brien and Martin Pipe.
…folk who are not the least interested in racing just propping up the bar all day and maybe taking a sideways glance at the TV to see if their lucky number came up.
Careful, now. Without these people, betting shops wouldn’t exist.
I have not noticed anyone catching out Barry Greragty as an habitual liar before, so why would he start now? Or perhaps you believe that he is so untutored in the way of the horse in general, and this horse in particular, that his opinion is due no regard at all. Or perhaps you had a better feel of the horse’s style of running from your view on the rails (or the sofa in front of the TV), than did BG from the horse’s back.
So the jockey was being completely honest after the Tingle Creek, was he? Nonsense: he knew full well that Sprinter Sacre could beat Moscow Flyer on the bit; he was just trying to be political.