Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sailing Shoes, everyone makes money from the game, as someone pointed out earlier. If they didn’t, the game wouldn’t be worth a light for those who win in the medium to long term, i.e. net winners: professionals and semi-professionals.
Winning on a particular day would certainly be the "be all and end all", if we lived in a world frozen in time.
I’ve have been making 200 to 300 a week, for a while now; £300 this week, and all from small stakes, as well as having near misses, and put most of it down to improved staking. As somebody else, mentioned in their tagline, it’s as important to control our losses as it is to find winners. <br>Again, this is a recognition that finding winners is not enough. Surely, your common sense will convince you of that.
I won’t be arguing any more about it, because if you can’t see it, you can’t see it. And you will surely feel justified in your own eyes in concluding precisely the same in my regard. But good luck. Arguments are what this forums about, to a large extent, isn’t it. But whoever’s right, it helps all of us to remember that the purpose of an open mind is to close on the truth. One position must be right and the other wrong. I’m sure we both understand that.
<br>Sorry, Sailing Shoes, I see you implied that you are a net winner in taking your calculated risks. But I’m baffled. I wonder why insurance companies bother to employ actuaries, or why they have developed a whole branch of mathematics dealing with probabilities, not just including the time dimension, but with time being the actual pivotal variable.<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 3:36 pm on May 20, 2004)
I have to disagree with you on that one, Sailing Shoes.
On the same basis, neither do I believe "paper betting" is a really effective form of practice – though it obviously must have some merits, by way of preparation for the real deal.
Of course in the event,  you are always pleased if you avoid a loser, but that’s human nature – and not taking the long view that you must, if you aspire to make money at the game. ÂÂÂ
I think that committing real money in a consistent way is another matter altogether; the pressure can affect your thinking. If you’re on a losing run, you can either over-react and rashly commit even more of your dough – because "the balance of your mind has been disturbed!"; or you can either reduce your stakes excessively, so that when you have a winner, even at a decent price, you have underfunded your bet, or pike out altogether and not bet at all for the rest of the day.
I remember watching a great Hagler – Leonard fight I believe Hagler won, but lost the eventual decision. I think people, including the referees wanted Leonard to win it.
But having seen clips of some of Duran’s bouts, I’d have to agree he was awesomely brutal! Leonard must have been some boxer to work him over the second time they met.
Nicely put! You’re certainly a droll lot.
I want to keep ACR1’s wry comment on disk – though, of course, to me, they’re a commendation.
(Edited by Grimes at 11:48 pm on Mar. 20, 2004)
I was rambling on the other day about Best Mate, implying that it would be almost cruel to have him try for a 3rd Gold Cup or even race again; but I’ve been thinking it ‘s probably the pathetic fallacy. So he loses – may be a few times – would he be inconsolable? Particularly, as he’ll always be everyone’s hero – the Irish too, I’m sure, without detracting from their esteem for Himself.
You seem to forget Daily that a fair number of athletes, equine and human hold records for a long time. I suspect Arkle would murder best mate now.
I think at least one of Secretariat’s records – even harder to preserve on the flat – is still held, possibly comfortably, since our Derby winner in that year would have been at the furlong pole when Big Red crossed the line.
That was the way Arkle won. It’ll take more than a few generations before would-be rivals will be able to catch up, I reckon.
Your argument holds for superstars, but Arkle and BR were supernovas. A heck of difference.
True, today is surely the wrong day to be making or questioning such comparisons, but I disagree that comparisons between generations have to be irrelevant.
There was a Scandinavian-American woman called Babe Didrikson Zaharia (her husband was a wrestler), who used to take on men in sports as varied as golf (and I mean pro golf) and boxing, and beat them.  If you don’t know about her, do a Google search. Now she was a super athlete, the likes of which has probably not been seen since in the womens’ ranks. I doubt even Fanny Blankers-Cohen, though she may have been before Babe’s time. (Sometimes, as with football, it evidently is relevant. Although the improvement was thanks largely to the continentals, who applied science to the training and approach).
I believe Babe played in a men’s golf  tournament in Scotland once, and it must have been a severe culture shock to the Scottish men of the day, who would have been used to thinking of the Missus as the "wee wifie"!
A journalist once asked her if there was any game she did *not* like to play. She just snorted, "dolls!"
Incidentally, there have a few been horses in more recent times who were able to run up an extraordinary sequence of top-class races. Falbrav wasn’t too bad was he? But I was always astonished at how Night Nurse and Grundy could keep on running and winning again and again in the same season. In one respect, Sea Biscuit reminds me of William Marshall, the medieval knight, who was fighting "at the sharp end" into his seventies, and had never ever lost a tournament. One of his French hosts during a time when he was in France, the tournaments having been banned here –  nicknamed him the French equivant of something lime "guzzle-guts", and said he spent most of his time between tournaments, sleeping; which was said about Sea Biscuit in the cable TV documentary.
(Edited by Grimes at 12:04 am on Mar. 19, 2004)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 12:08 am on Mar. 19, 2004)
The only horse in the same *universe* as Arkle was the American flat horse, Secretariat.  They raced on tracks in a different dimension. They just *seemed* to be running against adversaries on the same track. Very confusing.
But you won’t get journos to stop comparing Best Mate with Arkle. They latch onto a cliche, however, ill-conceived, and just won’t let it go. It happens all the time in football; a filler, an excuse for not thinking imaginatively for themselves. Private Eye tries to satirise the press’s love of usually quite barmy cliches, but you can’t. It’s beyond satire.
Having said that, it was brilliant to see Best Mate win the Gold Cup again, and the utter joy of his connections. I got the impression that – surely very wisely – Henrietta Knight hoped that he would not be asked to try for a 4th. God forbid that the press should encourage his owner to do so, or Mr Lewis be otherwise tempted to.
It was reported that Tel was *required* by Henrietta to don his battered old trilby to watch the race, but I was disappointed that someone seems to have persuaded him that it might be more seemly if he put a neat dent in the crown. But what a joy to see his face crease up with laughter, when Leslie Graham said Best Mate was a national treasure – as indeed he was himself. And he lurched forward to give a her a smacker. (He probably didn’t lurch at all but I tend to want to guild the lily!!!, where Tel’s concerned). Incidentally, I’d love to see him Brian Blessed sparking off each, particuarly after a few drinks!
<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 6:35 pm on Mar. 18, 2004)
Well, Prince Regent, it’s given me a bit of lift to hear that that Nicholas shares my perspective on our equine friends.
I suppose High Chapp and Falbrav are a bit like Coe -well, Bedford, anyway – and Ovett.
Coe eventually conclusively trounced Ovett in the Olympics, while already holding world records at, I think, two distances. But Bedford, if I remember correctly, held world records, but was often beaten by ostensibly inferior runners.
A matter of horse-racing "Class", I suppose. If he’d worn a monocle (taped in place, I suppose), instead of a Viva Zapata moustache,  perhaps he’d have been a more consistent winner. But then, perhaps his mind was on more ethereal matters, rather than the tawdry trophies that this world offers…. Yes, this time, I am kidding.
<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 9:46 pm on Jan. 15, 2004)
I certainly think that Falbrav should have been rated at least equal top in the previous year, (I must try and find out), having run faster over 12 F than any other horse – in the world, I think it was. And that, by some margin, from my own brief form checks of top horses in Europe. In my opinion a giant, in class, evidently, as well as brilliance.
Not to demean HCh and l’Ancresse, who starred, on the day, they also stand out to me as horses who’d been geared to the one big race, and benefited accordingly.
I don’t want to alarm them – well not unduly – but I agree with Rory’s brief post and essentially each of Venusian’s paragraphs.
The word "handicap" is clearly used in a different sense in these classifications, to its use in its normal context of  estimates of horses’ abilities in terms of class/speed/fitness at a particular point in time,  in relation to more or les imminent races.
Personally, I’m glad displays or even a single display of absolute brilliance is classified in this way, as there are so many other ways in which horses are rated, none of which – many of you will be happy to know – concentrate solely  on maybe just one or two truly outstanding performances.
Incidentally, everyone mentions the Newbuy race, but don’t forget HW’s breaking of the all-age track record at the Curragh as a 2-year old. That must have marked him out as special.
It’s ironical though, when you think that Class seems to be – according to an American’s definition, I believe I read, perhaps on this board – the tenacity with which a horse will pull out more and more, when it is tackled.
I had always been puzzled by the term, as I couldn’t see why it was not simply synonymous with speed. But it seems that HW is an example of an absolutely brilliant  horse at the highest level… and still perhaps relatively lacking class. Although it was said that he was injured, on at least one occasion when he disappointed racegoers and aficionados. Class, it seems, is at a premium with the studs, so *maybe* HW’s value as a sire might be prejudiced, though I wouldn’t bet on it, because, in football terms, I wouldn’t rate HW a Ross County or a Partick Thistle. No offence to those teams.
<br>(Edited by Grimes at 9:43 pm on Jan. 12, 2004)
<br>(Edited by Grimes at 9:45 pm on Jan. 12, 2004)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 9:49 pm on Jan. 12, 2004)
It’s a wonderful feeling when you can bet on a horse, and feel truly confident of its superior class. I felt this with Galileo (not the hurdler). It only lost its last two, its loss to Fantastic Light by a show of heads.
The class of Sporazene’s dam is really impressive, so since he appears to be able to hurdle, I want to risk his flat-breeding class.
I think on page 7, Ian, you said that in your opinion, HW was not an exceptional horse. Well, strictly speaking, that may well be incontrovertible; but as to your judgment in the matter, old chap…aaah…!
You see, very few horses indeed would have broken the all-age track record at a Grade 1 track, as HW did. Does anyone know of any others?
It’s this switching off the lights business that’s really getting me in! Will you promise to switch the lights on again, if HW wins his next race in style, Ian?
Nice one, Ian! I didn’t think it would be long before you beggars came out of the woodwork!
Well, when a monster meets a force of nature (who is also a bit of beast/machine), as I actually feared, it’s not wise to bet on the definitive monster. Not that I would have considered betting on HW at the price.
What I’m kicking myself for is not lumping on DD ew, but doing him in forecasts with horses who, bizarrely, were never "at the races". What happened to Clodovil and Monsieur Bond in the King James, incidentally?
It paid off for you this time, but I still think you have strange disinclination to take the form of group races at face value, as if the horses were habitually as quixotic platers.
If you have a chronic aversion to "tall poppies" as the Aussies say, always looking for angles to disparage the best form in the better races, as I used to do habitually, you can end up like the oogly bird. But have you not found this to be the case – and your success in disparaging HW in this race (though not the last), a welcome departure from the norm?
On the other hand, I have been surprised at the extraordinary acuity of the comments of people in this game, even considering that they live on their wits and learn extremely quickly and shrewdly from experience. Remember Pottsy commenting on how he thought the other horses would have caught up with him, and we’d seen the best of him?
(Edited by Grimes at 6:45 pm on June 17, 2003)
