Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Apologies for coming to this topic so late. I don’t log on to the forum that often nowadays.
Also, I’m not conversant with any changes in the law regarding betting since I last studied (or was lectured on) it – some 45 years ago. BUT –
It always used to be the case that a bet was not a “contract”. It didn’t fulfill all the necessary terms for a legally enforceable contract. So that, if a punter refused to pay his bill, he couldn’t be taken to court and sued. Similarly, a bookmaker couldn’t be sued for breach of contract if it didn’t pay up.Because no ” contract” had been struck. Although there was “offer” & “acceptance”, there wasn’t a clearly defined benefit or deal (can’t quite remember the terminology) clearly available to both parties.
Has this changed?
Couldn’t BET365 just turn around and say “we’re not paying. This is not a legally enforceable contract, so any recourse to the law, no matter how clever a lawyer you hire, is a waste of time. Bets are not legal contracts.”
Maybe the law has changed. Maybe the introduction of Internet betting has somehow led to a change in the legal staus of a bet and one does now constitute a “contract”.
I’d be interested to be updated on this.What a bunch of killjoys! I gather the maximum stake (steak!) allowed on this bet was £5 – hardly enough to lure the mafia in.
Surely everyone who looked at this bet beforehand was aware it was a publicity stunt; anyone having a bet on this probably knew just that and that it was a stitch up. Yet just look at the puritanical outrage it has invoked – just what the bookmakers hoped for I’d guess.
Yet the Gambling Commission is to investigate it! Rather like getting the Pope to hear the first confession of a 5 year-old who’d been running in the school corridor. SHOCK HORROR!!!! WHAT NEXT!!!
Moan about jockeys pulling horses, or doping, or matches being fixed but this is totally OTT. Lighten up for heaven’s sake.
A £5 bet maximum on a fat guy eating a pie! Think about it. Is it worth your outrage and heightened blood-pressure? Can’t you lot enjoy a bit of fun?Oh dear Paul. Although I agree with much of your criticism of Chester, they don’t really add up to a reason to close it.
So many (perhaps most) of the crowd have no interest in the racing! True perhaps, but what would you have them do? Get the gateman to ask them to name two of Lester Piggott’s Derby winners and eject those who can’t?It’s a tight track! Yes. Great if you own a horse that loves that sort of course and there are plenty who do. Why shouldn’t they have a track which favours them?
Draw bias! True. And guess what? At Chester you know what the draw adavantage is to begin with so it should be a plus to the serious punter (some of whom do actually go racing there!).
Ever had a bet on a race with a large field on the course at….well,name a course….any course. Think Cambridgeshire, Royal Hunt Cup, Stewards Cup, Ayr Gold Cup, Lincoln Handicap…I could go on. Scrap those courses too? Why, I believe there are stats that show a draw bias in races like The Ebor and the Cesarewitch.Entrance fee too high. No it can’t be because they get big crowds who’d still come if prices were higher.
Piss-heads? Can’t argue with that. It does have a larger than average number compared to most courses.
The thing is it’s financially successful,innovative and gives the public (not just the form-book studying geek) what it wants at a price they’re prepared to pay. Much of the profits made go back into higher than average prize money for a track that has no race above GP3 level. Furthermore, it looks after connections. Racecourse catering usually means over-priced dross. The owners & trainers restaurant at Chester is of a REALLY high standard. If your horse runs appallingly you might still return just to take advantage of the hospitality. AND you’ll be re-imbursed a few hundred quid if you don’t get any prize-money! They know how to look after the important players.
Chester’s not for everyone (not me nowadays either). But it’s successful and has a winning formula. Many (maybe most) racecourses that don’t stage top-class races that would naturally attract large numbers are envious and would happily tolerate a few more drunken natives to get a whiff of Chester’s revenue.
Congrats on starting a thread that animates so many. Now I’ve defended Chester, it’s time to nominate tracks I’d give the chop to. (I’ve been to most courses over the years.) 1) Beverley and 2) Bangor-on-Dee.An all-weather track at Newmarket! Great. Can’t you just see the crowds jamming the A14,M11 etc. to witness this pulsating sporting spectacle at a venue custom-made for the spectator!
Newmarket: Apart from perhaps Dartmoor, you’d be hard-pushed to think of a worse place in England to attract a decent crowd for run-of-the-mill fare. They’d have to stage a Rolling Stone’s concert after the racing to get over 200 paying customers!Good luck Emily, I completed your survey but doubt my responses will be of much help.
One thing not covered in your survey is marketing. Could racecourses benefit from better advertising/marketing to boost attendances and should the cost be borne by the individual racecourse or by a central racing body?
How many people who seldom or never go racing might be tempted to go if they saw an advert on TV or in their local paper (or heard on the radio) highlighting what the sport has to offer?
A big race coming up? A clash of two or more top-class horses on the card? Why not accentuate this on a TV ad?
Most second-rate circuses or fairs manage their advertising better than racing.
(It would help of course if racing had a fairer geographical spread of its top races rather than so many being in the South East!).
You might find it beneficial to get in touch with Chester Racecourse who seem more aggressive in this area than most, the Clerk-of-the-course has a reputation as a very smart businessman who’s not afraid to try new approaches.
Anyway, good luck in your research.Thanks for this post Mike. An interesting read. Timely (for me) as well, as my daughter has recently moved down to London and I was thinking of taking her to a greyhound race meeting down there as she’s never been to one before.
Can anyone give me a brief analysis of what facilities, atmosphere etc. are like at Romford?My father used to race greyhounds around the North West of England in the 60’s. I used to go to our local track at Chester (long since defunct) from time to time. A flapping track but a high standard one (better than most non-flappers). I really enjoyed it,there were about 15 or so bookies there who would take £100 on a dog without wetting themselves. How times change.
Such at pity that Greyhound sports are on the wane. They are such elegant, streamlined beautiful creatures who can best be appreciated when racing or coursing. Both sports have blotted their copybook with cruelty and abuse, but that doesn’t alter the fact that the greyhound in pursuit of prey is a breathtaking sight.Re. the gym shoes. Whatever the expalanation (fraud, confusion, chance, a well-meaning but misplaced desire to “bend” events to confirm the “witnesses” own ideas re.religion or the existence of god, or maybe scientific – maybe of a kind not yet understood), the LEAST likely is that it proves there is life-after-death and a god. To jump to this conclusion after any “supernatural” or inexplicable event is understandable but flawed. If one is so gullible as to jump to a conclusion that a NDE proves there’s a God, why not jump to the conclusion that God is also behind disasters, crashes, tsunamis etc? Oh no! Won’t do that ‘cos that undermines the primitive minds’ aching desire to believe there’s something after death. How on earth could you stand-up for a god that allowed. say. the Aberfan disaster? Better make some inadequate mealy-mouthed excuse to deny the hand of god. But see a pair of plimsolls on a roof in an OBE and hey! God’s in the ring! Oy vey!
Your experience /memory was real but a brain can carry on registering events when once one would have been considered medically incapable of consciousness. Similarly experiments prove people can be “tricked” into believing they haven’t been tricked into memorising something they have only really anecdotal knowledge of.
The recent TV documentary into research specifically into NDEs managed to recreate all the usual reported NDE events (feeling of being dragged into a “loving” light-tunnel; heightened feelings of love and feeling of being in presence of loving family who’d died; a sense of reliving at high speed the sins and saintly moments of one’s life; out-of-body cogniscance etc). What’s more, the brain-scanning technology used in these tests could even identify which parts of the brain were responsible for creating these sensations.
It doesn’t comfort those who want to believe in life-after-death to realise that the right electrical stimulus to the right region of the brain can produce NDE experiences in people in medical research labs. (This might be why Grimes hasn’t commented on the programme!
)
To your credit Andrew, you don’t put your experience down to some religious “miracle” or as proof that a god exists (and is lovingly watching over you and letting you in on his presence) as some would. (Of course if such a god was so great, why the f@@k did he let you get injured in the first place?)There’s a documentary on National Geographic tonight at 20:00 (repeated later on) on research into NDE’s. Don’t know what conclusions – if any – it comes to. No doubt if it can rationally explain NDE’s,there will still be plenty who will refuse to accept the explanation.
Hope the link works. An interesting analysis in US publication by a Scottish journalist (editor of The Spectator). What’s just as interesting are the readers’ comments beneath the article.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/brexit-a-very-british-revolution-1466800383?tesla=y&mod=e2tw
On a slight tangent, I managed a wry smile at LibDem leader Tim Farron’s deep anger and disappointment at the vote. He represents a party that, in 2010, included in its manifesto the pledge to have a referendum on our EU membership. When, to their surprise the LibDems ended up in a coalition government they forgot all about this pledge as they never really wanted one anyway. Maybe if they’d pushed for that manifesto pledge and got a referendum during the coalition’s term, we’d have voted to remain! It’s a funny old world.
Gingertipster – you flatter yourself if you think I’m in the least concerned that you or anyone else on here has a different opinion on anything whatsoever to me. This is a forum; one rather expects disagreement.
I never watched much of the post-race coverage; didn’t really care who won or care if jockeys rode great or poor races. Maybe an in-depth analysis was given and a conclusion praising or criticising Moore was made. Was there such an analysis? There ought to have been. FWIW I believe Harzand was the best horse in the race and would have won however USAR had been ridden. TV has the capacity to analyse races closely afterwards and ought to do so for G1s.What I would stress is that this was the poster’s 4th ever post on here. He or she is entitled to their opinion and those who disagree can make their arguments without using derogatory comments or spouting on in a tone that suggests they are god’s gift to race analysis and anyone who dares venture an alternative viewpoint is a dipstick. Parading one’s own cleverness and superiority is rather unbecoming.
This forum might be considered by some potential newcomers to be becoming rather “cliquey” and anyone who dares voice an opinion contrary to the regular posters will get slagged-off. This thread sadly, will do nothing to dispel that impression.I repeat, if TV DID an in-depth analysis of Moore’s rides and concluded he had nothing to be criticised for, then fair enough. The analysis needed to be done though. The original poster raised a topic that merited discussion, even if most concluded Moore did okay. LD73’s point that there seems to be a reluctance to (ahem!) even imply a top jockey may have been less than tip-top for fear of jeopardising future interviews with such jockeys is a good point. Sky’s TV Soccer pundits criticise players and officials without fear, maybe TV’s racing crew should adopt the same approach.
Bravo TROY111 for raising the subject. This forum is where differing opinions should be aired. It is possible to disagree with a poster’s opinion but doing so in a rude manner adds no weight to one’s argument. I was surprised at the tone of AP’s first post(calling TROY stupid for example) as he’s usually the most readable of posters on here. Well thought-out opinions are just as well made (maybe better made) without slagging off others.
LD73’s last paragraph about racing pundits reluctance to scrutinise/criticise leading British jockeys rides is spot on.
Regardless of whether Moore’s Classic rides were works of genius or moderate, there’s no reason why his performance (or that of any other jockey) should not be subject to analysis – as has been done on here.
I think it fair to say if Joseph O’Brien had given Minding & USAR these rides, his performance would have drawn much more comment.
I think it’s fair to say his GP1 Epsom rides last week couldn’t be held up as glowing examples of how to ride Epsom . He’s a top jockey, but these weren’t particularly good rides. Had a lesser jockey given Minding a similar ride, there would have been much more criticism of it.
Enjoy yourself. If you seriously want to make it pay, don’t get engaged or married or have kids and be prepared to cut off family and friends.
Are you betting for fun or to earn enough to change your lifestyle?
If the latter, don’t get engaged or married or have kids etc.
Keep accurate betting records and then, if you’ve made a profit (making sure to deduct costs such as racecourse entry fees / racecards, papers, books, petrol etc.) divide that by the number of hours you’ve spent on it to get your hourly rate. And then apply to Costa for Barista job.
Good luck though!Oh dear Grimes you exhibit all the classical signs of someone frightened to accept that there’s no life after death. You eulogise the fawning, craving, beholden attitude of pre-science humans in believing in the supernatural. You can’t answer why such a wonderful god countenanced say, Aberfan or Dunblane or countless other episodes of human misery when the simple answer is that if there is a creator it doesn’t give a toss about what goes on down here, how you practice sex or whether you eat meat on a Friday. Please read Spinoza (born nearly 400 years ago yet stillmore enlightened than most nowadays) or, at the very least go to youtube and listen to a Richard Dawkins lecture.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vkyp3KruUgw&ebc=ANyPxKpUC-WhR0CZ6ZEp9QYtujsO_7Isd7n0MYyy1Q5XSfMznoBuvntwJE0O8nfAd4rShf0_zkyduDj9VT5DFm6_q7_7fHgr1w)
The effect of oxygen deprivation on the brain and how it triggers feelings of euphoria etc. is well documented and NDE’s seem to be proof of a chemical process rather than the supernatural. (Find me an NDE that doesn’t reproduce messages/images already stored in a person’s brain!) The influence of powerful figures (e.g. Padre Pio) on cementing imaginary beliefs in largely uneducated, rural and religious (ie gullible) people is another well known psychological human trait (how many in Salem swore blind their neighbours were in league with the devil – do you believe them?). Just be grateful you exist, don’t fall for the superstitions humans grasped at in the past through ignorance, fear and fear of the unknown (ie death). Shake off the chains of ignorance and superstition indoctrinated when you were at your most gullible – as a child. Listen to Bach now, ‘cos you sure as heck aint going to listen to anything at all once dead.If the vast majority of people feel foxhunting is a bad thing, then Horseracing’s connection with it would be a bad thing too. It might even deter sponsors to the sport.
That’s not the same as saying that foxhunting is therefore a bad thing – that’s a separate issue.
To decry something because the majority of its participants are toffs is inverted snobbery – perhaps even “virtue signalling” to use a current expression. The vast majority of brain surgeons and heart surgeons will have come from a priviliged background; would you refuse to allow a top surgeon in those fields do an operation on you because they went to Eton or the like?
I’m a working class towny but have known a few (working class I might add) hunt followers.I won’t go into the very sound arguments they make for supporting foxhunting – that’s not what this thread’s about, but they usually end up pointing out the hypocrisy of the urban luvvie slagging hunting off as cruel whilst never having seen the aftermath of a foxes slaughter of chickens,wildfowl, lambs etc. If people can manage to suppress their class bias and take the trouble to become better informed about foxes and their relationship with the countryside they may, like me, look more favourably upon it.
)