Forum Replies Created
- Posts
And what about Champagne Fever? It looks like the market has spoken and he will run in the QMCC. He has a similar ‘profile’ to SDG in having a fall followed by an easy win.
If I owned him I would run him in the Ryanair though. That looks like his optimum trip and the opposition is weaker in my view.
For the record, I think you mean Shotgun Paddy. Also I notice some selections are starred and some not. Is that significant?
A bit disappointing that Menorah looks like a non-runner. Apparently he is simply a reserve for Wishfull Thinking. I wish we had been told earlier but 25-1 always looked a bit too good to be true.
The market seems to have concluded Champagne Fever is going for the Champion Chase. Not a big surprise, but I think CF has a better chance of beating the better of Don Cossack and Cue Card than the best of Sprinter Sacre, Dodging Bullets, Sire de Grugy. Perhaps, if he does well at Gowran Park over 2.5 miles, he will go for the Ryanair after all.
Don’t forget S Conti had serious stomach ulcers last year. This alone would explain his poor spring form. However, apparently he prefers flat tracks anyway.
"I think you need to have a run to win the Betfair. Last year we needed the run. There is no point going into these big races needing a run. I’ve got it in the back of my mind that he saves his best form for flat tracks.
"After Christmas we’ll freshen him up for the Gold Cup. We found out after the Gold Cup last year that he had a few problems and after tests it turned out he was suffering from stomach ulcers.”
I find NH a bit of an enigma. Very communicative on Sprinter Sacre, but more or less silent on Captain Conan, Finian’s Rainbow. Maybe he deserves a squiggle.
Incidentally Blues Brother I notice your own rating of Sire de Grugy seems a bit lower than everyone else’s. That does mean he’s not a good thing in his race today?
Thanks all for enlightening me. Still seems strange that Silviniaco Conti ran in the Gold Cup with ulcers and Nicholls only found out later, as it looks like the ulcers explain the below form run that cost him the Gold Cup last year. Surely if it was a known potential problem he would have been tested say a month before the race as a precaution.
I agree. Also the article raises more questions in my view. For example it says the SP can be notably shorter than the final show. I didn’t think this was possible as surely the final show is the basis for the SP.
Also the article refers to hedging. I doubt if the sums of money involved justify a betting office laying just to reduce risk. They can easily tolerate profit swings of say £250,000 on an individual race and I doubt if they get big amounts of SP money on races at Wolves. Hence their only rational motive is to reduce the SP on favourites. I believe this can be done with quite small amounts of money, and if this happens in the last few minutes there is no chance for punters to take advantage of other prices adjusting upwards.
Racing Post:
SUSPICIONS that starting prices at British race meetings are being fixed in order to save the betting industry thousands of pounds per race emerged on Friday in an extraordinary warning letter to on-course bookmakers written by management at Wolverhampton.
The shock claim was made in a letter to all Wolverhampton pitch holders from David Roberts, managing director at the all-weather venue, amid concerns they may have been in breach of a rule which resulted in "distorting artificially the betting market or starting price".
In his letter, Roberts said: "The racecourse has recently become aware that some bookmakers may be in danger of contravening [the] requirement by laying off-course hedging money at starting price rather than the prevailing fixed odds price at the time the bet was struck."
If an on-course bookmaker was to lay a big firm hedging into the ring at starting price as opposed to the show at the time, this would result in the layer saving money should the horse win. More importantly, in betting markets with few bookmakers, the firm hedging are aware that the starting price is very likely to be notably lower than the show at the time.
Roberts refused to confirm or deny whether he or any of his staff had witnessed the process happening, but revealingly his letter said: "We have observed the impact of the this practice in the betting ring and it is the racecourse’s view that such behaviour invites accusations of price fixing and collusion which, consequently, may jeopardise the racecourse’s premises licence and compromise the integrity of the betting ring."
There were 1,170 bookmakers in attendance at 97 meetings at Wolverhampton last year, an average of 12 per meeting, and at Friday’s meeting as is often the case throughout the winter they bet from a position inside the grandstand standing shoulder to shoulder.
Wolverhampton is one of a number of all-weather tracks, with a weak on-course market, where on occasions over the last few months starting prices of certain runners have been returned notably shorter than the final show and, in some circumstances, in contrast to a drift of the betting exchanges.
Such instances give rise to accusations of manipulation of starting prices but the organisation which monitors returns, the Starting Price Regulatory Commission has so far opted not to take action.
Robin Grossmith of the Federation of Racecourse Bookmakers on Friday night said he was unaware of any accusations against individual bookmakers.
"It has always been the case that you mustn’t conduct yourself in a manner against the rules," he said. "It is now in the racecourse terms and conditions of entry and it appears all they are doing is flagging up the rules.
"Perhaps, I don’t know, somebody has observed something up there."
Wolverhampton’s shot across the bows of bookmakers was welcomed by the Racecourse Association. Caroline Davies, the RCA’s services director, was pleased that Roberts’ letter raised concerns not only in respect of the track’s legal requirements but also for punters betting on British horseracing.
"We endorse the actions of Wolverhampton racecourse and believe it to be the correct action to take in terms of both the licencing requirements and in protecting the integrity of the SP," she said.
FacebookTwitterDigg
I think we could see a big 5 for this race: Dynaste, Don Cossack, Champagne Fever, Al Ferof and Cue Card. It seems to be the optimum distance for all of them and all would have a fair chance of winning. I don’t see why any of them would go shorter or longer. In the Champion Chase they would be up against SS, DB and SG, all of which look to have the beating of these 5 over 2 miles. In the Gold Cup they wouid have to get past Silviniaco Conti and Road to Riches plus a few others who have more staying power.
The disappointing side of inconclusive for SS I would say. The CC looks like a 3 horse race now between SS, SG, DB, plus CF and AF if they decide to participate.
I think it reasonable to expect SS to improve for a number of reasons:
1. Second run can be expected to be better than first after a long lay off.
2. Better ground likely
3. Gentle treatment in this race
4. Slightly shorter trip at Cheltenham
5. Absence of health scare will probably allow more intensive training.So I think it is reasonable to keep SS as favourite. I think I would be roughly 2-1 SS, 4-1 DB, 5-1 SG, 6-1 CF and AF, 20-1 bar assuming all run (which is unlikely).
I assume we are talking about Sprinter Sacre. I think there is a fair chance he will be a non-runner. There has been fairly persistent rain today and more could come tomorrow. Apparently Nicky is due to walk the course on Thursday, when I expect it will be soft. At that point I think he could excuse SS and say the next target is the Game Spirit, where he might clash with Sire de Grugy.
I notice Captain Conan has an entry. He hasn’t run since last year’s contest when he was 2nd fav but fractured his pelvis. Nicky said after that a month’s box rest should put it right, but presumably it’s taking a bit longer. Might be worth a go at 33-1 NRNB.
SS’s odds on the exchange have come in a bit to about 3.1 which is encouraging but I notice Champagne Fever has been fairly firm as well. All logical if you think SS will win if he turns up, but still has a fair chance of not appearing.
One concern I have is Henderson is already preparing an excuse for not turning up at Ascot – wrong type of ground. And nobody seems to be piling in on the exchange ante post for Ascot. However, the weather forecast looks ok so probably good to soft which should be ok for SS.Looks promising for ante post each way as there appear to be a fair number of non-runners and no-hopers. So you may get 1/4 odds first 4 on a 12 runner race – if you can be sure your horse will run.
Are you willing to name the trainer Alf?
It was really just to emphasise that owners, in my experience anyway, don’t get enough say and whilst of course the trainer has the expertise and knowledge (for which he/she is well paid)the poor sod coughing up all the cash ought to at least have a bit of influence over when/where the horse runs once in a while. Or is that really a bit too Utopian?
Surely there is a gap in the market for a trainer who listens to owners?Can it be that difficult?
