Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Good grief, you’re a laugh a minute aren’t you?
The National has always been controversial. Always.
I’m backing Giles Cross.
I have to congratulate the connections of Follow the Plan. I remember when he won a grade 1 novice at Leopardstown, the general feeling was that it proved the novice chasers weren’t up to much. Then when he won the grade 1 at Punchestown last year, he was reckoned a lucky winner; a few fallers, Kauto not running his race etc.
I always thought he was being too highly tried, running out of his depth, and less ambitious targets would have been more appropriate. I’m delighted to have been proved wrong; the horse was in form, the ground was right, the others had been to Cheltenham, he received a beautiful patient ride, settled at the back, along the inside.
I reckon he would have won more easily if not for hitting the front to soon.Did you back him?
Come on PTS – you just saw one of the greatest staying hurdlers ever win for the 17th consecutive time, breaking all previous records.
If you can’t get enthusiastic about that…
I hear you, but we all knew he’d win, he was 5/1 on, Crack Away Jack, who has eaten god alone knows how much punters’ money, suddenly shows some each way value (opened 50/1 £8250-£250 Each Way – someone had an inkling…) It wasn’t a race it was a procession. Good on all concerned but it didn’t do much for me.
The rest of the afternoon, no winners or near winners for me. My own fault: I don’t get on with this meeting, but once you start looking at Form, you see things, or you think you do and down goes the money.
I used to be a National fan and good at finding the winner, but the last few years I kind of look at it as an embarrassment, a cruel affair with a usually-knackered victor with four miles of mess, injury and death behind it. Poor old Ballabriggs, almost dead on his feet.
I’m awaiting a new going statement.
Ryan Mania: Oh aye, it’s dead ground, very soft in the back.
You knew the rules so why make the bet ? Simple solution if you don’t like the rule is to have waited a couple of days and bet after final declarations have been made.
Look, this may be hard for you to grasp but I think the rule is wrong. Do you understand that?
By the way, what is the meaning of your signature about Chamberlain?
Oh yes I think we’ve got the message that you don’t like the rule and I understand that. What I don’t understand is, why, if you don’t like the rule, you placed the bet ? No one forced you too. What is even more hard to understand is, if you thought it would be about that price on the day why did you not wait ?
As has already been stated, if the bookies returned money on AP bets then they would have a rule 4 deduduction. This means the prices of horses that do run would have been cut so defeating the object of AP betting.
As for my signature it refers to something a while back on here.
Sorry for late repy on this.
I was taking a girlfriend to Brighton and didn’t want to miss my chance at placing the bet. I don’t usually bet ante-post because I don’t know any jockeys or trainers.I want the bookmaker to take a bigger hit. He can afford it.
No he can’t.
In competitive markets there’s only a certain amount of profit per race for any bookmaker. Therefore, if you get what you’re asking Prof, they’ll go broke in no time. Either that or drastically shorten prices available, betting to a far bigger over-round; which defeats the object of antepost betting.You strike me as one of life’s ‘upholders’, a believer in rules not a questioner. You may believe that they can’t take a slightly bigger hit but I don’t. Bookies whine more than smackheads, it’s all baloney.
You knew the rules so why make the bet ? Simple solution if you don’t like the rule is to have waited a couple of days and bet after final declarations have been made.
Look, this may be hard for you to grasp but I think the rule is wrong. Do you understand that?
By the way, what is the meaning of your signature about Chamberlain?
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.If it is an antepost bet, it is an antepost bet. You’re getting a bigger price because there’s a chance it won’t run. You can’t have that bigger price and still expect your money back.
For every punter who loses money through a non-runner in an antepost race, every other punter who’s backed another horse is getting a better price about his/her selection. Should other punters be forced to pay for your loss? It can’t be done. The Rule 4 favours punters. At the moment there is no R4 at 20/1+ (16/1+ in some lists). With so many 20/1+ horses non-runners in antepost lists they’d add up to a significant part of any book. So there’d have to be a rule change to enable bookmakers to use R4 at bigger prices. Do you want that?
When there’s a horse who "does not take part", by "refusing to race"… IF punters always get their money back there also has to be a Rule 4. Punters of the winner and placed horses will have to pay the losing punter from their winnings. Why should any punter who’s studied the form and worked out a horse is temperamental and should be avoided – pay for punters who haven’t studied the form?
To think it’s bookmakers who are ripping punters off when there’s a non-runner is extremely naive.
I got 9/1 about Robemaker and he would have been about that in my opinion. As for Should other punters be forced to pay for your loss? I think you;re framing the question wrongly. I am asking if it is right that antepost bets not refunded if the horse is taken out. I say it’s wrong, you say it’s god’s plan for us all. I want the bookmaker to take a bigger hit. He can afford it.
All the top racing will end up in the East, including English meetings. It will take years but in the end they will have it all.
Yesterday is history sweetie. As your post was made today I assumed you were looking forward.
Better to be a smart **** than just a complete ****
It was made at 1am, dear. I would have thought a smart*** would have seen that.
Is history not valid in racing…?
Dare I ask on what basis?
If you took someone to Donny (not a town I would want to go past in a train never mind visit, but) who’d never been racing, after you’d shown them a bit about form and a bit about betting Norse God would have won a rather silly race on silly terms at 50/1.
Person might say: ‘so, no one could find the winner?’
‘I doubt if many people were on, no.’
‘And everyone’s lost their money, including me?’
Yes.
‘Right. OK.’
As we head for the bar, I might say: ‘Racing anoraks will say ‘well, it’s the start of the Flat and four year old form and the highly questionable all-weather farce muddying the form and yadda yadda, and it’s all perfectly true.’
‘So why are these races run?’
‘Well, hmmm. They sort of have to be.’
‘Right. OK.’Perhaps on the basis that there isn’t a 2.05 at Doncaster.
Saturday March 31 2012
Doncaster 14:05 – Result
William Hill Spring Mile (Handicap) (Str)
£40000 added, 4yo plus, 1m, Class 3, 22 ranTip: no-one likes a smart***
Have you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
You may be a successful punter for all I know Prof, just seem to moan a lot and blame others when things don’t go your way.
I just can’t see the problem. From what I see you backed antepost in the hope of getting a better price. You know the risks Prof. It didn’t pay off this time. So why blame the bookmakers?
I don’t bet to level stakes and have many savers too. But if you wish to start a thread in the Daily Lays And Plays section, I’ll join you in putting up tips and keeping them to level stakes.
After entering a competition on another forum where the person (a so called "professional gambler") put up a good prize, and scarpered immediately it was clear I was going to win… You’ll have to forgive me Prof, not taking you up on that kind offer. No need for any prize, just winning is incentive enough.
Look foreward to the challenge.
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.Have you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
You may be a successful punter for all I know Prof, just seem to moan a lot and blame others when things don’t go your way.
I just can’t see the problem. From what I see you backed antepost in the hope of getting a better price. You know the risks Prof. It didn’t pay off this time. So why blame the bookmakers?
I don’t bet to level stakes and have many savers too. But if you wish to start a thread in the Daily Lays And Plays section, I’ll join you in putting up tips and keeping them to level stakes.
After entering a competition on another forum where the person (a so called "professional gambler") put up a good prize, and scarpered immediately it was clear I was going to win… You’ll have to forgive me Prof, not taking you up on that kind offer. No need for any prize, just winning is incentive enough.
Look foreward to the challenge.
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.
