Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Dear Mike, if that is all you can say to my thorough reply to your objections, I think it wise we don’t debate any more.
Well, I can’t offer you that luxury I’m afraid. I get debated on no end of topics on here and everyone else should expect that too. It’s sort of the point of a forum…
I think what bemuses myself (and others) is that you aim an endless fountain of vitriol at the sport; you see no fun, joy, excitement or happiness in it. Just look at your hundreds of posts – every one of them utterly negative about racing.
I’m just genuinely wondering out loud why you bother with the game? It only seems to make you deeply unhappy and very, very angry.
What pleasure do you get out of it? Tell us.
Mike
Well, I am glad you have conceded, or appeared to, the points we were debating.
What do I like about it? I trained as a painter (fine art); the first thing I liked about racing was its beauty. It is the most aesthetically pleasing sport in the world. I like the whole impedimenta of it: the silks, the tracks, the turf, the names, etc. Arriving at, say, Brighton, when a sea-fret is in and you can’t even see the top of the radio mast at the end of the track and then the sun burns the mist off and the horses parade for the first race. It’s a great thing to see, and I never get tired of it.
Standing at the last fence at Sandown in the depths of winter; watching half a dozen splashes of colour moving through the winter landscape at Plumpton. Horses racing through evening sunlight at Bath or Epsom or Chester.
I still like pondering the form, the handicap charts, looking for that little edge in form study like for example spotting a horse that can use its Brighton hill strength to piss up at Kempton etc.
The satisfaction of sniffing out a value winner or place bet, and a sense of anticipation at the start of meetings I really enjoy (Ascot, Goodwood, Chester etc). I used to feel it about Cheltenham – I used to have the week off work for it! But it doesn’t really move me anymore. It has become a Sisyphean task, a true waste of time and money.
And yes, I like to win money. I freely admit I have been/am at times an embittered punter – I find it hard to believe that any normal human being who has a good set-to with the bookies isn’t driven slightly potty by the experience for reasons already mentioned, plus all the usual Law of Sod stuff.
My breakthrough in maintaining enjoyment was to stop, ahem, betting large. That is what sours everything. I like to mess about with small perms and small wagers, so that the fact it’s all a bit of a condoesn’t matter
… much. One just takes what one wants from it. However, my disputatious side, and the fact there is not one racing journalist who is prepared to go off piste about the sport’s many faults, means I will moan and take the pee because I can; I pay my subs to the sport and it bloody well needs pointing out again and again: we punters don’t stand a chance in the long term! And the jockeys/connections/trainers/bookies who we keep going one way and another don’t give two ****s.
To this day I still wonder what happened to Tom Queally when he rode Frankel in the St James Palace Stakes, not that I’m suggesting anything. I remember his face in the starting stalls, he looked absolutely petrified to me then he went on to produce one of the worst rides I’ve ever seen in a group one. Only Frankel could have got him out of that mess. Other than that ride I thought Queally was superb aboard the great horse, but I’ll never forget that day at Ascot and I’d love to know what went through Queally’s mind.
Remember how Henry Cecil rolled his eyes straight afterwards?
I’m not a great one for saying horses should retire but Carruthers just didn’t seem to be enjoying himself over the Cross-Country the other day. His park form seems to have gone completely in recent runs, too.
The RP’s take on the Cross-Country was
"trying this discipline for the first time, didn´t excel himself and might need more practice"
. I don’t agree with that, he just looked unenthusiastic to me.
To be fair, he has got history of suddenly bouncing back to form, but he’s 12 in a few weeks and I hope they don’t chase his downward mark trying to win a modest race or two unless he rekindles his enthusiasm.
Let’s hope I’m wrong – his Hennessy win three years ago was very special.
Mike
It was, and I had a bloody good win on it.
The Cross Country is a stupid race and should be abolished. When I watched Carruthers jumping one of those cruel trap jumps thought up by some kn*bhead in tweeds, I thought: You poor sod. I don’t blame you for having the hump.
there is a huge amount of concealed or unknowable information in many highly valuable races. I suppose some of it is plots ie horses laid out and cunningly campaigned, but also what is being trained in public, what is just having a day out, who’s pulling for another day, who isn’t well, which jockeys are still p*ssed or coked from last night etc. Add into that the fiendishly complicated form, the inside elite who profit from the small punter and the incredible greed of the bookies’ margins
It’s not the sport for you Prof. You need to give it up. It seems to make you so unhappy.
Mike
Dear Mike, if that is all you can say to my thorough reply to your objections, I think it wise we don’t debate any more.
No [expletive], Sherlock. How is that materially different to what I said?
Well firstly, you’ve stated that "racing is a farce of concealed information" and referred to that as ‘an indisputable fact’. It isn’t, it’s an opinion. Blatantly, obviously, an opinion. NOT a fact.You then say that ‘racing depends on virtually all punters losing virtually all of the time’. This is just wrong. If it were true, even the most inveterate gamblers would give the game up. All punters can tell you of extended winning runs, it’s statistically inevitable. My description of ‘punters winning often enough to maintain an interest but losing overall’ is much more accurate. Ask a bookmaker.
Mike
So, you are saying that the information needed to win at racing is all there in the public domain, transparent and published, each day? Nothing concealed in any way? More water with it, Betty!
If the bottom line is most punters lose overall – which virtually all do – you might as well say they lose virtually all the time. To split hairs and say that when they claw back money they have already lost is some kind of profit is a bit desperate. You either lose or win overall. I’ll get some badges done up: I’M WINNING BUT I’M LOSING. JOIN THE RACING FORUM! The fact that every aspect of the game is set up to make it difficult to get ahead explains why it is known as a mug’s game and has had an unsavoury reputation since god was a boy.
So if you agree Prof, why moan about big handicaps being ultra-competitive when it’s what the public/many punters want?
Look let’s be honest, we all know what’s happened here. Prof’s had a bet on the Paddy Power via some stats-based analysis and it’s got stuffed.
So he’s come on here to blow off again about how it’s all a plot and everyone hates racing blah, blah, blah..
Mike
I did not have a bet in the race. Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote. I picked up a R/Post to look at the all-weather form. As I went through the first ten pages I reflected that the paper often has it arse about face – it comes on like a punters’ paper, but concentrates on ‘the big race’, which as I have said is more often than not a satchel-filler before it is anything else. Most punters I know take little interest in the ‘big’ races because they have been stung so many times more than they have won.
I noticed on one of the first pages of the Post that it had a large panel which said something like THE FORMULA FOR THE PADDY POWER GOLD CUP. I love this cr*p because it’s always wrong – I used to work at the Post so I’ve got a pretty good idea of how this panel came into being. I read what the panel had to say. I said: ‘This will be wrong’, and it was. That is why I mentioned stats.
Then I moved on to Sam T-Davies column. He seemed to like his rides but there again if you backed every horse that jockeys spoke about in the same manner, you would have ended up in Carey Street a long time ago. As it happened, he rode a 94/1 double because this is one of those odd years when Mr Nicholls’s early season horses are not overpraised, overhyped and overbet; one of those snow-in-July moments that racing excels at.
Then I came across Pricewise. Not worth the paper it was printed on, as per. Now, Pricewise is a turf snob. He said some time ago: ‘Leave the all-weather and low-grade crap alone’, but why would anyone leave alone something where value can be found relatively easily? He is supposed to be a punting masterbrain. And yet he goes diving into guesswork, bran-tub races where there is more concealed information than the Kremlin.
The paper is bookie friendly because of advertising. It, along with Channel 4 Racing, is toothless. McCririck was the last high profile racing journalist to openly say punters don’t stand a chance. Maybe that is why he was silenced. Clashed with the adverts a bit too much.
You say that I claim everything in racing is a big plot. Of course not. I said it was a farce of concealed information. Being a little punchy about criminality – as most racing defenders are (I suppose they have to be given the amount of newsprint about bent jockeys and connections and drugged horses that appears) -you read that as inference of criminal intention. I don’t mean it like that. I mean that there is a huge amount of concealed or unknowable information in many highly valuable races. I suppose some of it is plots ie horses laid out and cunningly campaigned, but also what is being trained in public, what is just having a day out, who’s pulling for another day, who isn’t well, which jockeys are still p*ssed or coked from last night etc. Add into that the fiendishly complicated form, the inside elite who profit from the small punter and the incredible greed of the bookies’ margins and the sane man must conclude that racing offers very little to the passing punter and therefore struggles to raise interest these days. How amusing you now compare the sport, once one of the most popular in the land, to crown green bowling!
When I go in betting shops I find a few old addicts watching the racing through addled eyes and everyone else punching the FOBTs.mid-to-low grade all-weather hcaps were a far happier hunting ground, with their share of decent prices.
I would totally agree with this, on AW & turf.
I said once on here that racing is a farce of concealed information that depends on virtually all punters losing virtually all of the time. That is an indisputable fact
No it isn’t, it’s just your opinion. Racing depends on punters winning often enough to maintain an interest but losing overall.
No ****, Sherlock. How is that materially different to what I said?
If you said to a non-racing member of the public that you’ve backed a 2/1 shot – they’d say
"what’s the point? Winning £2 for a £1 stake isn’t worth it".
Strangely, they also see short priced favourites (around 2/1 or less) as
"not worth opposing"
. They don’t understand odds. Therefore, Joe Public (and many punters for that matter) want open races with (what they see as) reasonable prices. This is one reason why the Cheltenham Festival is so popular; not only is it top quality races, but even the conditions races (unlike mostt conditions races) are ultra-competitive. In the general scheme of things, handicaps are more competitive than conditions races and therefore more interesting for the general public than most (non-Cheltenham Festival) conditions races.
If you take a non-racing person to the races, as a betting proposition they are generally less interested in the best quality race, the 5 runner conditions race with 6/4 fav… And more interested in the 16 runner class 4 handicap with 5/1 fav.
I agree with all of that, Ginger. The public will bet at bigger prices, but they wouldn’t know the difference between the Charlie Hall and the Hennessey. That’s because their interest runs no further than a fiver on a bigger priced fav. Why? For reason already discussed…
I pay 25p a race to watch it on Bet365: cheap at the twice the price to avoid Channel 4. Once the suits had got rid of McCririck it was all over. The last person on television to do the punter a service.
Oh I know all that, dear Ginge. I’ve had my share of winners of big handicaps. But they are simply not worth the effort in my view, and they only exist to get a lot of money back in the satchel quickly. It is totally unscrupulous, and to see various luminaries of the game taking money from bookies to exhort the public to bet in such races is unseemly if you ask me. Which is why I laugh sardonically about all the waffle and brouhaha that surround them. It is also why the wider public are totally uninterested. It is also why the sport is universally known as ‘a mug’s game’. If anyone can seriously challenge those points in tones other than that of the indignant anorak, I will be happy to respond.
I like handicaps where you can keep the variables in perspective and where you have plenty of form to work with; they are virtually the only races I bet in. The eternal questions always remain. Why is x horse in the race when it is obvious to ME, a city-dwelling mug with no contacts, that he will do nothing? Why are we, the betting public, being encouraged to bet our hard-earned in ridiculous races full of guesswork?
Not true Prof. The "Public"
are very much "interested"
in big handicaps more than any other race. Witness the Grand National. Most big betting races are big handicaps. Public
are
interested because they consist of bigger prices than any other type of race.
If you’ve had your "share of winners" in big handicaps then you can not complain Prof. Surely all anyone can expect is a "share of winners"?
I have had my share of winners, and they came out of laborious form study. I realised recently that all things considered, they were not worth the effort of study; mid-to-low grade all-weather hcaps were a far happier hunting ground, with their share of decent prices.
I said once on here that racing is a farce of concealed information that depends on virtually all punters losing virtually all of the time. That is an indisputable fact, and it is also the reason for the extremely poor public perception of the game. No-one on here, despite much skirmishing and gnashing of teeth, has ever been able to overturn that observation for the simple reason that it is true. Yes a few of us can stay ahead of the losses for periods but most Turf-followers, if they are intelligent and moral beings, must find the game absurd and unseemly at times.
The wider public (non-gambling addicted) are not interested in big handicaps bar the National and only then because of its cultural place in society, a position that is gradually being loosened for various reasons. I would have £50 with anyone that if you stopped and asked five members of the public to name a big handicap they could not go beyond the National.
Super race. Great ride from Sam T-D. Monumental run from John’s Spirit. Very sad about the fatal injury to Kapga De Cerisy. Commisserations to connections.
Can’t wait for the Hennessey in a couple of weeks. Can you Prof
I enjoy the Hennessey. I had a good bet on Carruthers when he won and I still enjoy watching the race.
My favourite race to watch of all time is Sea the Stars winning the Arc. Yours?
The prof has made 465 posts to TRF, every one of them negative. What’s the motivation?
Someone has to be a realist.
Did you think I bet in the PP Gold Cup, Ginge? Wrong! I don’t bet in races like that. Not worth it. Oh, I had tremendous fun over many years winning the odd one and then giving plenty back so that jockeys, trainers and bookies who don’t give a toss about punters can make their good livings BUT the fun has to end some time.
Handicaps are what they are. Open races where horses are handicapped to (in theory) finish in a dead heat between all runners. Big handicaps are even more open than a normal handicap…
It’s bloody obvious they’re difficult races to find the winner; but as a result you get a bigger price than in uncompetitive races.
Am going to regret this am sure, but what do you expect Prof?
Oh I know all that, dear Ginge. I’ve had my share of winners of big handicaps. But they are simply not worth the effort in my view, and they only exist to get a lot of money back in the satchel quickly. It is totally unscrupulous, and to see various luminaries of the game taking money from bookies to exhort the public to bet in such races is unseemly if you ask me. Which is why I laugh sardonically about all the waffle and brouhaha that surround them. It is also why the wider public are totally uninterested. It is also why the sport is universally known as ‘a mug’s game’. If anyone can seriously challenge those points in tones other than that of the indignant anorak, I will be happy to respond.
I like handicaps where you can keep the variables in perspective and where you have plenty of form to work with; they are virtually the only races I bet in. The eternal questions always remain. Why is x horse in the race when it is obvious to ME, a city-dwelling mug with no contacts, that he will do nothing? Why are we, the betting public, being encouraged to bet our hard-earned in ridiculous races full of guesswork?
…the Thatcher analogy isn’t quite right. UK racing is more like a cross between Chicago under the bootleggers and a socialist dictatorship from Eastern Europe.
If by that you mean it is the ripped-off many supporting a well-upholstered few then yes, dear Betlarge.
Did you think I bet in the PP Gold Cup, Ginge? Wrong! I don’t bet in races like that. Not worth it. Oh, I had tremendous fun over many years winning the odd one and then giving plenty back so that jockeys, trainers and bookies who don’t give a toss about punters can make their good livings BUT the fun has to end some time.
