Forum Replies Created
HKJC commentary team:
Brett:- Hey Clint, this horse has the same running style as you.
Clint:- How’s that ?
Brett (reading):- "comes home late".
Following in a good tradition on the HKJC programme. This from Trackside ten years ago.
‘Gavan, this horse reminds me of one of your girlfriends’
‘It hangs out on corners’August 1, 2014 at 22:20 in reply to: Sheikh Hamdan’s decision to run Taghrooda in the King George #487224
Would go up even more in my estimations if she was supplemented for the Leger as the path to the Arc !!
With that pedigree would love to see her have a run beyond 1m 4f but am sure that would be a sporting step too far.August 1, 2014 at 22:17 in reply to: Sheikh Hamdan’s decision to run Taghrooda in the King George #487223
I feel it was sporting in that she can have only one foal a year whereas Mukhadram could sire well over 150 per season.
If Mukhadram had won the battle for second behind Taghrooda, and hence by her participation been denied a King George victory to accompany the Eclipse, the decision to run her could not be called a commercially successful one given the increased stud fee income over the sales price of one solitary foal out of a filly who already had a Classic to her name. Not many Coolmore fillies have lined up against their colts down the years.
Just my view but an explanation of why I personally felt it a sporting move along with the fact that it was nice to see an unbeaten record being put on the line rather than being artificially preserved. .
I’m just an old romantic though
I lost my Mum the same way.
Those who work in the area deserve massive respect in often trying circumstances caused by basic underfunding and lack of recognition.
Whilst sadly it did not result in a happy outcome for my Mum the understanding of the illness helped massively in helping those of us who felt they had failed in not being able to prevent her death.
As has been so eloquently pointed out in the earlier posts by TAPK and Steeplechasing part of the responsibility of those whose loved ones have been affected by the illness is to speak out so that is becomes obvious how widespread an issue it has become in this day and age. The stigma still attached to mental illness within society and hence the feelings it generates in the sufferers that they cannot see themselves being reintegrated into it are a major cause of ‘negative outcomes’
Sincere condolences to Lucy’s friends and family and to all those and their loved ones who battle with such a cruel and misunderstood condition.
Thank you all for the kind words and the votes, very much appreciated.
Nice to see active and intelligent debate is still alive and well and heaven forbid differing opinions tolerated.
Whether your choice of commentator enhances this reputation may however be rather more open to question !
Congratulations to all the other winners and wish everyone a Happy Xmas and a profitable 2014.
Just a line to explain why the commentator can’t include them.
At present with the exception of Channel 4 the times are only available to the commentator via our monitor on a delayed feed as they are put on by RUK rather than being available on a live on course feed.
Clearly it is not a good idea to call off a feed that is not live but delayed by a few seconds however much we would like to include some sectional times in the call !
Hope that makes sense.
yes in those days there was a separate betting shop and course commentary, I was doing the shops.
Remember it well as was racecourse commentator at Warwick that day and apart from a Welsh National had never done a race that big,
The day was most memorable however for a race that a few may remember between Ramstar and Castle Diamond which was the best Maguire Dunwoody battle I ever saw. Not more than half a length between them for last half mile and an epic finish.
It also was one of the earliest examples of race being marred by the whip rules both getting bans despite in my opinion getting rides that showed off the attributes of their respective jockeys so briliantly.
Thanks very much to all.
Have great Xmas and all the very best for 2012 and look forward to bumping into many of you at various places up and down the country !
There is meant to be a procedure for NH for us to be told during race if the horse has been deemed a non runner by the starter. Frankly this has the danger of being Chinese Whispers and as yet has not happened to me.
We are only told if it is a non runner to try and avoid the confusion of hearing message whether yes or no clearly.
That is a fair point re the market Maori and if the effect of Vodkatini starting or not had an even effect on the rest of the field I would be more inclined to agree.
However the removal of a pace influence (in his case) would mean reduction in tempo penalising one group over another etc, poss uncontested lead now for another and so on hence a linear Rule 4 approach is still not correct.
To sum up here I have no major issue whether rule is introduced or not just fed up with it getting peddled as a major injustice when it is one set of punters subsidising another and adversely affects Levy as consequence.
If that in some way satisfies the outrage of your horse not starting then fine but racing has far bigger injustices than this one.
Hobby horse put back in stable. Cheers.
Certainly a fair point though computerised tickets have changed this a bit.
and how many who didn’t understand racing would think that the bookmakers had cheated them by not paying them what they expected on their winnings ?
If it the starters fault fair enough then refunds are reasonable but if it is the horses fault then they are not.
Else can just back the likes of the old Vodkatini blind every time knowing you would get a refund if not start.
Yes Leighton stood down after fall form Baile Anrai earlier in day.
For completeness in the above example should point out that the levy impact depends on the SP of the winner due to the maths inaccuracies of the current Rule 4 table which favours punters.
Had for example Quilinton won then amount paid to punters given 10p Rule 4 would have been reduced by (£1,490 x 66 x 10%) = £9,834 so levy loss would have been only (£11,111 – £9,834) = £1,277.
This of course shows how daft it is that the Rule 4 impact differs depending on which horse which the race. Deductions should be based on total returns including stake which would give £10,000 in both cases and levy loss of £1,111.
This is deemed unacceptable as would be more penal than current rules to punters which is just daft IMO. A modern table that moves with overrounds and includes stake with deductions is overdue though the favourite longshot bias disciples will probably argue otherwise.
I haven’t estimated turnover to be anything just used percentages and hypothetical book complying with overround for simplicity.
Same Maths apply to all levels of turnover with the resultant fall in profit.Just multiply it through to whatever you feel turnover to be.
As you think it is higher then resultant £ loss will also be even higher and hence so would reduction in levy by deeming to be a non runner. As you say could argue as much as £4k levy impact.
Therefore as it is just one punter paying another what is the point of reducing levy just for those who were clever enough to back the winner to reimburse others ?
Much is made of the PR angle of this but can be a high cost to pay in current financial climate.