Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hello all,
Long time since I’ve been on here…!
You don’t say what your £300 @ 5-1 was on Seagull, but I suspect it wasn’t a major golfing event! There is a massive trading difference between the book of the Ryder Cup and the 2.40 on a wet afternoon at Musselburgh.
The majority of big publicized bets you will hear about will be on massive events with few outcomes, i.e. a football match, cricket, golf etc. They will be big stakes at small odds and, as matron suggests, mainly by people used to playing with those sums of money anyway. ÂÂÂ
The majority of people who have bets refused are, as Mounty points out, usually on a Pricewise or gamble, bad each way races or arbs. No matter how smart or quick they think they are being, there is certainly a whole load of other people also trying to pile on! It’s not about restricting individuals, it’s about balancing your book and, as I said above, that very much depends on the event.
I would be exceptionally surprised if the Hills PR department sat around making up random bets and random locations! Ask Graham Sharpe if those bets are real and you will get a very rude reply…..!
Oh my god, what sad news. All my sympathy to Debs, Luke and all Craigs family. From bringing us TRF to all the syndicates, Craig brought so many people good times and great humour, such a lovely bloke and he will be greatly missed.
Jen x
Cormack, that is the problem (I know this is an old argument) – there are very few ways of riding across country like hunting, if you want an alternative. Yes you can hack around the bridlepaths – but the farmers give the hunts access to ride over their land which would otherwise be trespassing – and few local councils build you jumps to tackle like leaping over the hedges or  fences or maintain the ground for a good gallop. You could go to a cross country course – which may take you 30 minutes, not all day like hunting can, and you can’t ride round there with all your mates!
The alternative is drag hunting – which is surprisingly scarce – it is feasible if the farmers still let you use their land (big if), although having said that the drag hunts in Scotland set up after fox hunting was outlawed have so far been popular and successful.
(Edited by Spook at 3:15 pm on Sep. 17, 2004)
Cormack, i hope you mean most riders follow the hunt for the thrill and the excitement of the cross country riding? The whole ‘different agenda’ suggestion implies something much darker and if you think this is the case you have been to very different hunts than me.
As someone said earlier, following the pack means you very rarely see a fox killed, I can assure you seeing the kill is not the reason the public hunt with the huntsmen. If you think all the riders are crowding round to watch some bloodthirsty end to the fox then sadly it is you being naive.
highflyer, i have no problem who is for or against fox hunting on here as long as you can put forward an informed debate. As you say, this is a very emotive topic and irrational prejudices can come to the fore.
As for Blair, I know it is a backbenchers sweetener – personally I would rather have a PM who was willing to pass opinions and a voting system that doesn’t pass a judgement even though a third of our elected representatives decline to vote.
run and skip,
while i don’t agree with all of your post i get the principle – although not sure i will explain it any better!
In this multicultural country, Blair seems to be prioritising protecting the rights of the minorities who are likely to vote for him and is positively against anything considered to be traditionally British. Now I have no issue with the idea we should develop and move with the times but IMO the goverment treads very carefully through the rights of people who could call the racist card, yet tramples on others. Now, before this is atall misinterpreted :biggrin: I am not in anyway racist towards people I meet, and I respect others religions and I think all should be treated equally – it’s where people are treated unequally (on EITHER side, and there are examples of both) that annoy me. ÂÂÂ
However the main point is that banning fox hunting is an example of Blairs ‘anti anything traditional stance’ which is prejudice in itself, although I personally don’t think it’s his strongest reason for wanting to enforce the ban….. and I have rattled on a lot now!
By the way, after paving the way to force this law through,  apparently Blair didn’t even vote himself  :confused:
By the way, Clivex, you really don’t have a clue, do you? Explain the common agricultural policy to me and tell me you’ve spent at least a day working on a farm and I might think you do. If you think runandskips post was racist, i would say you got a much bigger prejudice you need to deal with yourself.
(Edited by Spook at 10:16 am on Sep. 17, 2004)
Sean,
I’ve heard the arguments and the answers all before too.  The issue is it is hard to judge the value of fox hunting with hounds while it is going on, but in theory a well managed and effective  hunt won’t kill many foxes – they are there to control the population and get rid of the old and the weak – not dessimate the population. Many of the hunts haave covered the same areas of land for years and will have created a stable population. The same also goes for the argument that the fox isn’t a pest – if it was a pest the hunts wouldn’t be doing a good job either!
This overall is  theory – and varies from area to area according to the method of fox control applied – but the Burns report (despite the fact it was very inconclusive about anything else!) did offer the view that areas where hunting with hounds occurs had a healthier, more stable communities of foxes.
Ian,
Having a goverment that consistently forces through laws (and I’m not just talking about hunting) for their own benefit and to use as public spin, IMO is not wholly democratic – and I have the right to voice that opinion! :biggrin: It’s not a Labour / Tory thing, I’m not offering the answers but I am very disillussioned by the twisting of public opinion this goverment has adopted and the weight of ridiculous European red tape. There is no common sense anymore. <br>
(Edited by Spook at 2:41 pm on Sep. 16, 2004)
It’s funny, Highflyer – I got the impression quite a few didn’t care – may be we all read in to the views we hear with a bias, I wouldn’t say I never guilty of that!
Actually Terence1, I was going to mention the numbers of voters – I was watching when the protesters broke in and was quite amused by the fact there can’t have been 40 MP’s in there at the time! (in fact from the picture on the front of the Guardian I can see 27, but you can’t quite see all the seats). Shows you it was all decided then – some democracy.
If this is meant to be a democracy, why is so much time and money being spent on something that the majority of the country doesn’t give a toss about? This so called democracy is a small group out of our elected representatives forcing through a law just because it a)keeps a few happy, b)it’s one thing they can say they have achieved before the next election, and c) all this malarky at Westminster has detracted from all the other messes the country is in, even for a short time. A democracy should make decisions that benefit the majority – yes there will always be those who disagree – but this benefits the majority, err… how, exactly?
I think its quite ironic that the security of a little fluffy animal has taken priority and the Commons been shown up by desperately needing to look at their own security first!
(Edited by Spook at 10:28 am on Sep. 16, 2004)
Remember alot of NH horses come from hunting, where they face a different variety of obstables. The Quads is a good example of a horse who can show good form because these types of races are more interesting for the horse. I’m with Ian here – although I am more of a jumps fan – the variety of racing there is covers everyones tastes. There are never going to be loads of xcountry races as they are intended to be unique but the ones they show are a great spectacle.
Apart from the bell and the clanging, Kieron Fallon has said Hold That Tiger (and the other Europeans) was distracted by the stall handlers, alot of the american horses had lads in the stalls at the start and he said his horse was looking at the bloke next door, like ‘ what are YOU doing in here?’ and wasn’ t paying attention when the gates opened. Something to work on for next year, maybe……..
I’ve met Tommo several times – he comes and does shop openings for us. For all the bumbling and cheesiness he’s actually an OK bloke. He is great with the customers (even though a few of them don’t think much of him before they meet him.) He will always find someone who knows someone he knows, talk to everyone, etc. Not that that makes an excellent presenter but he is very personable and I like that in him. If I see him at the races he always nods and says hello – I don’k know if he recognises me, he seems to do this to everyone! He’s not that bad!
I don’t want to drag over old ground, either, Ron, but this keeps bringing up several points there are no answers to.
Some livestock can be protected to a certain extent, but there are exceptions. Sheep grazed on common or extensive land. Chicken coups or barns, which had animal rights activists campaigning for freedom. Did he not mean they were poor because they had lost their valuable stock :biggrin:
As with any activity there are always a few who ruin the reputation of the rest, the local hunt I know respects other farmers property and puts work into maintaining the hedgerows and land (not because they cause damage, it is part of the service they provide.)
If you have a better way to control foxes maybe the government will pay you to initiate it? (they didn’t ban it last time cos they didn’t have a solution)
Ripped to peices for pleasure is a misguided view, the riders hunt for the riding it gives them access to and to support the hunt doing the local farmers a service. Very few see the kill, it is carried out by the huntsmen, as much as people would pay Rentokill to come and inflict a slow and painful death by poisoning on rats and vermin in the house. Or how about the slaughter men that provide your sunday roast (all veggies forgive me). The point is it is not a nice job and it doesn’t mean these people do it for kicks.
Ron, I think the point Sal is making is that it is the people who have a problem with foxes in their area who are the ones who are involved.
Do I presume that you live in an area, albeit in the countryside, where foxes are not eating your lambs and chickens (if you have any?!) You are suggesting by living in the country, you are ‘involved’, which goes against the point of your post.
The farmers who are being ‘mugged and burgled’ of their property by foxes probably feel strongly too.
There are several races run during the course of the nh season over the Grand National fences (albeit shorter) – but no one is suggesting these may be dangerous.
There are testing fences on the course – it wouldn’t be a great race if the conditions weren’t demanding – but they are not all monsters and the work done over recent years to make them safer can only be applauded.
The biggest danger is the number of runners and the ability of the horses allowed to enter. Having so many horses hurtling toward a fence (especially at the short start before they have time to settle) is simply not safe.<br>There isn’t enough time and visibilty to read the fence.
Heavy ground may be more tiring and result in less finishers but its the fallers rather than pulled up than need to be considered in terms of safety. I would hope the jockeys are good enough to pull up a tired horse.
Out of the 16 fallers last year, how many of those were bought down by Paddys Return running across the fence in front of the field? (I can’t remember) and does any one know if Aintree have taken any measures to help prevent this happening again?
