Forum Replies Created
- Posts
The aftertiming on this rancid site is disgusting but the vile charlie1987 outstrips them all
Never had a winner that he didn’t tip afterwards
ENNISCOFFEY OSCAR at 6/1 for me!!
This has been crying out for three miles and I believe will show big improve now upped in trip.
Good Luck Guys
jammy priick.
screw raymo and all the winners. and screw you too ham with all your aftertiming posts you priick.
**** this crappy site and all the pretentious up-themselve nobs who post on here. good riddance.
******* joke. **** this game and **** my luck. wank wank wank.
and **** this ******* site as well.
Where have I said you can’t critique the man, Judge? Do you enjoy just going round in circles not making much sense or what?
there you go the insults again. can’t win an argument so resort to petty insults.
But saying Mullins‘ stats and continued genius isn’t incredible is blasphemy.
^ this.
apparently it’s “blasphemy”, which pretty much amounts to not being allowed to critique him, right?
Regarding the drugs thing I think it’s quite common, not just WPM that uses them, so it’s basically a level playing field from my eyes.
I’ll use a sporting comparison as you seem to enjoy those – Olympics is the same. I’m 99% sure Farah cheats but that doesn’t overly bother me as they’re all doing it!These aren’t in training drugs, merely steroids and the like to help with growth both in mass & muscle.
words fail me. if that’s your approach to sport then there’s not a lot I can say.
You mentioned people questioning your intelligence Judge – I wouldn’t worry – I don’t think we have seen it yet. 😉 😉
I’m fairly confident my I.Q. is higher than yours Charlie although that’s by the by. Mullins comes across as pretty intelligent which is maybe another reason why so many put him on the pedestal. Wow, he washes his horses? Amazing.
I have no idea if Mullins is a “genius” or not, I’m just keen to shred all the mystery that surrounds the racehorse trainer. A lot of it seems like emperor new clothes stuff to me.
Judge, Mullins may use drugs during the off season, and I’m of the opinion personally that it’s quite common to strengthen up the horses using them during the summer (winter for flat horses) as the horses won’t really get tested away at the owners’ farm. ‘Summer on his back’ and ‘wintered well’ they like to call it.
if that’s true, how can he be a genius if he’s cheating?
But saying Mullins‘ stats and continued genius isn’t incredible is blasphemy
this is what i mean about preferring other forums. you can’t even criticize people on here without someone taking insult like you’ve slandered their grandmother or something. Jeez, lighten up a bit.
According to you he might well use performance enhancing drugs during the summer but it’s blasphemy to even critique the man. That suggests to me that you don’t take cheating seriously enough.He was under awful pressure to run Vautour in the Gold Cup but decided the Ryanair was best.
but isn’t it fairly obvious that Vautour wouldn’t get home in the gold cup, given that he didn’t get home in the king george. he was only under pressure i think because the owner wanted to win the gold cup and plenty of punters had backed him for it. hardly rocket science to switch him to the other race.
People so far ahead of the rest in other sports. Phil Taylor, performance enhancing drugs? No chance. Ronnie O Sullivan, no chance.
yes but my point would be that they are sportsmen, willie mullins isn’t a sportsman, he’s a trainer and in my view that demands much less of a skill level than someone like a Ronnie O’Sullivan. Ronnie I would describe as a snooker “genius.” His natural talent is unmistakeable. His potting ability, general strategic skills around the table and touch in and around the black when on a break, set him apart from the rest.
Others are describing Mullins as a “genius” (and not just Charlie- it seems a throwaway moniker these days- Clive is right, it’s tiresome) but without actually giving any reason why this is so. Don’t other lesser trainers have access to the same information that he does? where is the skill in getting horses fit that there is in making a 147 break? the skill it seems to me is in the horses themselves, whose innate ability sets them apart from the rest. Perhaps that is down to breeding, or other factors. And that seems a more understandable answer to me than describing the trainer himself as a “genius”
I also can’t believe you think training racehorses is easy..i presume you have a lot of experience with horses? their fragility and the general complicated nature of the animal?
Juggling owners, buying the right horses more than than buying crap? Placing them to win, get blacktype + to peak at the big events?
Have a look at the horse that beat Douvan, Bellshill(and Bordini) and Listen Dear in their P2Ps and Fr races..
What have they done? what have the others done? Doesn’t just “happen”…
This is what I mean about preferring other forums where your views don’t get ridiculed… just because I have no experience of working with horses does that mean my views don’t mean anything? Are you from Lambourn or Ascot? No?
I can’t believe you’ve turned this into a drugs conversation
I wasn’t intending to, but noone else seemed to come up with a worthwhile reason why he’s supposedly so far ahead of the rest, other than the obvious one about money. And I do think it’s a subject that needs to be taken seriously when all sorts of sportsmen at the very top of the game are found to be doping all the time. Just the other day a well-known footballer missed a doping test.
In many ways this is why I prefer the betfair forum, apparently it isn’t the “home of intelligent horse-racing discussion” (and what a pretentious title that sounds) but you can throw ideas out there and question people at the top without being patronised and having your intelligence ridiculed by others. It seems to me on here that a lot of posters hate having their racing heroes questioned, which seems odd to me especially when none of these posters will ever met these people or have any contact with them. I admire Tiger Woods, but if you said to me he was doping at the peak of his fame, I wouldn’t be offended by it.
No, I don’t know what mark he ran to in the king george (it certainly wasn’t anywhere near as high as 167) but what happened is the official handicaper decided that he had overrated him for his Betfair chase win (which pretty much everyone thought before the king george anyway) and dropped him six pounds. If he doesn’t win tomorrow he could see a further drop, while even if he wins I’ll doubt he’ll go up much.
I don’t know if Mullins uses drugs or not. I hope not, he’s not suspicious in the same way that certain American trainer who brings his bulls over for the royal meeting is. But when someone is completely dominant, when there doesn’t seem to be an obvious reason why they should be (beyond the obvious, they have more money) then in this day and age with so much doping going on in other sports, it seems almost naive to not question why someone should be so far ahead of the rest. Didn’t some high profile trainers, like Philip Hobbs, Hughie Morrison and a bit further back, Nicky Henderson get in trouble for breaching doping rules? And I seem to recall Hannon and Godolphin (who had a trainer banned altogether from the flat, if I recall, apparently an “isolated incident”) also getting into trouble in the flat game. And yet every bringing up the subject seems to drive some posters into fits of apoplexy, who seem offended that anyone should dare attack their idols, their “geniuses”
As for the marginal gains argument, I wonder if when Lance Armstrong was winning everything, people put his dominance down to marginal gains? that he’d do one or two things a little bit better than everyone else, and that was why he was miles ahead of everyone? it seems a poor answer to me.
I’ve always just thought that the whole role of the trainer in horse racing is overrated. if I’m a golfer, or a tennis player, or a footballer, then the trainer has some influence. but ultimately it’s me that goes out and plays the shots. And the same analogy should apply to horse racing, that the trainer can only do so much. But some just can’t seem to accept that.
But what makes him more exceptional is his ability to improve horses from other yards.
This is why I question what “methods” he is using. What is he doing that’s so different from the other trainers who had these horses? I’m just curious to know, as noone seems to explain it, apparently it’s just some mysterious force behind the scenes and we’ll never know
Just because you don’t like this as an answer does not mean I have misunderstood your incredibly straightforward point that success is more about the quality of the horses than it is the trainer.
It might be straightfoward but it’s also correct. are you saying that mullins is somehow more important than the quality of horses he trains? that if he trained a lot of clapped out sellers that he would still be able to train champions?
this “ridiculously good” strike rate that you point to, is mostly to do with the fact that he trains some of the most expensive horses around. Like Nicky Henderson does in the Uk. Like Nicholls did when he had his dominant period. Like the trainers who work for Gigginstown, like Gordon Elliot. Like Aidan O’Brien on the flat, (supposedly another “genius”) and Godolphin. Surely that’s the most straightforward point of all?
He has all these backers like Rich Ricci and other wealthy owners; their chequebook is the largest reason for his success. if you don’t understand this simple point then I wonder if it is you on the “wind-up”
