Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Thanks chaps. Not the info I wanted to hear but it’s all (good) experience. The horse was Gallante, and the bet was timed at 1117 so I’m out on any account.
Is 1200 a fixed time for ‘declarations’? For some reason I thought it was earlier. Or does it vary day by day/race by race? Not knowing makes me feel quite ignorant of a sport I thought I knew pretty well!
When and with what justification did that £5 raise occur, and for what service?
As a matter of interest, just how much are others paying for RUK?
Just got a letter telling me that my monthly sub is going up another £1.70. It’s still not bad value when stacked against the cost of racecourse entry, but it’s the manner of the doing and its justification that sticks in the craw.
They have recently launched the free RUKAnywhere multi platform service but are now using this as a reason to increase the price. Trouble is I only want Sky and you can’t opt out. Secondly their letter trumpets the addition of Ascot to their portfolio, but I could always get that for free from ATR. Finally they boast of how 100% of their profits go back into racing, but does anyone know how much that is in Pounds, and where it goes?
Grumpy rant over.
Yes, it was the impression that one stroke left me with. I’m not sure though how the result of that style could be anything other than a complete over the shoulder thrash/slash at the horse. Agreed, he held nothing back in the finish either. Presumably he was used to take advantage of his claim?
I just hope that for his sake, not to mention future mounts, that someone takes him to one side and has a word cos otherwise he’ll not learn.
On reflection, I suppose the question was a bit rhetorical. I get most of my info electronically and I’m often surprised by the amount of space racing is able to command against other sports but using, say, The Sun as a benchmark I’d kind of taken it for granted that other papers were on a par.
The volume and mediocrity of the day to day racing product provides little weight to any case for its coverage in the newspapers. Racing has no divine right to any space in the dailies, and I have no problem with that but it was a reality check for me to realise how low a profile ‘my’ sport has nowadays.
I’m only involved peripherally with racing but I do wonder whether those more closely involved realise just how irrelevant it is to the wider world.
Interesting question – at least it is to me! If you’re looking for one reason I’d say it would be the different amounts of money involved in the two codes.
Over jumps I can only think of JP McManus and the Gigginstown operation that are big enough to justify retaining a jockey of their own. On the flat there are many more, bigger owners who spread their risk across a number of trainers. They have a strength in depth and turnover of animals unseen over jumps, and more trainers depend more heavily on their patronage. Put simply they want, and can afford, and get continuity, consistency and consistency by employing their own jockey. From a jockeys point of view, it must make life more simple and straightforward, and potentially more lucrative.
Over jumps few owners have a string of horses to make retaining a jockey a sensible proposition. Only at the trainer level does the scale of the operation make it economically viable. At the basic level, I’m sure that if there was a better living to be made through owner retention rather than trainer retention there would be more jocks doing it!
Winner of the 410 the subject of equally inspired money!
Reasonably weighted if at its best, last showing it 2 years ago, but beaten over 135 lengths in its 3 most recent runs yet pops up backed in to 2nd favourite.
How was I to know that today was the day?Another link with my formative racing years gone; trainer of my all time favourite, Ekbalco. Condolencies to all family and friends.
In recent weeks it has become clear that the RSPCA and other animal welfare groups have a voice in the way that racing is run.
I’m not sure how they fit into the concept of being a ‘customer’, nor how they are any more of a stakeholder in the broader racing family than the punter.
But the reality is that such groups wield more power and influence than punters, and the fact is that punters have little say. Whether they
should
have a voice is a different, but largely pointless debate.
Steeplechasing
You are of course perfectly entitled to draw any conclusions you wish from whatever evidence you choose to cite.
The Post reported
"One tactic being discussed is targeting a steeplechase with a small field and the jockeys pulling up their horses after reaching the whip limit, thereby voiding the race".
As you say
IF
this has been discussed, it may have been discarded as nonsense immediately – we have no way of knowing.
However, nowhere does it say (as you do)that
‘they will deliberately hit each horse whether the horses behaviour or position merits it or not. In other words they will abuse animals for publicity.’
That interpretation and conclusion is entirely your own. It could equally be taken to mean that if during the course of a race a jockey reaches the limit they will pull up, rather than continue, thus risking a void race in which there are few runners.
I’d still be cautious at using media reported ‘fact’ to suit any argument of mine, but drawing attention to an issue by sensationalising it – mission accomplished.
Whilst I have no reason to suppose the Racing Post has plucked this story from thin air, until such time as the jockeys and/or their representatives come out and declare their intention to take this action, nothing I have heard or read can be treated as fact.
Using such reports as if they are fact, to pursue a particular agenda is unseemly, inappropriate and intellectually weak. The situation is difficult enough without attempting to exploit angles that may not exist.
Johnson does seem to have a problem in hanging on to stable jockeys. They can’t all have been wrong uns or is he just no good at spotting them?
I too felt that there were a few stables mopping up all the prizes with the rest scrapping for scraps so I’ve had a quick look at the trainers table this morning.
Top 5 have earned a shade under £4.5m, the same as the next 15 in total. You then have to go down another 50 trainers to accumulate that amount. That’s 7% of the top 70 mopping up 33% of the pot. In all honesty, not as bad as I’d thought it might be.
I had a look at a small group of second tier trainers with similar strike rates who I perceived to be having good seasons so far – Kim Bailey, Neil Mulholland, Peter Bowen and Gordon Elliott. Their winners have on average returned £3800, £5800, £3500 and £4800, compared to the top 5’s £10000, £7000, £7500, £8100, and £12400. Knocking on half the return.
Average prize money return per runner to date for my comparison group is running at £799. The same figure for the top 5 is £2233, almost three times as much.
The difference in comparative returns is significant but at an absolute level it must be some sort of a struggle. Peter Bowen has sent out 320 runners who have generated prize money of less than £200k and he has nearly a 205 strike rate!
All I can conclude is that it is a very different game at the top and you don’t have to be very far down the ladder for that to be the case. Not every one can afford to operate a boycott, no matter how much they may agree with the cause.
I’m confused;
Surely change is ongoing cos that’s what makes it change? If it’s not ongoing we have the status quo, which isn’t change?
Managed change, with clearly defined objectives, is what is required.
"Change is ongoing" really means ‘we’re dicking about with stuff, with no real idea of what we’re doing or why’.
I’m glad that others remember Lady Rebecca from the recent past, and my all time favourite Ekbalco. Cried like a baby when he was killed at Newcastle.
One over the jumps that I remember with fondness is Cavvies Clown – can’t say I ever backed the beast but it just had a way of racing that appealed to me.
I’m not sure if anyone remembers a flat horse I fell in love with from seeing its first race, named Cry of Truth. Trained by Bruce Hobbs if I remember rightly.
I don’t know whether he’s underrated or not, but I’ll not have anything detrimental said about Paul Moloney.
He talked us through a couple of the rides he had one afternoon, strengths and weaknesses of all the horses involved, how he saw each race going, what his options were and how he would ideally see things going.
He was spot on in both instances, implementing Plan A in the first instance, and Plan C in the second. They were completely different rides and I’m pleased to say both were successful. Polite, pleasant and serious about his work, I was well impressed.
I thought it interesting that C4’s between race coverage this afternoon focussed on the history and tradition of racing and its place at Newmarket, rather than ‘fashion’. Coincidence or a metaphorical nose thumbing?
I was pleased to see Eddie Freemantle repeat a letter to the RPost as his ‘Quote of the Week’
"Tradition is racing’s greatest asset and this needs to be conveyed in a simple and direct manner, not becoming lost in short-lived razzmatazz"
