Forum Replies Created
- Posts
No need for concern. Evens favourite. Won comfortably by 1 1/4 l from best Japanese sprinter Durandal. Ran the six furlongs in 1.07.5.<br>
Perfectly put Griff. I think I’d pay 75 quid NOT to go to Cheltenham – for all the reasons you mention. If you’re interested at all in the racing rather than in the alleged craic you wind up watching it on TV anyway.<br> Once it was necessary to go if you just couldn’t stand the C4 personnel. But RUK’s put an end to that problem.
Kevin, in other countries the tote turnover finances the courses. So much so that some tracks in Australia and US offer free admission. Bookmaking is illegal just about everywhere except in Britain and Ireland – although it is permitted, on course only, in Australia.<br>It’s the cost of the off course bookies that you’re really paying when you have to fork out 45 quid or whatever for the privilege of watching live racing.<br>Conall illustrates the downside of a tote monopoly. Otherwise it’s all up.
Whenever you pay for admission to the races, you are in effect paying for the right to bet with bookies.<br>Sorry this isn’t a new observation, but a lot of people still don’t realise it.
The game was corrupted about 50 years ago, ph. Now it is in the process of being restored to its previous greatness. Even if you cannot love it for itself, you will find it is the greatest betting medium in the world.:cool:
The reason this subject’s being discussed on a racing forum is that the racing authorities, without any vote or consultation, have aligned "racing" (that means all of us I suppose) with the pro-hunters.<br>I’ve no idea how much damage this will do to the sport’s image, but I would have thought it’s bound to do some.<br>
(Edited by Zorro at 12:27 pm on Sep. 16, 2004)
It wouldn’t be restraining them from riding or training racehorses – just from running them in races that were organised by the club (or Club).:cool:
Thankyou for that Seagull, and for starting this debate.
Gus, surely members of any club could be suspended by that club – particularly if they had signed an agreement to abide by the committee’s decisions as a condition of membership.
Gus, the point about the points:cool: is that they wouldn’t be given for deliberate wrongdoing – even though some might think, very reasonably, that this was the case. They would be given for incompetence – just like most points on a driving licence.<br> Mess up three times on a big drifter? No-one’s saying you’re a crook. Just: "Bye bye moron. You’re not fit to ride".
Who’s supposed to be my favourite jockey, by the way? If you mean Kieren Fallon, I don’t think he’d get many points. You may sneer, but how many of his drift markedly anyway?<br> And yes, I have heard of Ballinger Ridge.
I seem to have expressed myself badly. It never occurred to me that people would interpret what I wrote as a suggestion that every punter should be a steward IN FACT, with a right to impose penaties etc., or even that every berk who ever backed a loser should have the right to cry foul.<br>What I was suggesting was that those whose job it is to impose penalties should be alerted – no more – by those who invariably spot coincidences of serious drifting followed by inexplicable misfortune, and that the stewards should deal with these misfortunes within a framework that would enable them to get the crooks off the course, if only for a period of weeks or months.:( :(
Betting shop jockey here – even though I can’t remember the last time I went near one and have no intention of going near one in the future.<br> My suggestion is that since, by examining betting patterns, exchange punters now seem to be able to predict, for example, that certain horses will be slowly away, it might be a good idea for their vigilance to be harnessed by the Jockey Club as it tries to make life more difficult for those who hope to profit from such regrettable occurences. If you don’t like that, reet hard, would you mind explaining why.:cool:
