2016 Gold Cuppin

I will tell you how good ec is...how many winners did he have at Cheltenham last year proofed to this site?...could count them on the teeth of gumsy gordon

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
I will tell you how good ec is...how many winners dis he have at Cheltenham last year proofed to this site?...could count them on the teeth of gunsy gordon
Click to expand...

It isn't a question of good any of us is, Tanlic: EC1, me, you, Slim, etc

It's about how we treat each other.

I know EC1 gets fed up with me questioning his methods but I do it because I want to understand more about them. They fascinate me whether they're right or wrong or whether I can find myself agreeing with them or not. Somewhere along the line he will shine a light on something I am blind to. And for that I will always be grateful.

But I would never dream of disrespecting him or anyone else who clearly puts in the hours and (usually) gives strong, measurable reasons why he has arrived at his conclusions.

You are simply opinionated and you express that opinion crudely. If people don't agree with your opinion you are very quick to resort to personal insult which degrades not only them but the entire forum.
 
Something came to mind when I read DO post....you work your butt off come to a conclusion and it ends up your selection gets stuffed because it was not the ttue run race you ecpected...
My point is simple you can spend a month working out which horse should win but at thd end of the day pulling a number out of a hat will find you as many winners....but to be fair when ev is correct and he finds a winner then he gets more pleasure than the coin tosser....but and theres akways a but

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
Tanlic. You will get the nodding dogs who never post anything against the grain falling into line to slag you off of course . Plenty of wnkrs here but don't ruin a spot on point by overegging it

the point about differing ground is spot on I believe. There are different good to softs etc. I also think it's a factor in why many horses act at one course and not another .

Im always open to jockey and trainer general observations . More so than so much analysis. At the end of the day if I want to know how a train gets from a ro b, I ask the driver
 
Euronymous said:
I'm not having that:D My punting life started in the late 80s so we started at a similar time. IMO the flat was better in those days than it is now, the jumps worse and in the early 2000s they crossed over.

And it doesn't just come down to opinions, the Festival is monumentally better and bigger. The foot and mouth thing in 2001, the thing is too big to be cancelled nowadays, it'd just get postponed a few weeks.
Click to expand...

I'm not having this either. ;)

My first Festival was 1994 and it was as big a deal then (for genuine racing fans) as it is now. For some of us, it was too big a deal to be cancelled in 2001. It was like telling a child that Xmas was binned that year, and I was mired in the depths of depression for weeks.
 
Last edited:
Desert Orchid said:
It isn't a question of good any of us is, Tanlic: EC1, me, you, Slim, etc

It's about how we treat each other.

I know EC1 gets fed up with me questioning his methods but I do it because I want to understand more about them. They fascinate me whether they're right or wrong or whether I can find myself agreeing with them or not. Somewhere along the line he will shine a light on something I am blind to. And for that I will always be grateful.

But I would never dream of disrespecting him or anyone else who clearly puts in the hours and (usually) gives strong, measurable reasons why he has arrived at his conclusions.

You are simply opinionated and you express that opinion crudely. If people don't agree with your opinion you are very quick to resort to personal insult which degrades not only them but the entire forum.
Click to expand...

to be very harsh, putting "in the hours" doesn't automatically warrant attention or respect

you get those knobs who build crap models or the Houses of Parliament out of matchsticks . Takes years. But they are still crap
 
clivex said:
Tanlic. You will get the nodding dogs who never post anything against the grain falling into line to slag you off of course . Plenty of wnkrs here but don't ruin a spot on point by overegging it

the point about differing ground is spot on I believe. There are different good to softs etc. I also think it's a factor in why many horses act at one course and not another .

Im always open to jockey and trainer general observations . More so than so much analysis. At the end of the day if I want to know how a train gets from a ro b, I ask the driver
Click to expand...

The point about differing ground is indeed valid. I asked EC1 about this kind of variance in a different post, and was able to do it in a reasonably polite and straightforward way; without resorting to downright insults*. That's the difference.

* I acknowlege I have probably insulted EC1 at various times in the past, but only when he is really getting on my tits. ;)
 
Tanlic said:
Something came to mind when I read DO post....you work your butt off come to a conclusion and it ends up your selection gets stuffed because it was not the ttue run race you ecpected...
My point is simple you can spend a month working out which horse should win but at thd end of the day pulling a number out of a hat will find you as many winners....but to be fair when ev is correct and he finds a winner then he gets more pleasure than the coin tosser....but and theres akways a but
Click to expand...

Some good points here, Tanlic. I know the feeling in the first sentence very well. Enough people on here and elsewhere know the kind of hours I put into trying to solve Saturday and festival races. (At my age I also accept I need to have a life hence my ignoring 99% of midweek races.) I try to analyse every race I have a bet in. I will back horses in races for two main reasons: a) I think, all other things being equal it should win and is in my opinion a value price, and b ) I think it has a much better chance than its [long] odds.

If they don't run up to expectations I want to know why. Was it the going, jockey, how the race unfolded, tactics, etc, etc?

I disagree utterly and entirely that pulling a number out of a hat will find me as many winners. That would be akin to playing bingo or betting on virtual racing. Believe me, if I thought I could pull numbers out of a hat and back as many winners as I do I would be doing that!

But I do get as much pleasure out of the result of a race confirming the conclusions I'd arrived at as I do about winning money, unless obviously I get a big payout on a double or treble.
 
Back on Topic I can't see Don Cossack being beat in the Gold Cup but what's annoying is Simon Rowlands appears to agree with me, sectional times and all:)
 
Last edited:
Don Cossack
Course form - F3=moderate; jumping=moderate; attitude=question; staying power=question. Easily discarded.

Cue Card
Course form - 124U21=good; jumping=good; attitude=excellent; staying power=question. Place claims.

Djakadam
Course form - F2F=moderate; jumping=question; attitude=good; staying power=good. Place claims.

Vautour
Course form - 11=excellent; jumping=good; attitude=good; staying power=question. Wins if he stays.

Don Poli
Course form - 11=excellent; jumping=good; attitude=good; staying power=good. Wins if Vautour doesn't stay.

Simples. :cool:
 
clivex said:
Im always open to jockey and trainer general observations . More so than so much analysis. At the end of the day if I want to know how a train gets from a ro b, I ask the driver
Click to expand...

you don't read the racing post "reporter" section very often I take it..if you did you would know the "drivers" very don't know how they have got from A to B

i'll keep my eye out for a future example...but very often they ask the jockeys what the state of the ground is after the first race sometimes..and very often you get a range from Good..down to Soft ...quoted by different jockeys

if you are hanging your hat on this to inform you of the state of the ground..best of luck

its a bit like thinking someone on mastermind who answers not one question correctly is the man to snaffle up for your pub quiz team.
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
I will tell you how good ec is...how many winners did he have at Cheltenham last year proofed to this site?...could count them on the teeth of gumsy gordon

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

i didn't realise putting up winners in a 4 day period proved how good we are,,but as putting up winners is your criterion..i've put a lot more up than you on here over the years..and by some way. So ...by your rules..i must be better than you at the game

you made the rules don't forget
 
EC1 said:
you don't read the racing post "reporter" section very often I take it..if you did you would know the "drivers" very don't know how they have got from A to B

i'll keep my eye out for a future example...but very often they ask the jockeys what the state of the ground is after the first race sometimes..and very often you get a range from Good..down to Soft ...quoted by different jockeys

if you are hanging your hat on this to inform you of the state of the ground..best of luck

its a bit like thinking someone on mastermind who answers not one question correctly is the man to snaffle up for your pub quiz team.
Click to expand...

thats not quite what I refered to. I know it's a bit vague from all parties at times but if ruby Walsh says such and such didn't or doesn't go in tacky ground say, then no reason to ignore that as far as I'm concerned.
 
that doesn't help a punter in the middle of any afternoon though when he wants to know what the going is at a track Clive

when you look at all the sports and all the ways people have of analysing them..there is always numbers involved..in fact most things in working lifes have data ..you yourself must use data in york work

why is it though that when it comes to horses racing..its .,..ooh you don't need data..i just look at it and its sorted..i just guess or let someone with a stick tell me...i just listen to jock or trainer..they always get it right.

doesn't seem to be very consistent view to me...data rules in nearly everything we do..but not horse racing?

its akin to a company having say 100 employees that needs to get rid of some staff....and someone asks two people to work out who they have to let go. One guy works out all the data..sickness..punctuality...work product...etc and concludes the people who he thinks on all known evidence can be let go. Other guy just picks 5 random folk he judges by looks and body language and sacks the 5 most productive people in the company.
 
Last edited:
Time ratings dont help in the middle of the afternoon either

i don't know what the last analogy is supposed to represent but it's also not at all true that data "rules" everything . That's a myth in sport and in business

its pretty straightforward. If a trainer or jockey reports back that a horse didn't like the ground then I'm not expecting data to bloody well prove it

also tanlics point about there being different types of soft going stands up, I also agree with grass on the fact that very small changes in ground can have a distorting effect over jumping distances. That's something that has always struck me as being significant. Also courses can have varied going around the course. Sandown frequently does

This analysis has its uses on occasions but thats about it.

And in fairness it is agood read
 
Last edited:
Back
Top