Simon Nott
Rookie
Are modern day punters, too soft for Ante-Post betting these days? https://www.starsportsbet.co.uk/simon-nott-why-are-punters-anti-ante-post/
-
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!
At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!
Ante-Post Betting
- Thread starter Simon Nott
- Start date
Janthefish
Apprentice
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2016
- Messages
- 74
Spot on, they don't want punters who realise they are going to lose a lot of the time.
Desert Orchid
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 27,973
The only good thing about the article, for me, was getting 'anti' and 'ante' right.
Others may view me differently but I see myself as a reasonably well-read (as far as form is concerned) student of form. I was brought up on the idea of the ante-post killing, pretty much since my father landed the Spring Double with Double Cream and Specify, both at 33/1. I don't recall how much he had on it but I he didn't punt in shillings! I remember him talking about thinking nothing of winning £100 at the geegees on a Saturday afternoon and losing it all at night at Shawfield dog racing.
He once bought a Crombie coat at £150 with winnings.
However, he gave up within a couple of years.
There are dozens and dozens of anecdotes within my family about great ante-post bets landed (not necessarily to big money; it was the idea of being right well in advance that mattered) and what the winnings paid for.
But for decades now just about every punter I know has been lamenting the death of the real bookie. Stingy ante-post odds tend to get the major portion of the blame.
It isn't that punters aren't brave enough to bet ante-post - as this forum exemplifies in abundance - but that they're much more savvy about value and relative risks.
I've all but given up ante-post betting myself as off this season but that's down to a chastening experience with over-involvement in recent seasons as much as health.
My father had Double Cream down as the Lincoln winner from the end of the season before. Remember, back then there was no AW and the season stopped on November Handicap day and restarted with the Lincoln meeting itself. There was no central handicapping so my father just pored through the Handicap Book - it was a book back then - for a likely type HE calculated to be 'thrown in'. When the National weights came out he decided Specify was the winner and every single one of us had money it, so confident was he.
The handicappers are much better at their job these days. Long gone are the days of the ex-army ex-Eton patronising buffoon who knew it all. Centralised handicapping and computerisation has taken handicapping to a new stratosphere. It is genuinely much harder nowadays to beat the handicapper.
Bookies are nothing but software users who also have inside information which they use to screw punters.
Punters like me are still prepared to take on bookies at their own game and appropriately disadvantaged, probably due to a masochistic and misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
But ante-post is a completely different animal today even from what it was 10 years ago. The reason some bookies offer NRNB and BOG is an attempt to blood-boost it.
And punters should never believe a word of any tale of big losses on individual horses. It's just bookies trying to sucker mugs into following false trails.
Others may view me differently but I see myself as a reasonably well-read (as far as form is concerned) student of form. I was brought up on the idea of the ante-post killing, pretty much since my father landed the Spring Double with Double Cream and Specify, both at 33/1. I don't recall how much he had on it but I he didn't punt in shillings! I remember him talking about thinking nothing of winning £100 at the geegees on a Saturday afternoon and losing it all at night at Shawfield dog racing.
He once bought a Crombie coat at £150 with winnings.
However, he gave up within a couple of years.
There are dozens and dozens of anecdotes within my family about great ante-post bets landed (not necessarily to big money; it was the idea of being right well in advance that mattered) and what the winnings paid for.
But for decades now just about every punter I know has been lamenting the death of the real bookie. Stingy ante-post odds tend to get the major portion of the blame.
It isn't that punters aren't brave enough to bet ante-post - as this forum exemplifies in abundance - but that they're much more savvy about value and relative risks.
I've all but given up ante-post betting myself as off this season but that's down to a chastening experience with over-involvement in recent seasons as much as health.
My father had Double Cream down as the Lincoln winner from the end of the season before. Remember, back then there was no AW and the season stopped on November Handicap day and restarted with the Lincoln meeting itself. There was no central handicapping so my father just pored through the Handicap Book - it was a book back then - for a likely type HE calculated to be 'thrown in'. When the National weights came out he decided Specify was the winner and every single one of us had money it, so confident was he.
The handicappers are much better at their job these days. Long gone are the days of the ex-army ex-Eton patronising buffoon who knew it all. Centralised handicapping and computerisation has taken handicapping to a new stratosphere. It is genuinely much harder nowadays to beat the handicapper.
Bookies are nothing but software users who also have inside information which they use to screw punters.
Punters like me are still prepared to take on bookies at their own game and appropriately disadvantaged, probably due to a masochistic and misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
But ante-post is a completely different animal today even from what it was 10 years ago. The reason some bookies offer NRNB and BOG is an attempt to blood-boost it.
And punters should never believe a word of any tale of big losses on individual horses. It's just bookies trying to sucker mugs into following false trails.
