Barney Curley

The Stewards held an enquiry to establish the circumstances behind the withdrawal at the start of FEELTHERHYTHM, ridden by Shane Kelly and trained by Des Donovan. They interviewed the trainer, the Veterinary Surgeon and the Veterinary Officer, and the rider by telephone. Kelly reported that on arrival at the start, he was unhappy with the mare and asked the Veterinary Surgeon to examine her. The Veterinary Surgeon confirmed that after concerns expressed by Kelly that he thought the mare was unsound, and having trotted her up at the start, found the mare to be slightly lame and advised for her to be withdrawn. The Veterinary Officer reported that when initially leaving the racecourse, she observed that the mare was lame, however, on subsequent examination back at the stable yard, and having trotted her up without saddle or rider, FEELTHERHYTHM appeared to be sound. The Stewards noted their explanations.
 
Diamond Geezer said:
The Stewards held an enquiry to establish the circumstances behind the withdrawal at the start of FEELTHERHYTHM, ridden by Shane Kelly and trained by Des Donovan. They interviewed the trainer, the Veterinary Surgeon and the Veterinary Officer, and the rider by telephone. Kelly reported that on arrival at the start, he was unhappy with the mare and asked the Veterinary Surgeon to examine her. The Veterinary Surgeon confirmed that after concerns expressed by Kelly that he thought the mare was unsound, and having trotted her up at the start, found the mare to be slightly lame and advised for her to be withdrawn. The Veterinary Officer reported that when initially leaving the racecourse, she observed that the mare was lame, however, on subsequent examination back at the stable yard, and having trotted her up without saddle or rider, FEELTHERHYTHM appeared to be sound. The Stewards noted their explanations.
Click to expand...

and that is why racing in this country is fucked. Thats a front page in any other sport. Not for the RP though.
 
Certainly doesn't do the sport any favours. In financial services this would come under 'market abuse' and be severely punished. Maybe it's time betting markets were regulated in the same way as stock markets.
 
Last edited:
BennyB said:
Certainly doesn't do the sport any favours. In financial services this would come under 'market abuse' and be severely punished. Maybe it's time betting markets were regulated in the same way as stock markets.
Click to expand...



It is is possible but you would be talking about a Hong Kong model-maybe two or three meetings a week.I think any of us who punt on the all weather know there is a certain risk that comes with it.
 
LUKE said:
It is is possible but you would be talking about a Hong Kong model-maybe two or three meetings a week.I think any of us who punt on the all weather know there is a certain risk that comes with it.
Click to expand...

Basically we know it's not straight, and part of the challenge is to spot the patterns of who's trying and when.

I think we all accept that, but taking a step back it's still not massively satisfactory is it?

I'm not sure what the answer is, but stuff like today does racing nothing but harm. Every time I tell someone my main hobby is racing/betting on racing the first thing they ask me is "but surely it's all fixed?" or "how much of it is straight?", or similar. Racing must be the only sport that elicits that response.
 
BennyB said:
Basically we know it's not straight, and part of the challenge is to spot the patterns of who's trying and when.

I think we all accept that, but taking a step back it's still not massively satisfactory is it?

I'm not sure what the answer is, but stuff like today does racing nothing but harm. Every time I tell someone my main hobby is racing/betting on racing the first thing they ask me is "but surely it's all fixed?" or "how much of it is straight?", or similar. Racing must be the only sport that elicits that response.
Click to expand...

For me its not actually about it being fixed. Its our press who are paid to do a job who refuse to investigate this stuff properly. Yesterday was a scam to create a cash out situation for a small number of punters. The gamble was a smoke screen. The horse was pulled out after they had cashed out, was subsequently found NOT to be lame when checked again in stables. The whole thing should be all over the front page of the RP and they should do their job. The Editor is just a football punter living of the gravy coming his way from bookies. I'd chop his tiny little balls off tbh.
 
Digger said:
Yesterday was a scam to create a cash out situation for a small number of punters. The gamble was a smoke screen.
Click to expand...
I'm truly ignorant regarding the matter of cash-outs, but I had thought that cash-out was cancelled if the selection that was cashed-out becomes a non-runner.
It's a withdrawn horse so the original bet becomes voided with stakes returned, no?
 
Surely it's the BHA's job to investigate. The RP cover it but no mention of any investigation.

What really f**ks me off is the glorification that goes with it like these guys are some skilled, crafty & lovable 1940s-esque rogues fighting the war against the bookies. Which couldn't be further from the truth.
 
Last edited:
wilsonl said:
Surely it's the BHA's job to investigate. The RP cover it but no mention of any investigation.

What really f**ks me off is the glorification that goes with it like these guys are some skilled, crafty & lovable 1940s-esque rogues fighting the war against the bookies. Which couldn't be further from the truth.
Click to expand...

They didn't even cover the fact that the horse wasn't even feckin lame when checked again!!! Its the old thistle under the saddle trick.
 
I don't buy all this re cash outs. If the first 3 horses had won, or the first two even, then I could understand it. But with all 4 to run (albeit at prohibitive prices compared with when the bets were originally struck) I can't imagine the cash outs would have returned much more (if anything) than the original stake.

I have had a multiple on a number of occasions where more than one horse within the bet is trading at a much shorter price than that taken. The cash out offer usually ranges between 90% and 110% of the original stake.

If the first horse wins, the cash outs start to become interesting, depending on the price taken of the horse in question.

I am happy to be corrected though.
 
DanB88 said:
I don't buy all this re cash outs. If the first 3 horses had won, or the first two even, then I could understand it. But with all 4 to run (albeit at prohibitive prices compared with when the bets were originally struck) I can't imagine the cash outs would have returned much more (if anything) than the original stake.

I have had a multiple on a number of occasions where more than one horse within the bet is trading at a much shorter price than that taken. The cash out offer usually ranges between 90% and 110% of the original stake.

If the first horse wins, the cash outs start to become interesting, depending on the price taken of the horse in question.

I am happy to be corrected though.
Click to expand...


If all horse are say 14/1 + in a four timer.... then due to the hype of people claiming a "coup" they are repriced at 4s and less they were doubling return. There was a bunch of screen pics on twitter in the morning. There was nothing to stop the RP etc producing those and at least opening up the discussion that it was all a ploy (i think they were all turned over)...add to that that the horse that was removed on Vets advice was then found to have no lameness on return to stables then that surely deserves a full investigation. There won't be one though and thats my main point. No one in positions to influence gives a toss and would rather report its a potential coup that failed. Its all bollix and the RPs racing intelligence is up there with Womans Weekly.
 
Digger said:
If all horse are say 14/1 + in a four timer.... then due to the hype of people claiming a "coup" they are repriced at 4s and less they were doubling return. There was a bunch of screen pics on twitter in the morning. There was nothing to stop the RP etc producing those and at least opening up the discussion that it was all a ploy (i think they were all turned over)...add to that that the horse that was removed on Vets advice was then found to have no lameness on return to stables then that surely deserves a full investigation. There won't be one though and thats my main point. No one in positions to influence gives a toss and would rather report its a potential coup that failed. Its all bollix and the RPs racing intelligence is up there with Womans Weekly.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with you there Digger. It should be investigated and it's undoubtedly very suspicious given the circumstances. I'm just a bit skeptical about the cash out theory.
 
I ask again.....what is there for the Post to investigate? Unless you have evidence that someone has actually had it off via Cash Out, there isn't a story.
 
They're is a complete lack of understanding as to how Cash Out actually works and the limitations of trying to land a touch with it. It makes for a great Twitter conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
LUKE said:
Logically you cannot make money in a cash out situation if your horse is a non runner.
Click to expand...

They cashed out b4 the non runner. They cashed out after they promoted the sting to everyman and their dog on twitter. therefore creating a bunch of false favourites and bet365 offered more than double the original stake as a cash out. search twitter and you will find the screen shots. But RP haven't even mentioned it and haven't even mentioned the Stewards report that cleary states that the actual non-runner had **** all wrong with it. Im beginning to think I'm the only one thats not on the gravy here! :lol:
 
Digger said:
They cashed out b4 the non runner. They cashed out after they promoted the sting to everyman and their dog on twitter. therefore creating a bunch of false favourites and bet365 offered more than double the original stake as a cash out. search twitter and you will find the screen shots. But RP haven't even mentioned it and haven't even mentioned the Stewards report that cleary states that the actual non-runner had **** all wrong with it. Im beginning to think I'm the only one thats not on the gravy here! :lol:
Click to expand...

Then what's it got to do with connections? Anyone could have started the gamble. It's simple market manipulation taking advantage of how scared bookmakers are of building up liabilities.
 
SlimChance said:
Then what's it got to do with connections? Anyone could have started the gamble. It's simple market manipulation taking advantage of how scared bookmakers are of building up liabilities.
Click to expand...

100% agreed. There was never a coup! Thats the whole point. It was manipulated by "tipsters" on twitter telling everyone that the Shane Kelly coup was on tomorrow GET ON... suddenly all the horse are favs and the guys that started the rumour cash out for more than stake. The horse that got pulled out doesn't really matter but SHOULD STILL HAVE A FRONT PAGE from those wankstains in mullington towers.

Even Greg Wood who is normally pretty good in the Guardian is now far to busy drinking the pendleton gravy that he reports it just a cash out failure and ignores the set up element.
 
Last edited:
This is the danger bookmakers Dave from moving prices on air or penny bets to restricted accounts. You open yourself up to serious manipulation.
 
Back
Top