Barney Curley

I remember being at home last summer and they were going after that Napa Star hammer and tongs (was Byrnes's brother behind the gamble) at Bellewstown one night last July.
 
If you read my initial post, littlelad, I'm not doubting the charity work Curley does as I'm well aware of it. In fact, you'll read that I commented on how amusingly ironic I found it that he does so much for charity yet couldn't lie straight in bed himself.
 
i think the attitude to fiddling depends on the perceived status that the fiddler holds..Curley is viewed as little status so is looked down on..whereas Prescott is perceived as well to do..so its ok

basically some of the attitude towards Curley is just plain old snobbery
 
There's a slight difference - Prescott tends to make use of lenient handicap marks awarded to young and inexperienced horses (through some slightly borderline methods at times, admittedly, yet legal all the same) and stays ahead of the handicapper for a while until the handicapper has hold of them. Curley on the other hand takes already exposed horses and messes around with them for ages to get their handicap back down to a false mark, before taking the handbrake off them and piling the cash on.
 
Shadow Leader said:
There's a slight difference - Prescott tends to make use of lenient handicap marks awarded to young and inexperienced horses (through some slightly borderline methods at times, admittedly, yet legal all the same) and stays ahead of the handicapper for a while until the handicapper has hold of them. Curley on the other hand takes already exposed horses and messes around with them for ages to get their handicap back down to a false mark, before taking the handbrake off them and piling the cash on.
Click to expand...

not exactly true..these horses hadn't run for ages had they?

there is no difference bewteen Curley and Prescott re attitude to racing.....except the perception of each person from what I can see.....Prescott = toff..Curley = oik..........Prescott is loveable rogue.....Curley is evil demon
 
Last edited:
Does Prescott do it for the gambles or to win 5 in a row with a horse. Anytime I see one of his run up a sequence it's at pretty short odds so you're right, it shouldn't be allowed if the horse has not run on its merits but if the improvement is due to a step up in trip then the question is whether he used the racecourse as a training ground, and to be honest I'd say most trainers run their horses over too short a trip to start with, just to give a nice introduction to racing. What Curley does is entirely different.
 
rorydelargy said:
Which Willie Carson case btw?
Click to expand...

When he was just breaking into the big time, he was hauled before the stewards at Hamilton for giving his mount an 'easy'. The stewards asked him what his instructions had been.

Carson: To hold the horse up.

Stewards: Until when?

Carson: Until Ayr next week!

:lol:
 
Cantoris said:
Does Prescott do it for the gambles or to win 5 in a row with a horse. Anytime I see one of his run up a sequence it's at pretty short odds so you're right, it shouldn't be allowed if the horse has not run on its merits but if the improvement is due to a step up in trip then the question is whether he used the racecourse as a training ground, and to be honest I'd say most trainers run their horses over too short a trip to start with, just to give a nice introduction to racing. What Curley does is entirely different.
Click to expand...

The real issue is the handicap system and this will always happen until they get rid of it, which they won't.

This is a lot like football when someone fields an understrength side really.
 
Spot on Aragorn - we'd be better off just having allowance races ala the US system with races for winners of 1, 2 3 and then 1 within a year or 6 months, 2 within a year. We could keep the usual maiden races, claimers and sellers just scrap the cheats charter that is the handicap system.
 
I watch a lot of American racing and going down that road isn't the solution.it wouldn't be a rare occurance to see a bad claimer on the same card as a Grade 1.
 
a case today proves its not what Curley does - its how he is looked down on that brings the critics out

today Mhilu ran in seller at NA - Elliot had previously sold it for just £800..he then withdrew his own horse Financial regulator [apt name]from the race which was favourite.... then AP Mccoy is given the ride in a jockey change....Mhilu pissed in

not a dickie bird said - funny how some can pull stunts and be invisble:)
 
Last edited:
Interesting. The RP analysis mentions that winning trainer Gary Brown's landlord is none other than McCoy.
 
LUKE said:
Mhilu had an outstanding chance on form -can't see the problem
here.
Click to expand...

never said there was a problem - you have totally missed the point - which is..if Curley had been the trainer who sold it for 800..suggesting that great form chance no longer existed..then there would have been all hell to pay...proving its not underhandness that people dislike..but the particular individual doing the misleading
 
Seriously, EC? You believe that as long as it's a loveable, Cheeky Chappie misleading you serious punters, not some taciturn old bugger in Oxfam clothes, then folks won't get peed-off? I'm not sure how long it would take for punters to not be too impressed by the loveable, cheeky rogue as well - surely they're not quite that dim? Underhandedness is another word for 'cheating', so surely it doesn't matter who does it, when or why? A cheat's a cheat, for a' that.
 
krizon said:
Seriously, EC? You believe that as long as it's a loveable, Cheeky Chappie misleading you serious punters, not some taciturn old bugger in Oxfam clothes, then folks won't get peed-off? I'm not sure how long it would take for punters to not be too impressed by the loveable, cheeky rogue as well - surely they're not quite that dim? Underhandedness is another word for 'cheating', so surely it doesn't matter who does it, when or why? A cheat's a cheat, for a' that.
Click to expand...

thing is though Kri - there was hardly a murmur about this stunt yesterday - we all know if it had been Curley he would have been highlighted

its down to simple like/dislike isn't it?.. i think it does matter who does it - its the same with Fallon - slightest thing he does gets headlines - other week for example when one of the Hills lads got stood down for failing breath test..hardly a mention anywhere of it - had it been Fallon there would have been plenty said
 
EC1 said:
thing is though Kri - there was hardly a murmur about this stunt yesterday - we all know if it had been Curley he would have been highlighted

its down to simple like/dislike isn't it?.. i think it does matter who does it - its the same with Fallon - slightest thing he does gets headlines - other week for example when one of the Hills lads got stood down for failing breath test..hardly a mention anywhere of it - had it been Fallon there would have been plenty said
Click to expand...

That's a very fair point EC1. I'd almost forgotten that Hills failed the breath test( due mainly to lack of media coverage). He's escaped practically without any stain on his character. Fallon/ Carberry wouldn't/havent been so lucky as regards bad publicity. Me senses some kind of a media conspiracy theory in there someplace:whistle:
 
PRICEWISE2008 said:
That's a very fair point EC1. I'd almost forgotten that Hills failed the breath test( due mainly to lack of media coverage). He's escaped practically without any stain on his character. Fallon/ Carberry wouldn't/havent been so lucky as regards bad publicity. Me senses some kind of a media conspiracy theory in there someplace:whistle:
Click to expand...

Fallon and Carberry both have a track record of controversy - Hills (nor Mick Darcy who failed a drink test earlier this month) have the same track record.
 
Back
Top