Big Yards - Can They Get Too Big?

Slightly off topic and I apologise for my ignorance but on average what does it set the owners back to keep a single horse with a trainer for a year and is there a vast difference between the top trainers to the smaller yards?
 
links781 said:
Slightly off topic and I apologise for my ignorance but on average what does it set the owners back to keep a single horse with a trainer for a year and is there a vast difference between the top trainers to the smaller yards?
Click to expand...

Well, the split between WPM and Gigginstown was about raising fees from €50 to €55 per day for horses in full training and he probably charges something around 35 per day the rest of the year. I doubt any NH trainer in Ireland charges more, but a few on the flat probably do. And there are some trainers that cost maybe a third less than WPM.
 
He has a huge range of owners, and many of his horses are cheaply bought. He still caters for the syndicates with summer horses for Perth as well as Giggy and everything in between. In the middle of all the other activity this weekend he had a runner in a 2k race at Wolverhampton last night.
 
Of course they can, like everything it's about the team and putting the right people in the right positions.

Few think that Sir Clive Woodward is the greatest rugby coach of all time but he brought the right people into his England set-up so that the team were capable of winning the 2003 RU World Cup.

The same will be true of Gordon Elliott, he'll have the right people in as Head Lad(s), Assistant Trainer(s), gallops man, work riders, Travelling Head Lad, office staff etc.

It must be a logistical nightmare for those who are running the office with the various boxes, ferry bookings to the UK, where to travel to/from, when people are going to be back in the yard etc.

Martin
 
I'm sorry but anyone thinking that Mullins 'tucks up' punters is just wrong. Everyone knows (or should know by now) that he leaves his final decision to the last minute and may change his mind several times on the run up to declaration time. If you try to second guess what he doesn't even know himself then you only have yourself to blame.
 
Not really, archie.

If on the Sunday you say "We run in the Gold Cup or not at all", and on the Tuesday morning, you confirm you are going for the Ryanair instead, then you deserve everything that's thrown at you, imo.

A simple "We will leave it to Willie" would have sufficed, but the guy likes the sound of his own voice too much for that approach.
 
My tupence worth. More a basic observation of perceived fact that any great insight in to any of this.

A big part of all the fury (and well justified) is because punters feel mislead with their anti-post bets....
Anti-post betting has always been dodgy, but now with so many shorties at the festival, trained by Willie, and owned by Ricci, there is an enhanced squeeze on punters wanting to maximise their profits.
Having said that, I remember when they priced up Baracouda at 6/4 for the World Hurdle after he won the Long Walk, so all of this is nothing new, it just hasn't happened on a scale like what we're seeing with Ricci's horses.
This kind of makes me think we need a fifth day at the festival afterall, full of 24 runner handicap hurdles and chases, so we can actually find horses at odds against worth betting!
 
Last edited:
archie said:
I'm sorry but anyone thinking that Mullins 'tucks up' punters is just wrong. Everyone knows (or should know by now) that he leaves his final decision to the last minute and may change his mind several times on the run up to declaration time. If you try to second guess what he doesn't even know himself then you only have yourself to blame.
Click to expand...

Exactly
 
Marble said:
My tupence worth. More a basic observation of perceived fact that any great insight in to any of this.

A big part of all the fury (and well justified) is because punters feel mislead with their anti-post bets....
Anti-post betting has always been dodgy, but now with so many shorties at the festival, trained by Willie, and owned by Ricci, there is an enhanced squeeze on punters wanting to maximise their profits.
Having said that, I remember when they priced up Baracouda at 6/4 for the World Hurdle after he won the Long Walk, so all of this is nothing new, it just hasn't happened on a scale like what we're seeing with Ricci's horses.
This kind of makes me think we need a fifth day at the festival afterall, full of 24 runner handicap hurdles and chases, so we can actually find horses at odds against worth betting!
Click to expand...

It's also a lot to do with the new races at the Festival and the increased options available, especially to novices but also to the older horses.
 
I don't think it's anything very much to do with maximising profit, and I don't see the correlation with Baracouda at all.

My Gold Cup bet on Vautour was struck last December, and whilst I was pissed-off at him missing the race, I accept that it's a part of the risk, if you bet that far ahead of the Festival. The people who were really chinned by Ricci, were those who backed other horses in the Ryanair, in the expectation that they wouldn't be facing Vautour in the race. As soon as Vautour was declared, they were basically all on a) at a terrible price, and b) a hiding to nothing.

Ricci's mob paid-out on Vautour as a winner in the Gold Cup, which looked magnanimous, until you realised it was a much cheaper option than paying out on everything else as a winner in the Ryanair.
 
archie said:
I'm sorry but anyone thinking that Mullins 'tucks up' punters is just wrong. Everyone knows (or should know by now) that he leaves his final decision to the last minute and may change his mind several times on the run up to declaration time. If you try to second guess what he doesn't even know himself then you only have yourself to blame.
Click to expand...


I'm a long time student of the Mullins family and in my opinion Willie is always worth listening to.Regarding Vatour -that's horse racing -these things happen-plans change-it is an inherent risk of ante post betting.If you back ante post you need to accept there will be a certain percentage that will not run.
 
LUKE said:
If you back ante post you need to accept there will be a certain percentage that will not run.
Click to expand...

Yes. But with Ricci's horses its all the more enhanced. Shorter prices on them, greater perceived chance of winning, but seemingly a lot less certainty about what races they'll run in.

A recipe for disappointment.

At least with barracuda you knew the target...
 
Last edited:
They could do something like changing the the entry system. Say a month beforehand a horse is only allowed to be entered in 1 race.
 
Aren't they doing something like this, Tiggers - albeit much closer to the race-date?

Someone here will know.
 
I suggested it on here some time ago Grassy, which is where you may have picked it up?

If they are actually planning to do it I haven't heard anything. I still think they should though.
 
I think that was because he withdrew top weight to manipulate the handicap at a time when the weights stayed the same after they were framed. Didn't top weight carry something like 11st as a consequence? It's all a bit hazy now so I may be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Maruco said:
I think that was because he withdrew top weight to manipulate the handicap at a time when the weights stayed the same after they were framed. Didn't top weight carry something like 11st as a consequence? It's all a bit hazy now so I may be wrong.
Click to expand...



Sporazene was the beneficiary.
 
Back
Top