Jonjo O'neill Horses Still Unwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter useful
  • Start date Start date
Well said Cantoris - at last someone capable of not slagging the small punter.

Exchanges are good in the sense of getting on big without you stake being restricted by the bookies. And they are great for the new dimension they gave punters who can now bet on horses to lose.

You are right though - they have also made it incredibly easy for connections to defraud the public if they are that way inclinced.

With prize money as low as it is, there is clearly more incentive to defraud via the exchanges than to run on merit. Also the former is a guaranteed return everytime. In the old days you had to "fix" a race whereas now you simply stop your own horse.

The BBC aired a big expose a few of years back with some very high profile people exposed. But all of the people exposed are still working in racing, and winning at the high profile meetings. Whats that all about?

The main "betting exchange" do , to be fair, claim to monitor and report unusual betting patterns but I think this only gets to the tip of the iceberg.

Until a high profile criminal prosecution succeeds the sport will continue to "smell".
 
Originally posted by useful@Jan 21 2008, 06:44 PM
Until a high profile criminal prosecution succeeds the sport will continue to "smell".
Click to expand...
I know this is going off topic a bit but it doesn't need to be high profile as they will never be proved. I'll put it to you this way. If I was an exchange operator, I would give some high profile info to a source, claim I was doing my bit to keep the game straight blah blah, and if it resulted in a successful prosecution claim that I was a good policeman to to trust me. If it went wrong as the case failed and there was blood on the street and no more prosecutions likely and therefore no more policing, great. It's a win win. All I'm interested in is revenue. I don't care who backs and who lays, as long as I collect my commission. Punters will still bet, just like they will still watch football despite the betting scandals, just like people will vote whether they like politicians or not. That's life but there is surely a better way to do it. Put 100 people in the biggest exchange. Actually make it 200. Everyone gets tracked. Let me identify my connections and if I lay one, then ask why. It's not easy, but it can't be rocket science either. I was once told that the volumes on Irish racing were so small it was impossible to tell who was crooked and who wasn't. I don't believe it for a minute. A trend is a trend, whether its a fiver, five hundred, five thousand or five million. Sorry, that's my rant over with, I'm off to lay one of our horses!!
 
I think you have a rather archaic view of people's punting habits tbh, Useful. I'm a small punter myself, certainly compared with most on here, and I go to betting shops if I want to watch midweek racing as I've not been home enough in the last few years to justify getting satellite. That doesn't mean I don't take my punting seriously - I do, and I inform myself as much as possible before making my modest bets. I *have* to make it pay.

I see people in the bookies all the time, who bet on anything and everything, and they spend about two minutes reading the RP pages on the walls before they make their bets on the horses. Mostly they bet on the dogs, or the fruit machines. Why should I not see them as 'mug punters'? - that sadly is what they are, and I don't see why racing should spend time and money policing people's self-destructive behaviour, or protecting them from themselves. They are mugs because they are spending money gambling on something which in all truth they know nothing about. I'd be a 'mug punter' if I gambled on the dogs, or snooker, or footie - so I don't.

As for people in betting shops being the biggest contributors to gambling revenue, well that's very far from the case imo. You rarely see a bet bigger than 50 quid in a betting shop [unless someone is pulling off an 'inside info' touch] and most are smaller than that. Most betting shop punters come in for a bit of company as well as to spend their few quid. If they were serious punters they would take it seriously! Being a small punter and a 'mug punter' are not necessarily the same thing

Almost all big punters now gamble on the exchanges - you can see the sums for each race above the prices, and even for small races they are considerable. Or they have telephone betting accounts, and ring in their bets, either from the course or more often while watching ruk and atr at home. These kinds of punters, which include a lot of people in this forum, are the ones who keep the bookies going - they gamble in at least three and more usually four figures, and they do it regularly. Bookies would fold tomorrow if they depended on the unemployed and the pensioners in the shops [ie people like me!!].

The matter of whether or not exchanges like Betfair encourage skulduggery is a big question - and another question. It seems to me that is being policed; and in any case you have to put on a huge sum to win a small one if you are laying, so it's not that hard to monitor. My own opinion is that more effort should be made to identify and ban bent trainers as well as jockeys, as we can probably all think of a few who we wouldn't trust with stolen money. They are the ones defrauding the punters, whatever the level of their punting expertise.
 
Headstrong said:
These kinds of punters, which include a lot of people in this forum, are the ones who keep the bookies going - they gamble in at least three and more usually four figures, and they do it regularly. Bookies would fold tomorrow if they depended on the unemployed and the pensioners in the shops [ie people like me!!].

QUOTE]

Then why don't they close the shops and save themselves shite loads of money?

How does this bloody "quote" menu work?
Click to expand...
 
Bookies now make most of their money on one arm bandits, and the dogs, and virtual racing, sdo far as 'money over the counter' is concerned. I can;t see how it pays, not in smaller fairly rural towns anyway. city shops are a bit different...

I think a lot of shops will close in the next few years anyway if my local ones are anything to go by - since the smoking ban they have been almost empty. And most of the punters are older people - the sort who probably have not got computers, or satellite telly. Younger people in the shops tend to be excitable Chinese on a work break, or others dashing in from work to put on a couple of bets

To get the 'quote' facility to work you click on quote... the post will come up in a separate box. Best to snip all except the bit you are replying to, and no need to use it at all if you're replying to the post directly above yours. Hope that helps :)
 
".................You rarely see a bet bigger than 50 quid in a betting shop ................"

Heads, as you are a customer and not a member of staff, I find it difficult to see how you feel you are in a position to make that statement.

I think you would be surprised how many bets larger than that are taken.
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Jan 22 2008, 04:53 AM

To get the 'quote' facility to work you click on quote... the post will come up in a separate box. Best to snip all except the bit you are replying to, and no need to use it at all if you're replying to the post directly above yours. Hope that helps :)
Click to expand...
Got It! :clap:
 
Heads, as you might imagine, I concur with the two responses already made to your thread.

There seems to be a lot of people like you on the forums, who are probably similar in age.

And every betting shop has people like you who look down their noses at everyone else.

You might be surprised to know how many betting shops are in existence up and down the country, and the revenue they generate for punters. Like most businesses they will have busy days/periods, obviously Fridays/Saturdays/Festival Days being key.

I dont think people like you will ever change their opinion of so called "mug punters", however the fact remains these people are the main contributor to the levy, once you add up their number across the UK as a whole.

The serious big hitter plays the exchanges these days, often trading in running. These people contribute nothing to the levy.

My point therefore is an industry that gains so much from a section of the population should be regulated more stringently in order that the basic man in the street wanting a fun bet in his lunch hour or whatever has access to as clear and up to minute an information source as possible.

After all, without this what is to differentiate real racing from virtual racing. And if we go down that road, which is not beyond the realms of possibility should the "mugs" as you call them start to catch on to the unfair state of play, and start moving away from racing as a betting medium.

I recall racing in Belgium almost collapsed overnight when a corruption scandal saw punters stop supporting the sport in their droves.

There is no guarantee whatsoever that a similar situtation could not happen here.
 
After all, without this what is to differentiate real racing from virtual racing.
Click to expand...

The true odds of winning at Virtual racing are statistically fixed in favour of the operator. The longer you play, the more you will lose and there's nothing you can do about it.

At least with real racing it is at least theoretically possible to gain an edge and make money over the long term - that's the difference.
 
Gareth Flynn, quite right. My point is that in the absence of the sort of information I mentioned earlier (with reference to Another Brother), most betting shop punters have as much chance of winning on the "cartoons" as they do on the real races.

A lot of people in the shops follow jockeys and trainers. Without information about the form of these connections they are being deprived of the information you quite rightly gives them a chance to gain an "edge".
 
The information is there in the public domain - punters have to seek an edge, those on the exchanges do and get the better odds, I read up on which trainers are in or out of form and back the horse accordingly (or not if he or she is out of form) etc.
 
I saw a gamble on a horse in a bumper at Uttoxeter earlier this season - 20/1 into 7/2, the trainer in question based in West Yorkshire had something like 1 winner in 200 starters (both codes) in the past 2 seasons. The horse ran well considering and just blew up in the last two furlongs.

Did those piling into this horse know the stats on the trainer? maybe, should they have checked them out before piling in? most definitely.
 
Irish, yes it is there in the public domain, but it is not there in most betting shops these days. And my point concerns the people betting there - with no access to the internet, or a full copy of the RP at least, probably just finished a shift, or on their lunch hour. Fun punters, for the most part, but when added up they are a significant funding source for British Racing.

The truth of course is as I said before, the government are happy to keep collecting the levy, and the bookies are not going to bend over backwards to help people win! And as the government need the bookies winning to collect their revenue, they also want the status quo maintained.
 
It's caveat emptor isn't it?

If someone spends over the odds for a new TV because they didn't spend 10 minutes finding out where to get it cheapest, should we have sympathy for them based on the fact that they're contributing more VAT?

As for whether the information is available, don't the RP include their trainer RTF (run to form) figure in their cards?
 
It is there though it's not hard to get a copy of the Post, it's normally kept behind the counter or on a stand they only need to take a quick peak and see the stats or print out a copy off the website in the morning and you're away - the hot and cold jocks list, even some daily newspapers have a list of them I believe.

Would the fun punters really take any notice of whether the trainer is in or out of form anyway?

Most of the punters in the shops I've been in wouldn't know a colt from a filly or Jonjo O'Neill from a permit holder and look at the price and then put their £1 to win on.
 
Yes, they do, but that is hardly clearly highlighted is it?

What would be more preferable in my opinon would be additional comments, perhaps under sub headings, in the spotlight para, drawing the readers attention to things like trainer form, so for O'Neill under Another Brothers Spotlight they could say something like:

"Stable 0/22 Jan. Incl: 2/5 Beaten fav; yard under a cloud; possible virus"

I only started recording my bets ion 2002 and had been betting for 15 years prior to that. I dont know how much I lost, but I know I lost!!!

Now I know my profit and loss for the past 6 years, and I use every available means to gain an edge.

However, people like you and I are surely in the minority among punters, and I think that having come from a betting shop past, when all I had to go on was the RP on the wall, punters deserve better.
 
Surely what you get out of racing, as with most things, is in proportion to what you put in.

You say you have seen the light, that you are no longer a mug-punter, what was your epiphany?

Fun punters, as you call them, and as Irish Stamp has pointed out, wouldn't bother looking at the information you are asking to be printed. Surely if you want to make a profit at punting you find out these things for yourself, it can be done if you are prepared to put in the effort.

Over the years I have spent much too much time in betting shops but when you here things like "I always back the bottom 'orse", "always back a horse with "r"the third letter in its name", " back horse number 10 if the second letter in his name is "o"", what else can you call these people but mug-punters.

No amount of information about stable-form is going to help them.

Would they admit that they need help?

Do they care, they are in an environment that presumably they enjoy and once they have lost their budget they stop betting.

You have to accept that if there are going to be winning punters then there have to be losing punters, we can't all win, can we.

What we should all try to do is make sure we are not the losers.
 
I disagree on your point Colin Phillips re: they wouldn't read the information.

Most shops are characterised by the huddles around the RP broadsheet copy before the next race. In this time the punters will be feeling an adrenaline rish and are searching for a selectin to win money. At present the "RPR" stat is meaningless to most people.

A simple addition to the Spotlight section, such as I suggest, would help the majority of betting shop punters.

Yes you are right to say you get out what you put in. However just because I had "an epiphany" as you choose to describe it, doesn't mean that I have decided all betting shop punters are scum and deserve to lose.

As I said earlier on in the thead, combined they keep the racing show on the road and at least deserve to be given some sort of chance.

Otherwise they may as well just bet on the cartoons. And to be honest a part of me would love if in the morning they all stopped, and went on the roulette machines permanently. Then I would enjoy watching the racing big wigs bemoan the fact they never treated their mass customer base better!
 
or Jonjo O'Neill from a permit holder
Click to expand...

Well....



this has been discussed on another forum but i suspect the same poster

Lets put it this way. Is it really so difficult for a punter to get on the net? and if they do, they will find on the RP site at least, information they couldnt have dreamed of 15 years ago

Complaining about lack of info with the current availability seems perverse frankly

And i dont think that mug/social punters or whatever are any the less likely to move away from racing because they havent been spoonfed information.

What does put them off is the perception that racing is bent...but thats a different subject of course
 
Hello again Clivex,

This is the first time I have made these views on a forum so not quite with you on your opening sentence.

Anyway, to respond, the point I made was about punters who find themselves in the bookies at lunchtime or after a shift (our postman pops into the local Corals everyday he is working). Or the man having a pint in his local who pops next door for a quick bet.

You and I may choose to bet online and use the RP site, and you are quite right it gives us info we could have only dreamt of in years gone by.

However for the types of punters I mentioned above, they should be given better information in my opnion. And perhaps having for years been that sort of punter, I am speaking with experience.

Of course, people have posted on forums before with the notino of an RP/Bookies conspiracy desgined to feed betting shop punters with skewed information. The argument goes that because the RP earns so much revenue from bookmaking advertisers it is designed to make punters lose.

I think this is an extreme view myself, but interesting nevertheless.
 
I suppose they could give a 1-5 rating of a trainers form against each horse on the card. Maybe that would need to judged against their usual standards (Alan berry somehwat different to M Stoute...) than against an overall benchmark

Not the worst idea and useful reminder for even (supposedly) seasoned punters
 
They already give a 1-100 rating of a trainers form against each horse on the card, judged against the expected standard of that trainer's horses. shrug::

At least they do on the online cards. Pretty sure they're in the paper too, and would be surprised if they were left out on the shop-wall version.
 
it really all boils down to how trainer form is measured

it could be that the RP could formulate another way of reading trainerform...other than the RTF rating they now have and state a trainer is out of form...when in fact no such thing is really in play.

for someone to say a trainer is "out of form" is quite a bold statement using a set formula for all trainers.

RTF ratings are pretty neat imho...but...they aren't really fair to the trainer of poor animals who on the whole will have horses that will run more than 5lbs below their best rating quite often...just because they are not consistent animals...whereas the trainer with better class animals will get a higher RTF just because they perform more consistently...not really connected with a general wellbeing or otherwise in a yard.

Do trainers just have cycles when they they purposely "dumb down" over a period of a couple of weeks through choice...which looks like out of form but is actually their method of training.

re Jonjo...he has in the past gone through similar periods of horses looking out of form....then come Cheltenham..they miracously start winning...is it deliberate on his behalf?

maybe someone with more knowledge of actual training of horses could possibly start a thread just on how a horse is brought to peak fitness etc??
 
Absolutely EC, the RTF formula is certainly open to debate. But in terms of giving punters an easy ballpark number, it's there.
 
This weekend should tell us more about Jonjo's form. Exotic Dancer and Wichita Lineman both reappear with high expectations----the fact is that he has an unbelievable number of bad horses that JP never seems to get rid of----he probably will pull one out of the hat just to keep his job--in March.
 
Back
Top