Bruce, your post of the 6th states that there are too many people 'without the capital' to be in ownership (but who are) who are causing corruption. That's tosh, isn't it? There are a number of people who take up owning horses, either solely or in conjunction with others, because they want to be in the know; they open up telephone tipping lines and they constantly trawl jockeys and trainers for insider information to pass along to their telephone customers. They have no particular interest in their horses as personalities or individuals - in fact, the animals are to give them credibility as being in the game and in touch with all sorts of contacts. But they do have the capital - you cannot be in racing without it!
That's not corrupt, per se, but once these 'owners' begin laying their own horses, the BHA rules say that it is, and then they may be invited to produce their phone records for review. There are usually one or two active cases under such review at any given time, which shows - as SteveM says - the pernicious effect that the exchanges have had on racing.
There's always been a desire for 'inside info', from the very earliest days of racing, up to now, and there always will be. There is little point in 'inside info', imho. You're better off doing your own homework than listening to some trainer's head lad (last hot tip to a colleague of mine who backed it, a sluggish sixth) or someone who's heard that XYZ is working well at home - great, but do you seriously ever hear when XYZ is reported as a total pig at home?
As for Flame, I don't think there's anything essentially wrong with his averral that owners (and trainers) shouldn't feel under any pressure that they should share information with the public. I don't think it's any secret that Flame works very closely with his own horses and is a keen punter. If he feels he can benefit from the knowledge he works hard to gain, then why should he not take advantage of that first, before deciding whether to share it or not? That's no biggie, is it? No-one else is helping him pay for his costs, and no-one is offering him a cut of their winnings if his horse romps in. So why should he feel under obligation to impart any information?
In the case of many horses, it's probably easier to avoid the potential corruption of stable staff with bungs from players by coming out with as much information as might be informative, without in any way encouraging gambling. The last thing you want is to cloak the yard in secrecy, and then find that half your stable staff is on the take to watchers and their customers!
That's not corrupt, per se, but once these 'owners' begin laying their own horses, the BHA rules say that it is, and then they may be invited to produce their phone records for review. There are usually one or two active cases under such review at any given time, which shows - as SteveM says - the pernicious effect that the exchanges have had on racing.
There's always been a desire for 'inside info', from the very earliest days of racing, up to now, and there always will be. There is little point in 'inside info', imho. You're better off doing your own homework than listening to some trainer's head lad (last hot tip to a colleague of mine who backed it, a sluggish sixth) or someone who's heard that XYZ is working well at home - great, but do you seriously ever hear when XYZ is reported as a total pig at home?
As for Flame, I don't think there's anything essentially wrong with his averral that owners (and trainers) shouldn't feel under any pressure that they should share information with the public. I don't think it's any secret that Flame works very closely with his own horses and is a keen punter. If he feels he can benefit from the knowledge he works hard to gain, then why should he not take advantage of that first, before deciding whether to share it or not? That's no biggie, is it? No-one else is helping him pay for his costs, and no-one is offering him a cut of their winnings if his horse romps in. So why should he feel under obligation to impart any information?
In the case of many horses, it's probably easier to avoid the potential corruption of stable staff with bungs from players by coming out with as much information as might be informative, without in any way encouraging gambling. The last thing you want is to cloak the yard in secrecy, and then find that half your stable staff is on the take to watchers and their customers!
Last edited:
