On The Bridle
At the Start
Krizon - your posts of today on several threads actually exceed their usual brilliance....seriously insightful and constructed with your magic touch! Take a huge bow!
A punter should use the form in the book. If you dont trust the horse or the trainer to run the horse on merit dont back it.
Do you have all this "inside info" on all the other sports? Do you assume that every Dart player or Snooker player is giving 100%. You make a bet on what you know about that player, not what the had for breakfast or how many beers they had last night. Do you know the exact strategy that a F1 team will use before the race? NO.
Do you have all this "inside info" on all the other sports? Do you assume that every Dart player or Snooker player is giving 100%. You make a bet on what you know about that player, not what the had for breakfast or how many beers they had last night. Do you know the exact strategy that a F1 team will use before the race? NO.
EC1
On a break
i don't know if there any non trying dart throwers tbh
..i never bet in that sport or many others apart from racing tbhI don't want to know if Kauto Star was out on the razz the night before either
You don't need to know "inside info" info in many sports and games..just racing it appears
which is why i am saying..what is going to appeal to younger people in future who have been brought up on a multitude of sports and online games they can gamble on? Its a lot different to when i was younger..Horse racing was the main gambling sphere then. You could be ripped off quite easily by backing non triers unfit horses and that was accepted as part of the game then. Thats not really acceptable now because people have choice whether they want to gamble on a sport where they are missing key ingredients or gamble where they have near on all the ingredients
i would have thought people who watch F1 do so because they like watching it..not a sport based on gambling like horse racing is..most people i hear talking about F1 at work have never had a bet in their life
Last edited:
again EC1 i'll say use the form book. We all know which trainers to avoid at which time of year, and we know that from watching how they run over the years. Dont bet on what you dont know. The amount of people ive seen bet on South African racing and all sorts of shite shown in the bookies is astounding. Nobody is forced to put a bet on, and if you think you are being hoodwinked then walk away. But if i own a horse and the trainer tells me he's improved hugely on the gallops then i reserve the right to use that information for myself before it goes out to the general public. I honestly see nothing wrong with that.
Horse racing isnt a sport based on betting either. Bookies appeared at horse racing as they saw an opportunity to make money. Same goes for dog racing and other sports. All these sports existed before there was dozens on bookmakers at the courses.
If an owner or trainer is asked about their horse they should give an honest answer, but they are not obliged to stage a press conference each time their horse runs.
In any case punters are mostly better off ignoring what connections have to say and coming to their own neutral assessment of the form. I don't bother with any of these stable tour articles, for example, because they are far more influential on the betting markets than they ought to be. Most of the time trainers and owners are guessing too, because the real test of a horse comes on the track and not on the home gallops.
Certain specific pieces of information which can make a big difference, such as whether a mare is in foal, or a horse has had a wind operation, ought to be in the public domain. The racing media should also be making more systematic use of the information reported by trainers and jockeys to the stewards concerning the performances of their charges.
The grey area for me concerns horses with canine tendencies. Are connections entitled to avoid saying their horse is a soft, slothful, wayward sort who will throw the race away if let? Of course they are, why should they be expected to cut their own throat twice over, first by talking down the value of their horse and then by giving the opposition information they can exploit?
In any case punters are mostly better off ignoring what connections have to say and coming to their own neutral assessment of the form. I don't bother with any of these stable tour articles, for example, because they are far more influential on the betting markets than they ought to be. Most of the time trainers and owners are guessing too, because the real test of a horse comes on the track and not on the home gallops.
Certain specific pieces of information which can make a big difference, such as whether a mare is in foal, or a horse has had a wind operation, ought to be in the public domain. The racing media should also be making more systematic use of the information reported by trainers and jockeys to the stewards concerning the performances of their charges.
The grey area for me concerns horses with canine tendencies. Are connections entitled to avoid saying their horse is a soft, slothful, wayward sort who will throw the race away if let? Of course they are, why should they be expected to cut their own throat twice over, first by talking down the value of their horse and then by giving the opposition information they can exploit?
I dont agree with that at all. No one knows the horse as well as the trainer and form only tells you what has happened rather than what will. If a punter wants to ignore a straightforward competent trainers assesement that a horse needs this or that to be at their very best, without the form book being able to confirm then thats up to them, but i dont
But 'real' punters will soon enough know which horses have canine tendencies, as evidenced by enough relevant opinions on forums like this one, won't they, Grey? Even LONG RUN is not viewed as a nailed-on job, let alone the dozens of lesser mortals gracing the tracks. Or disgracing them.
As for all the endless stream of info about cheekpieces first time, tongue ties first time, wind ops, etc. - heck, isn't that why people buy race cards or TimeForm, or listen to ATR and RUK, where the i/f info is usually dispersed? If you are a serious punter, ear constantly to chatter, then you'll know these things one way or the other. Most presenters worth their salt will be flagging up changes in yards, i/f, changes in headgear, first time right-handed, and so on.
There is surely only so much stuff to chuck at punters before they just have to make up their own minds? And when is information too much, and not that relevant anyway? So, a horse is going first-time r/h - does that mean you'll fancy it more, or less? It's an observation, not a guarantee of better performance, that's all.
Every now and then, there are these bellows for more and more and even more information, until you'd think all yards had as a function was to feed a constant stream of updates to the punting public. No-one mentions changes in feedstuffs, supplements and the application of various therapies, do they? Would it be helpful for you to know that KAUTO STAR gets heat lamp treatments before he runs (I'm making this up to demonstrate a point), or that BIG BUCK'S has regular Reiki sessions? When did these start? What effect have they had? You want to know about changes which may impact on a horse's performance in order to maximize your betting potential? What will you do if you're informed, via some sort of updating website, that Bonzo Dog has had, since his last outing 75 days ago:
The addition of Cortaflex to his feed
A switch from cheekpieces to blinkers
The application of a Chifney bit from a plain jointed snaffle
Two practice gallops round Kempton (r/h first time)
A mild ear infection (treated)
A slight prick to a heel (not infected, slightly lame only two days)
Slight stiffness through his left shoulder (treated with Shiatsu)
Which of these everyday occurrences in racing stables would encourage your desire to punt him off the boards? They're all relevant to performance, but some more than others. You choose! And unless you're also pretty well up on what they imply, you'd then need a flipping Glossary of Terms to find out what they meant, first, and what the intended result would mean. There has to be a line, surely, somewhere, before all of this just turns into an overload of gibberish?
As for all the endless stream of info about cheekpieces first time, tongue ties first time, wind ops, etc. - heck, isn't that why people buy race cards or TimeForm, or listen to ATR and RUK, where the i/f info is usually dispersed? If you are a serious punter, ear constantly to chatter, then you'll know these things one way or the other. Most presenters worth their salt will be flagging up changes in yards, i/f, changes in headgear, first time right-handed, and so on.
There is surely only so much stuff to chuck at punters before they just have to make up their own minds? And when is information too much, and not that relevant anyway? So, a horse is going first-time r/h - does that mean you'll fancy it more, or less? It's an observation, not a guarantee of better performance, that's all.
Every now and then, there are these bellows for more and more and even more information, until you'd think all yards had as a function was to feed a constant stream of updates to the punting public. No-one mentions changes in feedstuffs, supplements and the application of various therapies, do they? Would it be helpful for you to know that KAUTO STAR gets heat lamp treatments before he runs (I'm making this up to demonstrate a point), or that BIG BUCK'S has regular Reiki sessions? When did these start? What effect have they had? You want to know about changes which may impact on a horse's performance in order to maximize your betting potential? What will you do if you're informed, via some sort of updating website, that Bonzo Dog has had, since his last outing 75 days ago:
The addition of Cortaflex to his feed
A switch from cheekpieces to blinkers
The application of a Chifney bit from a plain jointed snaffle
Two practice gallops round Kempton (r/h first time)
A mild ear infection (treated)
A slight prick to a heel (not infected, slightly lame only two days)
Slight stiffness through his left shoulder (treated with Shiatsu)
Which of these everyday occurrences in racing stables would encourage your desire to punt him off the boards? They're all relevant to performance, but some more than others. You choose! And unless you're also pretty well up on what they imply, you'd then need a flipping Glossary of Terms to find out what they meant, first, and what the intended result would mean. There has to be a line, surely, somewhere, before all of this just turns into an overload of gibberish?
On The Bridle
At the Start
All I generally want to know is "is he off". That gives a fair indication usually....
:lol::lol:
But, seriously, the amount of guff that pro or very regular punters want is getting to be a bit daft, innit? Race cards are crammed full of stuff that, far from involving newbies to racing, distances them further and further from understanding its mechanics. On the one hand, we want racing to be 'more transparent' - which has been taken to mean by some that everything should be updated, Twitter fashion, so that no tiny gleaning goes unmade and unconsidered.
What sort of analysis tables are the Excelled masses to make of all the changes in saddlery, trainers, or left or right hand preferences, if they're then told that a horse's improved performance was down to anti-ulcer medication, cold compression bandages, or regular swims in a heated pool? If all of those quite normal procedures are not part of the 'transparency' now so demanded by ECI & Co., then those with that information are indeed on the 'inside' and it'll be stable staff, more than anyone with all of their graphs and charts, who'll be the beneficiaries.
There surely has to be a limit - unless you want to pay even more for TimeForm's services! - to how much information can be carried into the public domain every day. There are around 17-18,000 entries in every copy of Horses in Training (and even then several trainers are omitted), and if you really think that you could cope with thousands of little bits of info re the changes in horses' routines on a regular basis, then you might make a helluva lot more money launching such a site, rather than twiddling with the knobs and dials of trainers' opinions, journalists' reviews, and the evidence of the form book!
Significant (apart from form): application of first-time eye restriction headgear, whether it's blinkers or cheekpieces or shadow rolls (the sheepskin noseband, which is NOT announced when first applied, illogically). These items are to prevent a horse from using its peripheral vision to distract itself by looking back or to the sides (primitive prey animal reflex).
Changes in distance; changes in trainer (useful mostly if you know how different their regime might be); changes in regular jockey if there is one; number of days since last run; distance travelled (you ain't paying to send a horse 250 miles without some degree of hope!).
Physical changes since last run: gelding, wind op, recovery from injury or ailment, pregnancy.
There are so many other factors which you observe for yourself, or at least note from others' obs: does the horse's action suit the going; the trainer's record with the type (2 y.o. debut, sprinter, etc.); world without end.
There are just so many details to take into account, that I can't believe anyone really feels they need more in order to make up their minds as to whether to bet or not. I don't know if spread bettors need so much info on, say, tennis players (taking anti-arthritic drugs/7 lbs over best weight/recent break-up with girl/boyfriend might impact focus)?? :lol:
But, seriously, the amount of guff that pro or very regular punters want is getting to be a bit daft, innit? Race cards are crammed full of stuff that, far from involving newbies to racing, distances them further and further from understanding its mechanics. On the one hand, we want racing to be 'more transparent' - which has been taken to mean by some that everything should be updated, Twitter fashion, so that no tiny gleaning goes unmade and unconsidered.
What sort of analysis tables are the Excelled masses to make of all the changes in saddlery, trainers, or left or right hand preferences, if they're then told that a horse's improved performance was down to anti-ulcer medication, cold compression bandages, or regular swims in a heated pool? If all of those quite normal procedures are not part of the 'transparency' now so demanded by ECI & Co., then those with that information are indeed on the 'inside' and it'll be stable staff, more than anyone with all of their graphs and charts, who'll be the beneficiaries.
There surely has to be a limit - unless you want to pay even more for TimeForm's services! - to how much information can be carried into the public domain every day. There are around 17-18,000 entries in every copy of Horses in Training (and even then several trainers are omitted), and if you really think that you could cope with thousands of little bits of info re the changes in horses' routines on a regular basis, then you might make a helluva lot more money launching such a site, rather than twiddling with the knobs and dials of trainers' opinions, journalists' reviews, and the evidence of the form book!
Significant (apart from form): application of first-time eye restriction headgear, whether it's blinkers or cheekpieces or shadow rolls (the sheepskin noseband, which is NOT announced when first applied, illogically). These items are to prevent a horse from using its peripheral vision to distract itself by looking back or to the sides (primitive prey animal reflex).
Changes in distance; changes in trainer (useful mostly if you know how different their regime might be); changes in regular jockey if there is one; number of days since last run; distance travelled (you ain't paying to send a horse 250 miles without some degree of hope!).
Physical changes since last run: gelding, wind op, recovery from injury or ailment, pregnancy.
There are so many other factors which you observe for yourself, or at least note from others' obs: does the horse's action suit the going; the trainer's record with the type (2 y.o. debut, sprinter, etc.); world without end.
There are just so many details to take into account, that I can't believe anyone really feels they need more in order to make up their minds as to whether to bet or not. I don't know if spread bettors need so much info on, say, tennis players (taking anti-arthritic drugs/7 lbs over best weight/recent break-up with girl/boyfriend might impact focus)?? :lol: