Racing Post Charge

I wonder if there's a market for an online-only competitor to the RP? I'd guess the team behind The Sportsman thought about it, at least fleetingly, at some point?
 
Obviously the Racing Post database is superior but in terms of fresh storys, racecards etc...the SL generally has it up before the RP.
Click to expand...

On the SL site you can also see on a single page what races are happening that day. Their 'fast results' service covers Irish racing and their 'full results' are in much quicker than on the RP site. So it fills a niche during the afternoon while the racing is happening.

That said, there's no comparison between the SL and the RP for form and analysis.
 
pauloon said:
all you need to pick winners are the runners, a form book,and your own opinion....if you need somebody else's opinion..your'e doomed.
Click to expand...
My point is that if you are using the SL site as your formbook option, you're in trouble. It's good for results, but otherwise littered with inaccuracies.
 
rorydelargy said:
My point is that if you are using the SL site as your formbook option, you're in trouble. It's good for results, but otherwise littered with inaccuracies.
Click to expand...

fair point...but even the form book is just someone's opinion...how many times has the 'judge' gave out obvious 'lengths' discrepancies..in fact how often has the judge given out the wrong result..maybe not that often but it does happen....i backed one for a place a while ago on betfair..was relieved to see it scrape into third,only for the judge to unplace it(later amended)..and also in the 'arc'..not amended...before i place a bet i check the form book...AND watch race replays...it THEN becomes MY opinion on what happened in that race...i get some right..some wrong..but either way,win or lose....i'ts my opinion...nobody else to blame but me.....
 
Surely if one has the distance down as 10 lengths then the other will too? If SL aren't using the official distances (the RP do) then they'll have it wrong far more often than not.
 
Will an upgrade mean I`ll actually be able to view the race videos through Firefox rather than having to open IE every time?
 
Irish Stamp said:
Surely if one has the distance down as 10 lengths then the other will too? If SL aren't using the official distances (the RP do) then they'll have it wrong far more often than not.
Click to expand...

They do use the official distances from the PA.

However it is true that mistakes are made on a more regular basis than you'd like regarding giving over distances; these are generally the announced distances/results though which tend to be rectified fairly swiftly and the PA notified as such straightaway.
 
Tried to get onto the sample site but only got a message back saying that an upgrade was needed, no other details as to what was required.

Like Melendez, I'm blocked to RP at work so only have access to SL. Unfortunately, I'm also blocked to ATR.

Frustrating.
 
Internet Explorer 7 is needed to work the site.

I'm still using the old site and will continue to do so until it is phased out.
 
Browsers and plug-ins
To use racingpost.com, you will need one of the following browsers:

Internet Explorer version 7 or higher

Safari version 2 or higher

Firefox version 2 or higher

Google Chrome

SITE PERFORMANCE

racingpost.com uses recent developments in internet technology to enhance the usefulness of the site. The speed at which pages download will vary according to the browser you use. Google Chrome, Firefox 3.0 and Safari 3.0 significantly outperform Internet Explorer 7 in this respect.

VIDEOS

To ensure that the videos in the racingpost.com media centre work to the highest standard we recommend you install the latest versions of Adobe Flash Player and Windows Media Player.

Racing UK

Video provided by Racing UK is encoded to be viewed using Windows Media Player and due to the digital rights management software utilised by Racing UK will play only using Internet Explorer.

Racing Post video

Racing Post audio and video productions are encoded to be viewed using Adobe Flash Player and will play in any of the recommended browsers.



Emphasis mine. Just stupid.
 
I'm not really sure what all the fuss is about. As far as I am concerned, the new site is so similar to the old one that is makes no difference. If anything, some of the little tweaks here and there have made it better.

That said, if MR2 can analyse a race in 4 minutes, then he clearly has a very different method to mine. We all use it for different things, I suppose.

When do we have to start paying? I can't believe I have had so much information at my finger tips for so long for free and I genuinely don't mind coughing-up for it now.
 
Rel, I found the beauty of the current RP card layout meant that I could quickly, within a few minutes, eliminate 'the losers' in a race and then compare the relative value of the remainder.

Now, I'm having to open additional form/betting tabs etc adding delays. Hopeless!

However, having tried to carry out my analysis process using the Sporting Life another question has arisen.

I had assumed that common race readeers were used by all the sporting press but then along came the 2:55 Leicester and Zahras Place.

The RP running description of its previous run hints at a trier but the SL version paints a poor jumping proposition - can I trust either???

My view remains that the new RP is little more than a glossy magazine and not to the punters advantage. My view would change if recent form was immediately visible beneath each race card, having to open new tabs is ridiculous!

MR2
 
Good job, I took the RP running version of Zahras Place rather than that of the SL and the SP reflected the RP forecast which I thought was a value price.

Is this the last £5e/w because I ain't spending hours doing what I can do in a few minutes.

A troubled MR2
 
I used the new format RP site (deliberately because I had the time to get used to it).

Personally I found it really easy to use, all of the data that I needed was in the logical place and I love the ability to grey-out runners in races that I have ruled out.

All of the data-feeds for prices and intelligence load much, much faster than the horrible old Java versions and if you spend a few minutes configuring the site to work best for you then it really works well.

The fact that the content loads dynamically so page refreshes are not necessary and there are no clunky Java plugins means that I think that analysing a race is actually a touch quicker than the old site.

I don't tend to utilise video-form so much - so I didn't encounter any issues with my Firefox browser.

Visually I think it is an improvement - less serif fonts was always going to bring that and generally the interface is slicker, without being flashy.

The only enhancement that I would ask for at this time would be a button to display all runner's form summaries with one-click.

All-in-all the differences are not huge between the two formats, but the increased speed of the dynamic AJAX-style content makes it a slight improvement over the old site.

Whether it warrants the move from free-content to paid-for content is a different matter, but I suspect that was coming anyway. Most crucially for me they didn't mess-up an already good product, which isn't always the case when firms migrate from Web1.0 to Web2.0.
 
Got it.

I have download something called explorer 7, although haven't tried to work out how if afects RP yet. If I'm really bored tomorrow, I might post up the review of the IT ignoramus later
 
Back
Top