What are your views with regard the issue of the huge gambles taking place today? I can see the obvious arguments and wondered if anyone had anything to add. For In support of such a thing we all like to see a punter winning and winning big against the bookies who are often never said to lose, the big bookies make big profits and so if they get caught with their trousers down occasionally then I am sure few will shed a tear. It is the battle between bookie and punter and its that which we love and most people I know would hate a pari- mutal because it takes away these things. We must also bare in mind that many owners enact the same ploy daily but the scale is much less of course and so can we criticise what we ourselves would do if we had a horse? I myself if owning a horse that was quickly identified as other than a group horse would find out from the trainer what his thoughts were with regard ability. I would then be expecting him to educate and handicap the horse to a mark he could win a race from and then tell me exactly when the horse was expected to win. The big flat owners have taken much of the skulduggery out of racing by allowing horses to run on ability from the outset as people like you or me would be unlikely to do so. Against There are also in my opinion two sides for the against argument The first is that honest racing enthusiasts have studied form today and placed bets with hard earned money and have had almost no chance of collecting because of these coups and this cannot be right, although this is the case everyday to a lesser extent and we could argue part of the art of punting in watching for these. The second is in the wider perception of the sport as should these gambles be landed it will make the main papers and could lead to people jumping on the all racing is fixed bandwagon once again, however wrongly, and this is not good for the perception of the sport we all love in general. My own opinion is that I quite like that these things occur as its very exciting watching them play out and has made an ordinary Wednesday very watchable. I do feel however that were it a common occurrence it would ruin the sport considerably as confidence in the form book would diminish and that would cause many of us to not trust the product.
Barney's back. Good or bad? I'd say more bad than good but if I was a midweek punter on these 'offs' today I'd probably have a different view!
Its a con. Thousands of people will have backed other horses in those races, the vast majority with a lot less money than curley. They may aswell have ripped the money up
Evening all ladbrokes knew about it that's why they never priced up at kempton early doors.its not just barney Curley it's the trainers and jockeys as well,one big interwoven web of cheating.its been going on since horse racing started but everything is so transparent now.the problem is the mug money has dried up the bookies can't balance the books anymore.you try going down to lingfield and get a monkey on a horse that is off and big mouth Barry Dennis will tell you to f off mate.unless something drastic is done racing has had its day,the bookies have known it for years now their just squeezing out the last drop before joe public turns away
Evening Ron a monkey is 500 quid off is just a word I use when the horse is down to win or is at least trying to win
Easy that Ron Wait until they're off, then drag off the jockey and replace him with a monkey dressed in the same colours. Monkey being much lighter, gives your chosen horse a 4 stone advantage. Easy when you know how eh? Course, you just might get spotted ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ These types of betting coup are relatively rare today, but hiding a horse's true potential is far more prevalent and harder to detect. But as someone else said, spotting them adds to the fun
Thanks. Hadn't heard the expression "off" before in connection with horse racing. I was thinking why put anything on a horse if it's off (colour) .
You never had it off large Ron? As for Barney Curley I think he's more Dick Turpin than Robin Hood. However, I find it very tough to muster any sympathy for bookmakers. The littl'uns will go as little as 1/6 of the odds a place on course and the big uns seem to be strangers to paying tax on their profits and you don't have to look far on t'interweb to find the shenanigans they get up to in settling winning bets. And what about that Henderson stable lad who had the big accy at the 2012 Cheltenham festival. Won a million but should have had loads more than that but for the payout limits set. I think it was Bet365 he had that bet with and as they tend to price up early hopefully they got stung today. Maybe he was a mate of Curleys and was in on it today, that would be nice.
Didn't something like this take place in the last year or two for only the 4th and last horse to lose when it was heavily odds on? It's a shame that those in the know we're not members of this forum. Anyhow it must of took them probably months or the last 12 months to pull this off which must have been pretty difficult to do, but in a way well done, and as for them bookies shortening the last two into odds on shots once they were aware who was behind these gambles is pretty shocking aswell. Mind you by doing so they have saved themselves probably another million or two. Anyhow who needs BC and his cronies when the good folk on here are banging out good winners on here day in and day out ( not me). I sure that one day soon this forum between you all will pull off a massive coup and make yourselves a nice packet.
Barney Curley... Sorry but we have to look at the classic again...!!! [video=youtube;LfPpBpDaSXE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfPpBpDaSXE&feature=player_detailpage[/video] Interview my 'rse...!!!
I don't have any issues with these gambles for several reasons: The horses were all declared. They all had reasons for improvement. Horses don't always run to form. How many times do we the punter get let down by many different reasons ie careless riding, the horse the other day that "Roulette" that swerved and lost its jockey when several lengths clear, intereference etc etc How often do bookies falsify prices, like yesterday cutting horses merely based on the trainer not on the chance of the horse? Rule 4's, non runners in handicaps or 7 runners when 8 were there when you bet. Finally what about Frankies 7? Fujiama Crest don't tell me this game aint bent!!!
