It's also not that statistically unlikely. You can find better evidence for a conspiracy theory on any decent website.
Horse racing is still littered with what some would see as dodgy practice. However people get upset over the slightest thing. Understanding living animals and how they will behave on any given day is not easy. Examples where people are misguided in their judgement that racing is corrupt are numerous. I know people for example who bet who do not understand the premise of how some trainers prepare their horses. Often for horse welfare and so as to not bottom them early in the season. The trainer my father had his jumps horses with would never have a horse ready to roll first time. Indeed he would often say, "look he will strip fit around X time of year, we'll get two sharpeners in beforehand". The sprint horses are a great example. The number of sprinters who improve massively for their first two runs is a well known fact. One gets the freshness out and the 2nd gets them race fit. Yet people moan about how a horse will run ok and look threatening first time out and they'll think "that will win next time". Only for the horse to bounce and finish down the field next time out. Then it'll go and win. People say things like "Oh they obviously ran it down the field for the odds next time". Honestly that stuff rarely enters a trainers head. Eric Alston who trained a few sprinters successfully for my father was great at preparing them with a 2 run build up. The handicap system is of course the bug bear of many. I personally love it. Understanding what mark a horse can win from is helpful to a punter. Its not exact science because on any given day a horse can under or over perform. Its about pinpointing when the odds are slightly more weighted in your favour. People moan about trainers running marks down and so on. It happens but I have sympathy with the trainers who do. And sometimes, they are just out of form. Then you have trainers who run a horse average to poor 3 times get a mark and suddenly deliver huge improvement. Cumani and Prescott sprint to mind. They can ready one. So what, punters can be aware of trainer traits also. It might get you some value as long as you understand the risk. I don't think racing is corrupt. I think too many people just fail to understand the sport and its intricacies. Yet they still bet and still complain. Fools and their money.
The fact that the Sun reported it and no more respectable publications showed any interest doesn't fill me with enthusiasm for the theory. Statistically, I think the odds are 1/16. A bit unlikely but not remotely proof of anything.
To be fair, the Express, Mail, Mirror, Guardian and Sky also reported it, just with a bit less Sun-ness. 1 in 17 chance I believe. Still pretty remote, and as it was conducted not-live..... I think we're all aware it was fixed. My question was - how far does it go? PB's made some comments about the EPL that should be looked at - City will not get the favourable fixtures again next season. If they do, I wonder how far you'd have to dig to see some rather high sponsorship arrangements with the Middle East?
the big money races i was meaning you can say what you want its fixed .. has always been fixed ..looking after the well being of there horses ...bollocks ... so why do they just stop riding then .. ( no they will tuck it inside and pretend to push the horse ) wait for a lighter weight the next time .. . Eddie Ahern ,winston cant remember other ones ...seen the jump jockey jamie osbourne caught on camera .. if they have been convicted then how can you defend them or are you just trying to protect this so called sport .. done work for horse trainers in ireland and in england ... also the owner of the great monksfield champion hurdle winner ... ha ha dont you think i ask them things ha ha .. been offered part shares in horses .. look today man some trainer getting fined for horse testing positive for some drug .. they make more money out of there horses getting beat than wining ..same with greyhounds
Oh yes, the minimum fine because he was shown to be innocent of the charge of administering the anabolic steroid. The panel ultimately decided to ignore the guidelines, use its discretion and impose only a fine, having decided that, “on the balance of probabilities, Mr Morrison was innocent of any involvement” in the administration of a steroid to one of his horses. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...e-little-sister-british-horseracing-authority
whey whatever no smoke without fire .. all i say its protected , to much money in it ... there are loads of trainers banned for dope scandals .. i like a bet at chelt , the national and the derby . for which i have no doubt they all try , that never crossed my mind , there is to much money to be had ..
Well, the only fire that's been found is that Hughie Morrison is guilty of being in charge of a horse that has been a given banned substance. So if the horse was nobbled without his knowledge then he was guilty of that and that is that. It's like the bloody military courts: someone is guilty somewhere of something and the BHA being the gin-soaked galloping ex-majors that they are still run the pantomime in a military, but wholly ineffective manner. I have no time whatsoever for the BHA: they have some good Bright Ideas whose execution are sorely lacking. You still maintain that nearly every race is fixed, I counter that by asking how come the same group of people are able to make a profit year in and year out punting on the sport without inside information or illegal activity? I am still awaiting your reply, without which admission must be surely be made that the the game isn't a total fix. "at chelt , the national and the derby ." The first two I tend to swerve totally. The Derby was one I used to look for something along the lines of "Back Fallon in any big race" and not come out far wrong. The National meeting is one that I do like; the Thursday being the best day but Cheltenham has been buggered up by the fourth day and I used to go to the Open meeting. In fact that's where I had my largest on-course priced winner at over 170s on the Tote (and I just missed out on the Exacta by the closest margin possible).
I don't know what's going on in this cup but if I assume that there's eight teams and the issue is that four of them have been kept apart then the chances of that are 1 in 35, or 34/1.
