Skip to main content

Big Harry goes nuts at BHA Chief Exec

A heated confrontation yesterday at Doncaster races when professional punter Harry Findlay crossed paths with BHA Chief Executive Nic Coward. The reasons behind the angst can be found here in a previous post. Findlay accused Coward of ruining his life and demanded the resignation of Coward and BHA Chairman Paul Roy.

Now, I'm not one to side with racing authorities very often, but the facts of the matter are that Harry knew the rules, and broke them - not once, which may or may not have been an accident, but twice - and that's only of the times that we know Betfair and the BHA Integrity Unit spoke. And then he had the gall to claim he had special privileges, despite all figures in the racing industry being told very firmly that using inside information to lay horses in the same stable was expressly prohibited. He was given a severe penalty which was later reduced on appeal, but he was still found guilty of the offence.

You made your own bed Harry, now you have to lie in it. Rather than blaming the BHA for your problems, perhaps you should accept the fact your penchant for hooch is frying your brain and ability to think rationally. Stop acting like a two-year-old throwing a tantrum.

Comments

  1. Couldn't agree more - no one but he decided to lay - he knew the rules but even if he didn't ignorance of them is no excuse.

    One person to blame and imo the first punishment was right not the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In the aftermath of it, a six-month disqualification isn't that big a penalty, so perhaps it was appropriate... but that is conditional on other penalties being stiff and very tough. Rules are rules, and while I think there should be a separate assessment of trading whilst still profiting from a win, until the rule book changes, you have to live by what is written.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is a bit extreme to for Harry to say that Nic Coward has ruined his life.

    Findlay isn't stupid and I'd be surprised to find that he didn't know the rules.

    I'm sure there are 'people in the know' who lay horses in a far more discrete manner than Findlay does, it smacks of arrogance from him in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term 'Ponzi scheme' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up.

So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done.

The…

damage control when trading goals

When trades go bad, some people will say cut your losses immediately, others will recommend having a bit of patience as events tend to level out (i.e. games with two goals in the first 10 mins never end up with 18 goals in 90 minutes). This is something I like to do on certain matches.

Background:
1. You've backed Under 2.5 goals, trying to nick a few ticks at a time as the clock ticks.
2. You've been caught out by a goal.
3. The market has gone sharply against you.

On this particular match from a couple of weeks ago, there was an early goal (sixth minute) before I got involved. The period immediately after an early goal regularly shows a sharp drop in the Under price, so I was trying to capitalise on that. But Watford then scored again after 14 minutes. The Back price I took (3.95) was now out to 12 - I could close out for a big loss (not my style) or wait and wait for the price to come back to somewhere I could close out for minimal damage. But at 2-0 after 15 minutes, it w…