Skip to main content

English racing a mockery again

Am I Blue, the 33/1 outsider in the morning Racing Post forecast, with a formline of 7-0-0, wins by about 20 lengths (19 officially) in the 3.10 at Hereford after a huge, sustained gamble.

Dean Coleman, a 5lb claimer, is named to ride the horse, the money goes on (started 5/1 second favourite) and lo and behold, the jockey is replaced, and on goes leading jumps jockey Richard Johnson.

Trainer lying through her teeth after the race to say 'we haven't backed it'. Yeah sure. OK, perhaps she didn't, but it was certainly set up for a sting. Lives next to Tim Vaughan, pure coincidence that the Vaughan stable jockey goes on and it bolts in.

1 - surely an investigation is required after a horse looks completely useless in its previous three starts, and then wins by panels.

2 - it's ridiculous that a leading senior jockey is allowed to take over from a conditional jockey. Ireland and Australia have a 'like-for-like' rule - i.e. a senior jockey can only replace a senior jockey, and preferably one of similar ability/standings.

Matt Chapman on ATR after the race mixing between slamming racing for allowing to happen, and being sarcastic about the trainer's answers.

How can racing in the UK grow and thrive when crap like this is allowed to happen? Very poor for the image of the sport - when punters can not have confidence that form is genuine, then they won't bet. And when they don't bet, there's not much money going to the BHA for levy payments....

Comments

  1. Spot on analysis, as usual.

    Guess its always going to happen though. Horses are running for such poor prize money that landing a touch is sometimes the only way to cover expenses.

    That said, like for like replacements must be a rule that has to come in. It does help those who want to land a touch do so much easier.

    Regards
    SimpleBet

    ReplyDelete
  2. perhaps it's time we stopped this illusion that lower-class racing is for prizemoney, and if bookies want to bet on races of such poor standard with peculiar formlines, then good luck to them?

    The trainer put the turnaround in form down to treatment on the horse's back and a change in tactics. It's possible, but questions should have been asked before the race, and perhaps even a system where the trainer lodges reasons for form improvements (or potential sharp declines) BEFORE the race in a sealed envelope, only to be revealed after the race if needed. Ideally I'd like all this stuff declared to the public at least an hour before the race, but in a non-tote monopoly system, that would never be accepted.

    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

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla

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. T