Cheltenham Festival
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
well any idiots who havnt already backed it for chelt, ur screwed now, streets ahead of anything else, binocular been the next best obviously
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 48
|
By:
6.5L ahead of Oscars Well.
Remains to be seen how far he is ahead of Zarkandar, Rock on Ruby and Grandouet, if he indeed he is ahead of them at all! |
|
By:
6 1/2 lengths on the bridle first run of the year and on ground softer than ideal worth a damn sight more than the winning distance that he achieved. the rest are playing for second imo
|
|
By:
Different class to the other runners, easily the best since Istabraq.
|
|
By:
soyouthink, it cud of been 20l if he liked, u r joking aint u? the fact u mention ZArkandar in the same post as hurricane fly is a joke in itself, hurricance is miles clear of anything, and binocular is the next best 2 him
|
|
By:
No point runnig the race then. Might as well give him the cup now.
|
|
By:
i never sed it was a cert, Hf is just miles ahed, doesnt mean that things cant go wrong, but given a good round , i cant see him getting beat
|
|
By:
Idiots is a bit strong denman,like you say he aint a cert,and he werent even a cert to run till this weekend,in fact he still aint given his track record.
What was his best price NRNB?? |
|
By:
15/8, 7/4
|
|
By:
Was 2/1 NRNB defo - nt sure about 9/4
Think 2s was best |
|
By:
I think the race lost a bit when Spirit Son dropped out as he was the only rep from the Supreme which looks very hot. The only danger to Hurricane Fly imo comes from the Triumph now and I expect horses from that race to fill the places. Even so they have some way to go to beating Hurricane Fly and it's very likely to be too much of an ask for a 5yo to beat one of the best hurdlers we have seen. I've backed the Fly at 15/8 and now I've seen him fit & well I'm pretty pleased with that. Zarkandar & Grandouet should both run well but one is very inexperienced & the other is arguably better on flatter tracks.
|
|
By:
The bookies, and in particular Lads, will take an absolute hammering if the Fly wins with some of the NRNB prices they were offering on him.
|
|
By:
He was 5/2 without NRNB so those taking NRNB have given tons of their value back to the bookies.
|
|
By:
Unless he doesn't run of course...
|
|
By:
Not at all, those who didnt take NRNB already have half a point more than those who took NRNB which covers half your stake on your next non runner if he wins. All these differences in prices make you way more profit by not taking NRNB as the higher prices easily cover any non runners you might have in future and you also get to keep the large amount left also. This amount is what people taking NRNB prices are giving straight back to the bookies every time they take a lower NRNB price.
|
|
By:
But he hasn't got there yet. If he doesn't get there the NRNB backers get their money back to invest on something else, you don't...
|
|
By:
You dont get it do you .... and it is costing you loads of money. Here are 5 bets, one person takes NRNB each time, the other is taking the bigger antepost price (not NRNB). Lets count up the difference in prices that gives if they put 50 pounds on each horse.
£50 at 5/2 Hurricane Fly or £50 at 2/1 NRNB if wins then 2/1 NRNB loses 0.5 staking points (loses £25 of his winnings) compared to person taking normal 5/2 antepost price. £50 at 4/1 Kauto Star (Gold Cup) or £50 at 7/2 NRNB if wins then 7/2 NRNB loses 0.5 staking points (loses £25 of his winnings) compared to person taking normal 4/1 antepost price. £50 at 11/4 Grands Crus (RSA Chase) or £50 at 6/4 NRNB if wins then 6/4 NRNB loses 1.25 staking points (loses £62.50 of his winnings) compared to person taking normal 5/2 antepost price. £50 at 4/1 Big Zeb (Queen Mother) or £50 at 7/2 NRNB if wins then 7/2 NRNB loses 0.5 staking points (loses £25 of his winnings) compared to person taking normal 4/1 antepost price. £50 at 11/2 Al Ferof (Arkle Chase) or £50 at 4/1 NRNB if wins then 4/1 NRNB loses 1.5 staking points (loses £75 of his winnings) compared to person taking normal 11/2 antepost price. In total the person taking the NRNB prices above is winning £212.50 LESS than the person taking normal antepost prices whenever they have 5 winners and the prices are the same as those above. This is more than 4 * £50 in other words more than 4 times their stake on a horse meaning they would have to have 4 non runners in between having these winners and would STILL BE WORSE OFF THAN PERSON TAKING NORMAL ANTEPOST PRICES by £12.50. The higher the prices you normally take NRNB, the worse off you will be in the long term compared to a normal antepost backer because the difference in prices between NRNB and normal prices at higher prices is greater. For example 12/1 NRNB compared to 16/1 normal antepost is 4 staking points given back to the bookies by a NRNB backer (covering 4 future non runners you might have, if not then you pocket the 4 staking points instead of the bookie) Wisen up antepost NRNB backers please before you skint yourselves. |
|
By:
It isn't costing me anything as I haven't backed anything NRNB as long as I can remember but I do know there is a chance a horse won't turn up and that the NRNB can be better value depending on the horse in question and the prices offered.
Do the calculation again but Hurricane Fly hobbles out of his box a week before the race, Al Ferof runs in QM and Grand Crus switches to the Gold Cup after kauto star is a shock non runner after being bitten by a passing relative of Denman... Person A gets zero back after Big Zeb loses and the other 4 don't run. person B gets £200 back which he lumps on Last Investment in the RSA and collects £1500... So, who doesn't get it? |
|
By:
No offence but if you cant work out the basic maths I gave you above and see where you are wrong your missus should take your wallet off you as you will lose long term by backing antepost NRNB instead of normal antepost. Go ahead carry on mate do it your way.
|
|
By:
Your Grands Crus example is plain stupid
The other examples have a degree of merit but given a formerly fragile horse like the Fly who had ?s a few weeks back and a prep race to get through I was much happier taking 2/1 NRNB than 5/2 My decision process is as follows: I have £1K @ 2/1 so if he wins I have £3K. I have the option to double this up with him turning up for which I will get 1/6 for my £3K. I don't want to risk a lot on a 1/6 shot that gives me only fear and no excitement |
|
By:
Let me add at the same time I backed Spirit Son EW NRNB at 8/1
|
|
By:
You've obviously never backed a horse ante post that failed to turn up for the race.
In reality, your argument only holds water if you lay off every bet before the race. Given that a horse can be scratched at any time from the moment your bet is struck until the day of the race, this is always a possibility. (What was the name of the ap favourite for the Champion Hurdle that was withdrawn on raceday, or maybe the day before, about 20 years ago? Anyone remember?). Plus, if you do lay the bet off, your only maximising your gain if you manage to lay at the absolutely shortest price available before the race, which is incredibly unlikely. 2-1 NRNB on a horse with an injury record like the Fly is a great bet, irrespective of whether someone else backed him to win 5 years ago at 20-1 or 3 months ago at 5-2, straight ap terms. |
|
By:
You will never have a valid arguement unless it concurs with Eric Morris' ideology
|
|
By:
yeh EM does seem to have a degree in talking bull sh it
|
|
By:
Back to the subject matter of this post. I was amazed that anyone is still prepared to lay evens. You would have to be thinking that Unaccompanied was virtually lame to fancy any of the Triumph runners from last year and with SS out and Peddlers, SS and Alf all in the Arkle there really isn't much else to take him on. Not only would I back Fly at evens I reckon I would take evens for the Arkle field to beat the rest of the Champion Hurdle field.
|
|
By:
The key point is not to look at one runner in isolation as you are above that is unless you only place one antepost bet in your lifetime.
The key is to look at ALL of your antepost NRNB bets, calculate the money the difference in price is costing you in winnings in total. This is winnings you could be keeping yourself. Take away from this how much you ACTUALLY would have lost in non runners by not taking NRNB. Over time you will see that you will lose a fortune by taking NRNB as you wont have that many non runners, leaving you with most of that extra normal antepost price winnings in your pocket. Wisen up or get eaten up. |
|
By:
Eric Morris clearly doesn't back non runners ever, nor does he actually read the posts he replies to. As I said I can't remember last time I backed NRNB but I can understand why people might choose to do so and IT CAN WORK BOTH WAYS as the slightly humourous example I gave shows.
Oh, and thedemps needs to go to sense-of-humour school... |
|
By:
I expected 1/2 when I logged on last night. It will be interesting to see how Zarkandar gets on in the Totetrophy but can't be an ideal prep or too meaningful a pointer.
|
|
By:
He is just plain disrespectful of any other opinion that doesn't fit in with his.
|
|
By:
I am 100% right on this. Anyone who understands basic maths will tell you this. Go ahead dont listen and insist you are right when you are wrong ... it will cost you cash on this NRNB issue.
|
|
By:
OMG you don't understand chance and probability at all do you eric? What a shame. You obviously don't understand the internet either given your acerbic comment about my wife and my wallet. Shame for you.
|
|
By:
I've written probability software and am pretty good at maths. What I would say is read my example again and sit and think about it. Think about the extra money you are not winning NRNB because you are over-compensating for the number of non runners you will actually have by taking dire NRNB prices just in case they dont make it. It is only the odd one doesnt make it yet you are taking a shorter price for every NRNB bet you place and YOU WILL LOSE IN THE LONG TERM PLACING NRNB ANTEPOST BETS.
|
|
By:
Depends on the horse and the race eric, half a point for a horse with a poor record of getting to competition is not worth it, also it may be a choice taken where there are multiple targets. Every bet is different, can you get your head round that? If even one of your six doesn't make it you will be worse off unless you have got a full extra point about a winner. I'm only arguing in theory anyway as I only bet on betfair these days - too far for me to trail to a real bookies and my online bookie accounts are all closed or severely limited.
|
|
By:
Everyone who backs antepost NRNB keep a record of how much less you won by taking NRNB price compared to the highest antepost price available at the same time. Then subtract how much you would have lost due to non runners if you hadnt taken NRNB. Do this over a couple of seasons and see whether the number of non runners you actually have makes up for the dire prices and loss of extra winnings of NRNB prices.
|
|
By:
Eric,
As a previous poster pointed out an antepost price is effectively a double on the horse to turn up and then to win. In your example where you back a 16/1 and lose '4 staking points' if it wins (its 1/12 not too) the calculation you do is 17/13 which gives you a price of around 3/10 for the horse to make it. This is actually pretty good value in most cases at this stage of proceedings but their are scenarios where it isn't; also people, understandably, are not prepared to bet a chunk on longs odds on shots which are essentially down to fate. Anyway the important thing to note is their is a choice for the punter to exploit value in the 'to turn up' price and take the nrnb insurance when there is not significant value there. One final question for you, if the bookies have such an advantage betting nr/nb why are they so reluctant to revert to it causing a stand off each year between them? |
|
By:
if you sytematically back nrnb then em is more than likely correct. if you selectively back nrnb, and apply a nr probability factor to the full odds, then you may well win.
|
|
By:
Precisely el gato.
|
|
By:
I presume if all these 5yo hurdlers are better than The Fly Ruby will pick Zarkandar instead. Not a hope in hell. As we all know 5 yos have a poor record in the race anyway so it is very unlikely that a number of them are better than possibly the best hurdler we have seen in the last 50 years. Dermot Weld told us all last year that Unaccompanied wanted give in the ground so what happened yesterday. It wont/doesent matter what ground the really good horses get. If The Fly gets there in one piece and there are no accidents like something falling in front of him (all these are possible of course) they can post the trophy over to WM now. He is a very slick hurdler, he stays at least 2 1/2 miles, can handle any ground, has done it all before over course and distance and he has finishing speed as he had very good flat form.
|
|
By:
^^^say hello to Pete & Phil from me
 |
|
By:
Seems to me that Eric is trying to help people here,tad unfair imo to slate him for that.
If you think hes wrong,fine,say thanks but no thanks,but having a go at someone who means well? |