Tingle Creek (9th Dec)

Betfair could lead the way in ante post bets, if your horse is a none runner they substitute the favourite. 
The same as place-pots and the scoop six.

HenryKate
16 Nov 17 20:28

Betfair could lead the way in ante post bets, if your horse is a none runner they substitute the favourite. 

Are you related to I123 by any chance. That's a ridiculous suggestion even by his standards.

Wow, the price of Douvan has collapsed from 8/1 to 6/4 (Paddies) since sunday. Coincidence or purely a red herring, similar to last year eg UDS and Douvan, if memory serves.

Who knows with certainty? But if the market is any guard, and given stable propensity and history eg 1st preference for Ricci's horses - Wylie withdrew Nichols Canyon and Yorkhill from the Morgiana despite 1st outing for Faugheen for nearly 2 yrs - Douvan looks the more probable of the two to appear here, I believe; last year there was massive disappointment when Douvan was scratched at the final decs despite Mullins exuding confidence of his participation a few days leading up to it, if memory serves.

Hopefully they will aim Fox Norton at this race.

Everyone has stopped believing Mullins and and his bookie owner Ricci on targets.

Trainers sponsored by bookies or heavily dependant on bookie owners where is it all going when nobody trusts connections announcements on running plans?

Mullins hasn't as yet indicated what his running plans are for the tingle creek so its all mere speculation for now.

Fully agree Reaseheath. After last year's hysterical reaction, where some posters on here absolutely disgraced themselves, Mullins would be out of his mind if he named a definite target at this stage.I'd expect Douvan and Un De Sceaux will both be entered again and a final decision/statement won't be made until final declaration time.

Impossible123, it would do you good to look up last years Tingle Creek thread from start to finish, and hopefully you will avoid a repeat this time round.

Last year Mullins did just that - he entered both and said nothing would be decided, or no statement given, until final declaration time, and he did exactly that. The hysterics that followed between Tuesday and Thursday were not his doing but were from punters following the money.I'm sure Mullins will take the same approach again but I really hope you don't.

I am actually in favour now of trainers like Mullins, Tizzard and Henderson shutting tfu in terms of targets as it is more likely to make their sponsors and bookie owners money than punters. I have no regard for any of them and they dont owe us anything. Short term antepost markets should be binned as they are open to to much insider training on here and disinformation from connections isnt going to help either. Leaves a bad taste in the mouth after years of punting i am not too bothered for the future of the game when punters are treat with such contempt.

Anyway, back to the race. You would think from this drivel that whatever Mullins selects will automatically be the winning favourite. If Fox Norton travels and jumps as he did on Sunday then Mullins might as well leave both at home.

Nobody is forced to bet ante post. Horses change from day to day so if you have the luxury of 2 top class entries capable of winning you will wait as long as possible to decide which to run. If ante post punters want trainers to run a horse knowing it is not 100% because they have announced it as a definite runner a week before they are kidding themselves.

I'm a fervent user of antepost to try an enhance value whenever possible, but I've stopped backing any of Mullins'/Ricci's horses since the debacle with Shaneshill (Supreme instead of Neptune) and Vautour (Ryanair instead of Gold Cup). I firmly believe if the trainer of a principal runner says this race is the number 1 target for his/her horse but the owner says differently then surely, for the benefit of horse racing and racegoers/punters, it would be best if connections of the horse communicate with each other prior to prevent a contradiction in their statements - that's not a lot to ask, is it? - especially Mullins/Ricci has had a long history of "repeatedly" misinforming the racing public.

Nobody is forced to bet antepost is like saying nobody is forced to bet on FOBTs. It is an irrelevant argument. The next statement is not related to Altior announcements.

If the recommendation for a financial transaction is being deliberately affected by relationships where money is paid to the recommender for services by a benefactor of the affected transaction it is insider trading. The fact it is a racing market or connections are ‘just being clever when in reality they dont have a single GCSE to rub together’ or ‘there has always been skullduggery in racing’  or ‘connections dont owe us anything’ does not alter anything.

The levels of money changing hands and the billions in profit made by bookmakers each year in the modern age must lead to pressure in the future for the major participants to be monitored for integrity. At some stage and at this rate confidence will be lost in the markets and to restore this it will be necessary for cosy relationships for unfair financial gain to be e posed and stopped.

Spot on feltfair.

Insider trading occurs where directors of a company use sensitive information for their own personal benefit rather than for the shareholders they represent and work for. We, as punters, are not shareholders. We are merely speculating on the shareholders(owners) property.

Looking up the weekends entries, Henderson has entered 3 in a novice hurdle at ascot and mullins has 3 in a novice chase at gowran. They can run all 3 or if they wish they may run none. Most likely they will run 1. They may already have an idea who it will be or they may want to see how they work in the meantime. Whatever they want to do, right now its their own business.They don't have to let the public know how any of them are working or who they are thinking of running. Because until overnight declaration time they are free to pick and choose and change their minds as often as they want.
So for arguments sake, lets say some bookie decided he was going to run an ante-post book on these 2 races to try and drum up some business on a quiet mid week.What then? Do you think mullins and henderson should now be subject to a different set of rules just because some people want an early bet on the race, and may get a better price now than on the day of the race? And would you think its unacceptable that connections might know about running plans before the general public?

The rules don't change in order to facilitate ante-post punters. Most of us understand and accept this but some need constant reminding.

No, i have been betting for 25 years antepost and the new fad of close paid relationships between bookmakers and trainers is very concerning.

I dont stick 20 quid on if i see a performance that rings bells i pick my gonads up and have a grand or more on a year in advance. I do that because i believe my judgement is better than others even connections close to the horse after years of watching animals go from zero to hero on flat and jumps. Connections are at a betting disadvantage long range antepost as their bias leads them to the wrong conclusions. Connections really dont like this, reading of fancy prices had by others on here as they think they pay the bills and so deserve all benefits even the price when in reality it is the punters that subsidise them in their expensive sport and by heavily contributing to connections expensive sport should be equally allowed to exercise judgement and take a price well in advance.
By definition experienced antepost punters are going to come off best long range antepost as they are more knowledgable than connections on performances. They really dont like this and as they can do something about it short range antepost via disinformation it is rife to corruption.

Lydia Hislop did a great article on the Sp Life site however the last part of the sentence, like the statement from that public school lad Matt something or other are wide of the mark. The bookies take fortunes in the run up to Classics and Cheltenham in particular. Dodo’s dont bet in four figures or have five figures on a race at any time with bookies..there is no liquidity on Betfair antepost until near the time however so the first part of the second sentence is correct.

‘In monetary terms, however, this amounted to very small beer. Little was matched on the exchanges, risk-management operations were soon suspending markets and ante-post betting is dead – dead as a dodo.’

The dynamic in the old days was connections trying to land a gamble with their auld enemy the bookies which guaranteed a wide gap in information between the two parties.

The new dynamic with the vast online betting profits of the modern age is for bookies to pay trainers for closer relationships. With information shared between the sportsman and the bookie with shared information there are billions to be made from the punter with plenty for everyone.

Another idea is to break the direct link between bookie and trainer. If the bookies would like trainers to wear jackets with their logo on then give the ‘sponsorship’ money to the BHA to distribute to the trainers who wear their logos according to which bookies contribute the most to the BHA. Let them bid like anyone else for advertising space. The direct financial relationship between trainer and bookie SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.

One example from newspaper article this month.

Online gambling giant bet365 has seen its revenue increase to a whopping £2.15 billion over the last 12 months.

The company’s accounts, for the year up to March 26, show the Etruria firm's turnover grew from £1.65 billion last year.

It also increased operating profit from £456 million to £503 million and pre-tax profit rose from £459 million to £514 million.

In addition, bet365’s customers wagered more than £46.9 billion in bets within the 12 months – up by more than £10 million for the same period in 2016.