Does anybody know why RUK don't tend to carry out pre-race interviews? They seem mad keen on post-race chatter, which has limited use to punters.
Quote Richard Hills about Meezaan: "He worked really well the other day and we knew there had to be a really good one to beat him". This pre-race knowledge would have been great.
Quote Richard Hills about Meezaan: "He worked really well the other day and we knew there had to be a really good one to beat him". This pre-race knowledge would have been great.
Doubt Hills would have offered this info pre race.
Quote Richard Hills about Meezaan: "He worked really well the other day and we knew there had to be a really good one to beat him". This pre-race knowledge would have been great.Doubt Hills would have offered this info pre race.
flyingbolt, I know where you are coming from but, sometimes it can be helpful, its for people to decide for themselves, certainly after the race it isnt much help, but why do they not put it in a box in the corner so we can see whats happening in the next race, I once wrote a long email to ruk regarding this and they didnt give a reply
flyingbolt, I know where you are coming from but, sometimes it can be helpful, its for people to decide for themselves, certainly after the race it isnt much help, but why do they not put it in a box in the corner so we can see whats happening in the
My argument is that pre-race information is more valuable than post-race information, yet RUK have the balance the other way around.
I'd advocate a Martin Brundle type of approach in the Paddock.
Flying Bolt - information from trainers and jockeys is more useful than opinions of tv presenters/pundits?
My argument is that pre-race information is more valuable than post-race information, yet RUK have the balance the other way around. I'd advocate a Martin Brundle type of approach in the Paddock.Flying Bolt - information from trainers and jockeys is
This is the best thread I've seen on here for ages. Well done Freedomofspeech - I was thinking exactly the same thing. IF RFC want to do something effective then they should certsinly advocate HONEST pre-race interviews. Those comments from Hills were extraordinary and should be in the public domain before the race.
This is the best thread I've seen on here for ages. Well done Freedomofspeech - I was thinking exactly the same thing. IF RFC want to do something effective then they should certsinly advocate HONEST pre-race interviews. Those comments from Hills wer
tbh Freedomofspeech although I always back my own judgement I would take more notice of someone who is a punter than those of a jockey or trainer. I learnt many years ago that they tend to view their own horses through rose tinted glasses without being objective about the opposition.Obviously there are exceptions but they tend to be the ones that wouldn't tell a TV audience anything anyway.
tbh Freedomofspeech although I always back my own judgement I would take more notice of someone who is a punter than those of a jockey or trainer. I learnt many years ago that they tend to view their own horses through rose tinted glasses without bei
I agree trainers' view their horses favourably, and some can 'put you away'. However, over time one can start to interpret trainer psyhologies and personailities and decipher what is useful and what is isn't.
I agree trainers' view their horses favourably, and some can 'put you away'. However, over time one can start to interpret trainer psyhologies and personailities and decipher what is useful and what is isn't.
I agree with pre race interviews. I remember a few years back they interviewd David Elsworth who had the fav in a race. He said he could not understand why it was the favourite as it hated the ground and was a bit short of peak fitness. I win and place laid the horse which came in 5th.
I agree with pre race interviews. I remember a few years back they interviewd David Elsworth who had the fav in a race. He said he could not understand why it was the favourite as it hated the ground and was a bit short of peak fitness. I win and