'putatively' well-handicapped ! - where does Nick Luck get these words from?

Imagine playing Scrabble against him. He'd probably find a 100 pointer out of the letters Z X Q J W G K

hes been waiting to use it for days

wait til Claire turns up next week.

Prefer trackie Dave's " Think dis one will sh1te in " myself

I'd like to see him play Mick Fitz at scrabble, Mick knows lots of word I've never heard before.

Mick say's words i have never heard before.

Dictionary readers must be staggeringly dull people

When they use such guff speaking to the average person (through TV) they're quite clearly arrogant, smug-arsed fcuks who need a good hoofing in the balls - he should be relieved of his TV duties for such ludicrous pomposity!

There's absolutely no need to use such bombastic semen when a dozen other easy to understand synonyms will suffice.


PS - I had to look it up as well...never fcukin' heard of it!


Alas, this tool doesn't get my enthusiastic contrafibularities and is causing me aural pericombobulation, so hopefully his next appearance won't be so interfrastic

Could not agree with your last sentence more NG, i think

All we need is the Snobs explaining the game too the poor(Make it easy  to explain or they will hate you lord snooty)

IF EVER A GUY WAS UP IS OWN AR-S it's Mr Luck

I bet 1.........won by 10L..........That was Beautifully well Hcped ?????????

He was one of the first to use the now
over used INTRIGUING which now gets
on my thruppenny bits

the lad dixon can also waffle on with the best of them.
but im yet to hear anything worth while coming out of is mouth.

Man has good command of English language.

Forum deprecates.

It's a mad mad world.

Fortunately didn't see much today although I did catch Luck attempting to make a quip at the expense of Dixon's scarf. Bit like Charlie Mann criticising your hat.

Bill Shankly.

"We're professionals at Liverpool, we believe in simplicity.  I wouldn't go on television or use words in newspapers that only a few people understand.  Some people use words knowing full well that maybe only 10% of the viewers or readers know what they mean.  We don't.  We speak the language of the people, the language that everybody understands.  Instead of me saying that somebody was avaricious, I would say they were bloody greedy".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-K6VTMeIdw

great stuff, billy


paris, obv nothing wrong with having good command of English in general but a wise man chooses the correct vocabulary for the situation....as a  horse-racing presenter it is not effective to use words that have the majority of the audience scurrying for a dictionary...he's clever enough to be aware of that surely?

Stuart Hall may get plenty of scrabble practice soon and he'll win his fair share.

grandiloquence at its worst

Pusiallinmous, semantically vacuuous load of fkn boring old w@nk

All part for RforC strategy to attract more of the common man and woman to racing. Convince them that racing is not the sole domain of posh ex public schoolboys

That certainly won't work if he uses words like that the common man or woman won't know what the hell he is talking about.

Superb command of our language - understands the form book too - get used to him as he is going to be around a long time .....

So many on this thread want everything down to the lowest common denominator and as for dear Bob Shankly using words we would not understand - come on .....

rogeringthebutler - If you're going to try and show off with pusillanimous, I feel it is incumbent upon you to master the spelling 

Genuinely surprised how many dimwits on here were sent scrambling for the dictionary

Everybody is familiar with the word putative, shoorly

plebians

If you hadn't heard it before it's clearly something to do with the Latin verb putare, so what's the problem?

chavman - You mean plebeians

Putative is the plural for a bunch of Pudenda's so how's he used it appropriately

You should do yourself a favour and stop looking towards the media for help with your betting. These people (luck and the like) are carefully selected to ensure that they do not educate the betting public in any way regarding betting. It is in their (media) interests that you (the public) continue to lose as much as possible without being put off the game. Having spoke to a few of them I can also state that most of them are blissfully unaware of this.

Inappropriate language for the audience. Also, needs to understand the style differences required for spoken word versus written word where reader has time to think. What is Luck trying to prove, I wonder? He is easily the best racing front man by a mile and doesn't need to try that hard to impress. He may learn something from Claire Balding who is superb, too. Somewhat surprised that his director/producer hasn't had a word.

thebrave - youd know better than me

These people (luck and the like) are carefully selected to ensure that they do not educate the betting public in any way regarding betting.


what nonsense...the people that employ them are tv people who know nowt about betting....they employ them based on tv skills rather than betting skills yes but to suggest they carefully select people based on lack of betting knowledge is ridiculous imo

When a Harrow educated son of a Jockey Club member is talking down to the great unwashed, all is right with the world, as far as the racing establishment is concerned, imo.

As for the idea that he'll "be around for a long time", I would suggest that he'll just continue shamelessly milking the racing gravy train for all it's worth until he finds something he thinks is a bit more worthy of him...

If you had that kind of start in life and ended up presenting Saturday afternoon racing you would have to consider it a failure, very sad.

So many on this thread want everything down to the lowest common denominator

Complete difference between speaking appropriately for your audience, and it being a case of appealing to the lowest common demoninator imo