THE MORNING LINE - CULL WHICH ONES ? Vote now !

A dinosaur of a programme. Get rid of the lot. All of them. Has anyone seen The Last Leg on C4? That's how you present a programme. Even if they don't know anything about racing the content would still be better.

kill the pig kill the pig

vee have vays of making it pork

Get Lydia Hyslop and Steve Mellish to front it cut out all the background sh1t and vary the rest with guests who are interested in the game and not themselves.

Cut out the dreamy music and hype keep to the info we punters need.

Francome,Down and Fitz(in small doses) get rid of the rest.

Its a complete waste of time and Arab money.

Its a nice little earner for the cast and if it was not for Arab money it would have gone years ago.

It really is a lesson in the folly of listening to tipsters and so-called experts.

Doubt if Hislop and Mellish would want to appear on this s***e sick to death of Mick Fitz saying trust me Tanya still can't finish a sentence best thing to do is get rid of it altogether.

Speaking of which.

Does anyone recall that famous question on Family Fortunes "Name a dangerous race"? The guy answered "Arabs". Les Dennis said "No, the top answer is the Grand National".

pleeeease get rid of sam thomas, it's cringe worthy listening to him. He has no idea what to say and usually resorts to asking "the grounds drying up will he handle it" It just makes for awkward viewing.

LOL Johnny !

Not politically correct these days !

nic luck,dresses down.

just get rid of clare balding and return the show back to its original format and presenters after all if its not broke why fix it

tanya out, matt chapman in. 
fitzy out, gary o'brien in.   
emma,gina,alice out, lydia in.

Replacing Clare Balding with Gina Bryce would instantly improve it

i watch ruk, im happy,its close to real time ch4 isnt.

chapman in, plunkett out.

melish in balding out.

BIG MAC -Bring back or not ?

Don't think that is an option to bring him back now after what he done to C4.  And his mouth has fired so many bullets into his foot.  He looked a sad figure at Cheltenham Races this week.

its carp now and I never watch. Fitzgerald is nearly as bad as Thompson.

OH DEAR - Clare Balding was a shocking omission from my original  list !
It just goes to show what impact she has with me .

Getting rid of all who work for bookies would be a start.

How can you criticise a bookie that pays you to promote their business?

Let's face it, the programme is really aimed at people who know nothing about horse racing.

MORE GINA BRYCE

I would like to see LYDIA HISLOP have a role in the show . Years ago she used to write a column in the Times and it was always an interesting thing to read .
She was not afraid to ruffle a few feathers .
The trouble with horse racing is that it appears to one big gravy train and no one wants to get off . Mind you ,if you were on it and having a continuous "free ride" would you want to rock the boat ?

GRAHAM CUNN... get rid, he is too similar in his opinions to Jimbo  for a programme to be interesting you need different opinions and a bit of conflict not back patting all the time

What a boot the "seagull" (pricewise)

Seagull is the last person to be on it his selections when he is on are deplorable.

Simon Mapletoft?  Or just another bland "yes man"?

It has to change but the issue is also the format,alaways trying to have 10 second photo captures with musical interludes which irritate me immensely. Reduce the number of presenters,concentrate on the races being shown and analsye them in depth with less sycophantic interviews which are onltyused to promote prsonalities within racing. The show has become a copy of the BBC format and has deteriorated massively since Tommo,Down,Jimbo and Francome used to plough through the days cards.

lose all bar Jimbo

completely agree judo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsIBvUB4Ybc

I think they need a shack up to be honest, they need to get bookmakers on the show who will give views on the market and take a decent bet ( if you could find one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ) Jimbo is the only one i listen to and says it how it is GC  and fitz are hopeless

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDyXfsCA9Oo

I can't understand why Cunningham gets so much stick on here as at least he has knowledge & enthusiasm.

However, I haven't forgiven him for those APPALLING tips last year (probably under orders from the bookies) in Grands Crus (short price fav over 3M and on bottomless ground) & Sanctuaire to beat Sprinter Sacre (with just 7 runners so bad value E/W) in the Victor Chandler after two previous 20 length maulings!

He also advised Tofino Bay (a novice with over 11st if memory serves) as an ante-post tip for the National???? Definitely on the bookies' payroll!

He's a shít tipster but he's definitely worth his place on TV as is McGrath, though I can't bear looking at the fcuker with those annoying mince pies

The relatively bearable ones include;

Jim McGrath (the oracle...but those fcukin' eyes!)
Graham Cunningham (one of the better ones)
Mike Cattermole (not as bad as many others)
Alistair Down (when he's not fawning, he's OK)
John Francome (lazy & contrary but strangely missed)
Simon Holt (part of the furniture)
Richard Hoiles (ultra-pro)
Ted Walsh (I like his outspoken views)
John McCririck (when he shuts up about the whip)
Tanya Stevenson (stuttering buffoon but harmless)
Gina Bryce (takes your mind off the racing)

whilst the ones that need the PERMANENT ejector seat or
dropped to the ocean floor tied to a large boulder are;

Sick Fcuk (smug prick)
Mick Fitzgerald (uber-bluffer)
Derek Thompson (what can I possibly add?)
Rishi Persad (sheer tokenism)
Leslie Graham (the worst EVER)
Alice Spunkit (just useless)
Sam Thomas (utter ponce)

I can't recall any more...I'm worn out after the Festival!

Ted Walsh,Charlie Swan,Jimbo,John Francome,Simon Holt,Alistair Down,Cunningham possibly, would all be fine

I wouldn't p*ss on ANY of the rest of them if they were on fire.

Richard Hoiles would be ok ( nearly forgot him amidst this sea of mediocrity )

navel

I truly loathe Cunningham more than any other, terrible judge, wind bag, bore

just awful

JR - I just don't understand how he can be more loathed than the ones in the shít column who know absolutely fcuk all...they've no expertise, character, or even enthusiasm!

PS - W/D with the Gold Cup winner...that's absolutely baffled me and as I stated, it probably had the WORST recent form of any of the last 35 Gold Cup winners!

Maybe there really is something I'm missing in your trends analysis but nevertheless each to their own and if it works for you then fcuk everyone!
Everyone thinks my E/W L15's on rags is mug betting but it works for me at the Festival most years

because he is making out he is a judge when really he is just regurgitating the form book

complete bluffer, makes me sick to listen to him

seriously I would do a better job, just with more swear words

as I stated, it probably had the WORST recent form of any of the last 35 Gold Cup winners!

learn the lesson, it's not all about form

form is just one of dozens of elements

I reckon I'd beat you for that

PS - at least he can RECITE it...the others are PAID to do so and have ZERO interest in it!
Obviously apart from the women, I think John Francome was the laziest pundit EVER though his opinions & experience of horses brought a different angle to the debate - I can't say that about Mick Fitz

Lord Windermere was missing LOADS of trends, I did not pick him because of the trends

he had not won a race this year, not achieved a top 2 placing, not a high enough RPR and so on

it was about profiles

The only things in his favour was that he was clearly far from exposed and had improvement in him, as well as winning the championship race for novices the year before at the meeting.

His overall profile was a poor one in my opinion but you called it right so fcuk me
I thought I'd save you a profanity or two

totally disagree, he had a perfect profile and breeding most importantly which most of the field did not, read this (on page 7)

http://www.narrowing-the-field.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Free-Cheltenham-Taster-Guide....pdf#sthash.q8qsqgiu.dpuf

only 3 that ran had the ideal dosage and they finished 1st 3rd and 5th

and Bobs Worth was attempting to defend and TGB had been beaten twice in the race - both statistically difficult to overcome

so 50/1 was massive

I'm sure you'll disagree but the emphasis of breeding is nowhere near as important over jumps in my opinion and consequently, something I've never really been THAT much interested in, whereas on the flat I readily recall the pedigrees of all the best horses over the years...and plenty of their siblings too!

FWIW I backed The Giant Bolster but only after Flight Lieutenant was withdrawn.

read the report I linked

its not about pedigree it's about the dosage system lining up with the typical winners not the names of the parents

anyway, you keep looking at the form

I also backed First Lieutenant who also passed the dosage test, but nrnb only

I already did...you put a lot of work into it (some telling stats) as I used to do but I haven't got that time or even as much inclination nowadays

Maybe that's why I don't win as much as I used to?

I didnt write the report, I just used the info to form an opinion

JR - I'm not manacled to FORM...I regularly pick plenty of rags in the frame at Cheltenham and I consider many different angles though 90% of stats really don't interest me at all as they're just rough guidelines in my view.

As I've said, if it works for you then you get the wedge for it

I was under the impression you formulated your own stats/spreadsheets well in advance of the Festival

yes but I didn't write that 'narrowing the field' report

like with LW I make value based judgements, it's rare you can say one stands alone and when they do they are short prices

and I don't bet short prices very often

Whose work is that and how did you find it?
I'm always interested in racing matters...even though it's very rare I'll take anyone's advice.

Sometimes another's view might sway me to pick the right one when trying to separate two selections though at the prices I back at I'll invariably do both.

it's a balance of probability method, you see

so for the Gold Cup,the method says on balance the winner will be or have:

younger than 10
a Grade 1 winner
achieved a top 2 finish at the Festival
run less than 15 times over fences
not the defending champion
not beaten in the race before
fit the dosage profile
a winner at 3 miles
not a winner at 3 miles 2 or more
run in the Lexus or King George

I only really use these methods for Cheltenham, Aintree and Royal Ascot, I have totally different methods for flat handicaps mainly revolving around RPRs vs BHA ratings

it's a balance of probability method, you see

so for the Gold Cup,the method says on balance the winner will be or have:

younger than 10
a Grade 1 winner
achieved a top 2 finish at the Festival
run less than 15 times over fences
not the defending champion
not beaten in the race before
fit the dosage profile
a winner at 3 miles
not a winner at 3 miles 2 or more
run in the Lexus or King George

I only really use these methods for Cheltenham, Aintree and Royal Ascot, I have totally different methods for flat handicaps mainly revolving around RPRs vs BHA ratings

Each to their own squire...fro example, home gallops for NH horses are far less informative than for flat horses as I see things - just how many trainers run their horses at home in a 3M chase?

Conversely, on the flat a trainer can replicate conditions better and get a true gauge...I always remember Mark Prescott reckoning that Pasternak was about 3/4 of a length better than Rudimentary (at the weights) just before the Cambridgeshire and that's exactly how they were separated - I might add that I was on the runner-up at 33/1

the guy who wrote it is called Ben Aitken, you should check his blog  http://www.narrowing-the-field.co.uk/

there is always scope to improve your methods, for everyone that is, to see if you can find new insight

I have changed methods many times, or rather, incorporated new methods and ways of finding edges in markets many times over the last 20+ years

Sack.Tanya , Sam Thomas and Mattie B. Bring back Francome and employ Ted Walsh. Keep Fitz, GC, Rishi, Jimbo and Simon Holt. Shoot McCririck and feed him to the Pig. To make it better? Simply stick to evaluating the days televised races in full. I would also like to see a section of the programme given to pinpointing and highlighting the iffy rides. Particularly on the AW. Trouble is the programme would last three hours. It will never happen but I would love to have them talk freely and honestly about the sport instead of sitting on the fence. Now that I would watch!!

Cheers for that...I've saved it in my racing favourites bookmarks - there is a fcukin' library in there

I assumed you wouldn't have wiped your arse on RPR or those of Timeform.

PS - that Prescott horse was Rudimental, not Rudimentary who was Cecil's over a decade before
Can you tell me something notable about that Cecil horse?

I have a terrible memory for horses, always looking for the next big touch so no I cannot tell you anything although I clearly remember the horse running

I look at my punting like a golfer playing a course; he addresses the ball with a strategy in mind to get round in the fewest strokes and depending on the shot he has he chooses a different club

that's what I have developed, or the equivalent, a set of 'punting golf clubs' - I pull out the one I consider most appropriate to the situation in hand and the methods are quite varied

He was bought by Lord Howard De Walden out of Robert Armstrong's stable to be used as a pacemaker for Slip Anchor (as a 4yo) but as you know, that colt was beaten on his only run.


Oh shííít! I've just realised that was Rakaposhi King
Rudimentary was a different LHDW/Cecil horse from the late 80's early 90's...and you thought your memory was failing!!!

Rakaposhi King ended up a group performer yet he was only a handicapper at Armstrong's - typical Cecil...he even got the best out of Critique when even Vincent O'Brien couldn't.

THEY'VE ALL GONE

Whatever anyone says, racing does, and always will revolve around betting, so there are two things that need sorting.

1. Get someone on with the ability and knowledge to analyse races from a betting point of view, by that I mean in depth form, looking at times, comparing RPR ratings to official figures etc, and have the balls to acknowledge when a horse has had a quiet one!!!

2. Whenever there is a smug bookmaker representative on the programme, please ask the question " How can you say you took a £50,000 bet on line" when most punters get knocked back when wanting £10 ew on at a price, or have there account closed or restricted if they show any resemblance of someone who actually looks as though they know what they are doing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We all know that this will never happen, but then channel 4 have to ask themselves why their viewing figures can be counted on one hand.

They are not doing anything for the viewing figures by having it on more4 this morning that's for sure.

Nick Luck and Jim McGrath both do a great job. I never tire of those two.

Oh no!

It was on More4

I looked for it but didn't think it was on

You were lucky

Lol Virgin.

Just found it on Catch up

.http://www.channel4.com/programmes/channel-4-racing/4od#3662519

That link was for yesterday's programme

from the ones that went, Francome was probably the biggest loss.  And maybe out of the question to get them but I would like to see Lydia Hyslop and Kate Miller on the show.

Trying to get it right to satisfy a wider audience I appreciate is not easy, but very easy to screw up on both fronts.  I think generally they are doing a good job but they are lacking a strong personality on the team.  And it has come a long way from these early days...

Since Jamie Aitchison, Highflyer etc revamped it Channel 4 racing has all gone downhill.
Stop making excuses and time for another total revamp of presenters and format.
Sorry but most of the current presenters have zero personality and they are just stuck in a portacabin with a huge IPAD.
Listen to the racing community: viewers/forums/twitter to get feedback and start focusing on your audience.
Until then Channel 4 racing are doomed.

one not on your list...richard hoiles..........should be on the show far more.....excellent bloke

Kill the whole program most talk rubbish.

too busy laughing at their own jokes , crap tipsters , be interesting too show a table off their naps , bet they make a loss ?

Interesting how Nick Luck started saying things like, "Can you believe it's ten years since Best Mate won the Gold Cup?" etc. He was only 9 when that happened. Middle-aged admittedly but only 9.

apparently in a bid to sex up their grand national coverage c4 will replace luck and balding with nick hewer and susie dent

I don't know about you lot but I watch 90% on mute these days. Most of the period between races is filled with sentimental sh1te at best such as that provided by Alistair Down and cliched claptrap at worst. Months ago I switched on to discover Balding's eulogy on McCoy when he'd got his 4000 up. I thought it was an obituary and had to put up BBC News to check he wasn't dead. One day last week I fell upon a Morning Line at an odd time of day. I thought I might have a look as I haven't seen it for years. What you get with this programme is pure, undistilled **** without the interruption of a live race. I lasted 5 minutes.

Tarnya's biggest Cheltenham contribution was to inform everyone that 8/1 about McCoy winning the top jockeys title at the meeting was a fabulous bet and that the Stephenson bankroll was already on! As for what is happening 'in the betting jungle', this is 2014, fyi Tarnya you don't need to be within sight of a tic-tac man to know the current odds. Sorry love.

as a side note....the c4 coverage of the gold cup post race was shambolic.....a taped recording of the enquiry then a cut back to Jim Culloty celebrating. jesus chist....their director is totally fcking useless.

1. Build the suspense.
2. Show the Enquiry LIVE
3. Build more suspense.
4. Show the Result being announced live.

would've been excellent.

The trouble is these programmes don't cater to the people that watch.
Typical example is right now on RUK.
10 minutes before the first at Carlisle we are treated to a discussion between the two presenters about Cheltenham,while in the background we can see that the horses are in the parade ring.
Don't know about anyone else but wouldn't it be more to the point to show us the horses,even if the presenters keep talking about something else, rather than looking at their ugly mugs!
And,following that, we get a talk with a bookie and an item on odds for a race in next year's Cheltenham!!! Unffngbelievable!

Really...the morning line is something you can do with just 1 person.

Its not anything overly special and shouldn't be.

Just hire Matt Chapman and job done.

The show is too technical and serious and gord knows what that elaborate machine is for - apart from confusion?

I'd keep Nick Luck and Jim McGrath - I think they do a good job but it does lack a bit of banter without McCririck and Francombe - Its the show itself that needs revamping maybe more so than the presenters but I don't watch it as much these days - so that says it all to me!

keep the pig for gawd sake

he is a better judge than me

gleesen for tanya is a start....

Cannot bear to watch that rancid crew..

Tanya should be replaced by some-one in the know that is not allegedly having sexual relations () with a high flyer..

The angry Northerner should be given the red card..


Alice Plunkett should take what appears to look like an upper class d il do and put it where the sun does not shine..

Rancid bunch of graveytrainers and if "Come Dine With Me" is delayed again I may complain to the regulator...

By the way who mentioned Matt Chapman..

How can he be allowed on TV when he promotes "Paddy Power - never knowingly above bottom price"....

How much money would they be on a week , roughly ?    fitz n tanya

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHAXnGxC8Jo


MONEY FOR OLD ROPE .