Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
02 Aug 16
15:41
Joined:
Date Joined:
22 May 08
There was a column in racing post several weeks ago where the writer wrote about Aidan O Brien disclosing that Mindings intended future target was the nassau stakes for which Minding was odds against. He then spoke about placing a four figure bet on this outcome. The racing post didnt report on Mindings intended target until Tony O Hehir did a piece about a week later. Minding subsequently won the race at 1/5. Now that raises a number of issues such as are racing correspondents deliberately delaying relaying information so they can bet on it? If they are backing horses are they also laying them? Does it also create a situation whereby connections are reluctant to get in contact with the Racing Post as they dont want attempts made to monetize the information they are disclosing. For example Ger Lyons has said he doent take calls prerace from the Post for this reason. There is obviously nothing illegal but it is morally ambiguous to say the least and paints the imbeciles who populate the Racing Post in a poor light.
Show More
The information journalists receive may not lead to a winner.The journalist is risking his own money so what is the problem .Some trainers may put people away or not have much idea 
I love this one - Brough and Ed getting on Awarded at 7s before it was smashed into 2s. Happy days....
http://www.broughscott.com/story.asp?NewsID=560
http://www.broughscott.com/story.asp?NewsID=560
Judging by his tipping record, Tony O'Hehir is usually kept completely in the dark.
He's either awful, or putting punters away, most of the time.
He's either awful, or putting punters away, most of the time.
The good information does not get tipped in the papers. When they get inside info on a good thing, they don't even tip it on the day, they tip one against. If they did and let the whole world know, the source would give them nowt in future.
you probably hear about the weddings but not the funerals.
Absolutely nothing wrong with it whatsoever and it's a fundamental part of racing journalism. The difficulty, of course, is recognising the wheat from the chaff. That said, the majority of the racing press are far too impoverished to wager anything significant.
Racing's not exactly the straightest of sports anyhow. A journalist that does that wouldn't be any worse than half of those involved IMO. All you have to do is look at the exchange markets to know that racing isn't exactly the most honest sport. Others have mentioned it time and again: http://goo.gl/lIjdyk
Win or lose I would say there is an awful lot wrong with it should you be saving questions for an off-air interview while just waffling on air.
in response to Mick Sturbs, if they are laying horses that are going to be withdrawn then there is not much of a risk involved. also the "journalist" in question was boasting in the same article about having his biggest ever win on the outcome of a stewards enquiry which seems a rather odd event to be heavily invested in. unless of course a prior knowledge of the outcome of the result was the catalyst for his actions. if that was the case then once again there is no real monetary risk involved.
The racing journalist, if given privilege info not in the public domain, should/ought not to use this info to his/her advantage in the betting market especially on the Exchange to lay when a financial gain can be easily obtained. For instance, the current betting of USAR in the Juddmonte ie a big price was on offer until inside info pushed it down. The similar thing is not allowed in the City of London and I cannot see why it is allowed in horse racing.
On the other hand, bookies do slip up too eg immediately post the Ribblesdale win of Even Song AOB stated, when interviewed by Lydia, the filly was going to the Irish Oaks yet bookies had Minding at odds-on 'fav' for the race with Even Song at 8/1; it was only much later they realised AOB would not have two of his best fillies running in the same race and Even Song was promoted to favouritism; Minding headed to the Pretty Polly instead.
On the other hand, bookies do slip up too eg immediately post the Ribblesdale win of Even Song AOB stated, when interviewed by Lydia, the filly was going to the Irish Oaks yet bookies had Minding at odds-on 'fav' for the race with Even Song at 8/1; it was only much later they realised AOB would not have two of his best fillies running in the same race and Even Song was promoted to favouritism; Minding headed to the Pretty Polly instead.
Yes it is wrong. Perhaps unfairly, I get the impression it is more prevalent in Ireland.
If applied to financial journalism, it would be illegal.
If applied to financial journalism, it would be illegal.
Aug 2, 2016 -- 4:43PM, themightymac wrote:
The good information does not get tipped in the papers. When they get inside info on a good thing, they don't even tip it on the day, they tip one against. If they did and let the whole world know, the source would give them nowt in future.
I remember back in the day in the old Phoenix Park racecourse asking Ted Walsh what he thought would win a race. He told me the horse (a Pat Eddery ridden Mick O'Toole one) and I backed it and it hacked up. However when asked on RTE beforehand he tipped a completely different horse which finished last
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539