Social Media 3-1 out to about tens.

i can give you g lee data from opening show to the final BFSP results?

Horses drift, of course.  If it's a gradual drift throughout the course of a day, it's less remarkable, as weight of opinion might simply drive a price out.  When layers are falling over themselves to lay it at almost any price, it's remarkable.  If it was an Albanian football team, people would be up in arms.

on the funny side this horse was a sky boost horse originaly offering you 7 to 2 for a 3,s shot,before offering you 4,5,6,7,8,9,s 5 mins before the race,

BB id like to think that,  watching enough racing also shows you that you arent right all the time

i openly admit to that

Do you have betfair price on opening show and betfair price at the time of the off ?

I'd be happy to be proven wrong and maybe its the cynic in me but he seems to ride more massive drifters than most, you know the ones that stick out a mile on the screen, they are a 20 and those around it are a single figure.

I don't claim to be right all the time. Just most of it.

aye it shows

Exactly like the example I gave above, Biscar (which wasn't ridden by Lee). A 20 chance amidst a sea of horses at 12 or shorter.

Interesting that no-one has actually defended the ride given to the horse regardless of opinions on the market.

G lee

flat and aw
drift opening odds industry to industry sp = or >20%
574 bets
ROIBFSP LAY 0.12%
ROIBFSP BACK -13.29%

flat and aw
backed opening odds industry to industry sp =20% or <
1008 bets
ROIBFSP LAY 1.2%
ROIBFSP BACK -22.8%

So, if I understand the above backing G Lee blind is expensive regardless of whether the horse drifts or is backed?

as it would be for a lot more than him

Fair comment. Am always a tad sceptical of ROI stats anyway as if a rider/trainer happens to fluke a 100-1 winner somewhere down the line it massively skews the stats even with a decent sample size.

0.18% ROI after max betfair comm (5%) paid laying all of his 4590 runners (before today), backing his backed runners (as i've stermined the parameter 20% plus) worse than backing his drifters.

obviously regular race readers no better than me but after the drift we were all watching it,i got the impression that lee made a dash for the inside about 2 out hoping he wouldnt get a run but when the gap was there he pulled it inside again behind a wall of horses,but i,m a cynic

He cooked the horses goose long before that by deliberately putting the horse in a poor position from a very early stage.

all that was obviously just fanny for the camera,s because the real job had already been accomplished

beat me to it,

I'm not commenting on today's example I'm more inteersted in everything I've ever looked at statistically with regards the Betfair market and drifting/backed horses.

If you had backed all the clear industry favs at BFSP that had drifted 20% or more from their opening show you'd have lost 0.12% of your investment after comm, if you'd done the same with all the backed favs 20% plus from opening show you'd have done 6.74% of your investment.

I'm not for one minute suggesting there are no suspicious going's on of course there are but it certainly isn't as rife as some would suggest where a massive chunk of these drifters are being layed with the knowledge they won't be winning!

I suspect that has more to do with poor liqudity and weak markets than anything else, though.

That reference is to the BFSP returns on favs.

that doesn't make any sense

I think it does. The BSP on well backed favourites are lower in a weak market than they would be in a strong market with good liquidity. Prices shorten faster in a weak market and hence well backed horses are more likely to start at a poor value price.

I thought Kirbys ride on Stanley was worse, he isn't that bad at his job of riding winners, this took his job of not riding a winner to a new level. It was wrong on so many levels but nothing will be done cos he let it run on once 8 lengths in arrears and Queally in full flow.

I haven't seen that one. Will have a watch of it.

like my gripe BB,we know it goes on but still we return daily. It goes for us and against us. I accept you're highlighting a big drifter but those in the know in the 4.00 didnt leave anything behind.

Halloween was yesterday but Kirby decided today was the day to horrify punters.

I am sure that you can rule out any Owner involvement.

A home-bred filly - running in the Studs name - they would want winning brackets for her, surely.

Even if she is only rated 54 - getting her down to any less would jeopardise her chances of getting into future Handicaps.

She is far from being a world-beater on breeding - but winning brackets for any filly mean so much more.

Her Owner-breeders? ... The Cliveden Stud

Run by the Freedman family - descendants of former stud owner Loius Freedman -

Who just happened to breed, and race, Derby winner Reference Point.

I think if you are trying to bet at value prices it goes against you more often than for you.
Just watched that Wolverhampton race. At best, he got caught napping.

I agree the owners of the filly would want to win a race with her, onlooker.

Barton most of the weeks racing is low class

I'm saying you should expect with your conspiracy theory that these groups of backed and drifting horses should show a difference in relation to each other.

you seem to be using drifts to suit your purpose for individual events, ie the drift on today's ed dunloip horse is supposed to indicate something even though in the bigger scale there is no evidence to suggest this is the case.

I'm not arguing on single events (of course there are bent aspects in the sport) i'm saying this notion of drifting horses being a massive problem with skullduggery and an indication of the expected results is just not upheld anywhere.

perhaps Filthy has his eye on next season and a lenient mark for the colt Stanley, the winner was a filly, Stanley unsurprisingly given a boys name is a chap. Thats all I can suggest, it broke well, was reined in and not allowed to stride on over a suitable trip with undoubted stamina on its side. Can't see Kirby having Filthy over myself.

I was highlighting a specific example of an extreme drift and a disadvantageous ride not trying to make a general point about drifters in general. The thread was specific to one horse in one race. I don't believe that the strike rate or ROI of a larger population of horses is of any relevance to whether this case was suspect or not.
I will back my own judgement that the price was so far from removed from what myself and other judges whose opinion I consider valid that it looked very suspicious. Quite interesting to hear the pre-race comments made by Richard Hoiles on RUK today as well. He seemed shocked by the extreme drift. There can not be any reasonable doubt that the ride the horse was given gave it no chance.

what rating do you think the horse will achieve BB

no idea what the connection between Normandie stud is and Cliveden stud, if Pip Cooper was a Freedman then I get that.

Maybe 70-75. Likely once she has won a race or two she will be retired for breeding purposes. She's nothing special but she will win given a proper ride over 12f+.

she might win an a/w race somewhere,  i doubt she will even make 70.

That's 70 in terms of Racing Post/Timeform type figures. So am saying she will win off 50 odd and then again off low 60s.
Just looking at Stanley's pedigree, that has got to a better horse next year over 12f plus.

if she wins one i very much doubt you will see her again. just out of interest when she was a well backed 7/4 shot at wolverhampton, what did you think about the ride that day?

the trouble is a drift again and you'll probably be too paranoid to back it

Genuine apologies for placing you in the 'it's all bent because it drifted brigade' though Barton

Lol. If it trebled in price again with Lee up I definitely wouldn't back it.
There are drifts and there are drifts.

the dealer, I thought she was ridden to try and win at Wolverhampton. She still showed signs of inexperience (undestandably on only her 4th career win and also the first time they had had a go with her - having given her 3 quick runs to get her handicapped and then a break) and looked a staying type as she lost her place and kept on again. I got the impression she would be well suited by a step up in distance (which she got today) and a positive ride (ahem).

apologies for being wrapped up with Stanley, however I've seen many sick drifts on Dunlop non jiggers, his is a stable that knows what the pink button is for.

I don't have a strong view on whether the Stanley race was hooky or not but a maiden where they bet any price you like bar the two with obvious chances is an ideal tool for a bend up.

Veeraya 7s out to 32 wins 740 Kempton

I've just seen the race, it looks like they've crawled round as suggested by the slow time (16 secs outside standard), and as a result he's not had the clearest of runs up the straight as horses weren't stopping and the gaps weren't appearing. She's going on at the finish and showed enough to suggest she will be winning off a similar mark when things pan out more favourably.

In conclusion, I'd say the way the race was run was the problem rather than anything dodgy, in my humble opinion.

Fair enough, I see a connection between the massive dirty drift and the ride the horse was given in a race not run to suit. Without the betting patterns being as they were I might agree with you.

FFS george b and friends the horse was a non jigger and connections close to the horse layed it at any price to nick a few quid,
we read day in day out on here, thread ongoing at the monment about so called pro,s looking for miniscule bookmakers ricks and leaping on them yet he,s a horse fav for 6 hrs pre race been layed at 3 times its price, FFS

That's your opinion 1sttp, I've given mine, we'll have to agree to differ on this one.

I was keeping an eye on that Dora's Field from the same yard, fair to say a bit of an eyecatcher (nudge nudge wink wink) on its third run for a mark at HQ. Interestingly, the handicapper seemingly didn't give it a mark and they had to run it in a maiden at Wolver where it was held up and made no progress, but then the handicapper was able to give it a mark

Bit disappointing since going handicapping, save one good effort at Beverley.

maiden races are for   the inside  men  take today  they are 4
12.50
1.10
1.20
1.45     
they are the first races i cross off

bookies love em

2m maiden hurdles in particular are absolutely full of non triers.

Another very polarised market here at Chepstow with Criq Rock (does have the best form) backed to the exclusion of all else. The second fav has been extremely weak despite having been the subject of media hype.

That's a rarity! A heavily backed horse in a 2m novice being given a poor ride!

just as rare as you admitting you got it wrong

Lol.

I need more data but since 2012 at least there seems a large disparity with the largest scale of drifter in the late market with flat racing and nh racing (opening show---returned sp).

Horses that have at least doubled in price in this late market have returned 78% more winners than would be expected at BFSP on the flat there have only been about 67% of expected winners.

The NH figures are not skewed in any way by prices (the excess occurred in different price groups) but the samples are only currently just over 400 runners for flat and jumps in this period.

*Horses that have at least doubled in price in this late market have returned 78% more winners than would be expected at BFSP (in NH racing)

striding, are you running queries on your own database or proform or something like that ?

For me, this horse was not going to win today - Lee had options down the long home straight but preferred not to take them - running in behind horses ....

On the other hand, there are examples of drifters from this stable winning - a recent one was Michael's Mount at Catterick - he was a big drifter prior to the off.

"yesterday" for goodness sake - some might say I do not know what day it is!!!!!!

O'Regan there at Chepstow. I know the horse didn't jump well but neither did the other market leaders but there's no chance he was trying to win on Paddys Motorbike there is there?

One big drifter in a race where only four had a chance and look at the state of that from Hughes. Again no bet here but Golden Town was VERY weak in the markt and has been given a laughable ride.

Some drifters are undoubtedly going to be dodgy and at some point they will affect all of our punting. I just don't think on balance the level of paranoia in general on this forum regarding the market is justified, for all the big drifters that run stinkers there are big drifters that will win/run well often enough to suggest it's not anywhere near as rancid as some would have you believe.

pablo...Horseracebase

I didn't have a bet in the race and had no vested interest in the result. But that looked awful.

cheers striding

i totally agree striding but i think we are in the minority

Regardless of whether the majority of drifters are innocent or not, I would defy anyone to watch the ride on Golden Town or Paddys Motorbike and give the honest opinion that the riders have tried their best to win.

Money back today lads, with interest.

8.45 Wolverhampton tonight.

Are we switched on?

Sorry bidders, did not see your post.

Longer trip fine, opposition not up to much and Morris likely to be far more proactive than GLee.

Well done to those who kept the faith.

lol

some ride that

very good

Luke Morris wanted that alright!

Compare that to the sack of sh!t Lee fannying about

kitchen sink job

Add Lorelei to your list that racecourse gallop will bring the horse on a ton

Ta muchos.out and about.done me a right favour

Think that Barton Bank has been totally vidicated in his observations, well done.

GEORGE.B
     01 Nov 16 22:45
I've just seen the race, it looks like they've crawled round as suggested by the slow time (16 secs outside standard), and as a result he's not had the clearest of runs up the straight as horses weren't stopping and the gaps weren't appearing. She's going on at the finish and showed enough to suggest she will be winning off a similar mark when things pan out more favourably.

In conclusion, I'd say the way the race was run was the problem rather than anything dodgy, in my humble opinion.

^ I'd stand by that.

Whatever, all about opinions, and well done anyone who collected this evening.

In conclusion, I'd say the way the race was run was the problem rather than anything dodgy, in my humble opinion.

and the drift from 3>>10 nothing untoward iyo?

roida, I gave my honest opinion having watched the race without any bias or having had any financial interest, and for me, she was never getting a clear shot at it up the straight and that was shown on the head-on too.

As for the drift, all I can say is I couldn't accuse them on what I saw. I won't give the clichéd response of: does drifters never win?

Your honest opinion George B as anyone can see isnt worth a hill of beans, and taht can be applied to striding edge also.
Why feel the need to give an opinion when you havent an iota about the subject.

rarely if ever do horses drift from 3-10 unless someone knows something.

I'll take that as a compliment coming from someone who has posted more than his fair share of shyte on this forum.

Fair enough roida, I was focusing solely on what happened in the race.

Well if you were focusing solely on what happened in the race, why feel the need to offer an opinion on something without reference to a very important part of the jigsaw.
You were disagreeing like that other yoke ima mazed does, for the sake of it. Thats it in a nutshell.
It was clear as day what happened , and  anyone who disagreed is not worth engaging with , because either they were being argumentative or hadnt an iota.
Couldnt be simpler.

Comparing me to ima_amazing, lmfao, I've lost count of the number of times me and him have had a 'Geoffrey Wheeler' on here.

ok mincer, I'll spell it out to you. They've crawled round (visual impression and time of race very slow), it's Redcar, horses tend to keep rolling along there , and because they've gone no gallop, the gaps aren't appearing and he's trying to close on horses that aren't stopping.

I'm no apologist for Lee, but that was my reading of it, in my humble opinion!

As for the drift, yeah fair enough, but striding argued a case against that!

I have read the thread in full and i must apologise to you because although you are wrong and have been man enough to come on and say so , you were no where near as vociferous and even dare i say nauseating as striding edge. The stuff he wrote on here with percentages and all this garbage was the biggest load of crrap ive ever seen.

At no point on this thread have I said I was wrong, only that it is a considered opinion having watched the race in full and without any bias.

As for striding, a good egg imo, it's not his fault you're too thick to understand the evidence regarding 'drifters' that he presented to you!

she was hardly a gamble and only just fell in off a mark of 53 tonight. so although the OP quite rightly should get the plaudits for finding a future winner, it doesnt look to me the plan was to lay her out for this race to land a gamble after taking it easy last time. i didnt think she was very good at the time and i still think the same, if she wins off a penalty or a revised mark, i will be the first to come on and say im wrong.