Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 167 comments are related to the topic:
4.25 Why did Supersta win?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 4 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 167
By:
the dealer
When: 23 Mar 17 23:37
i am not saying you are wrong, just saying that its down to you guys and imo its wrong for others to assume anything without all the facts.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 23 Mar 17 23:40
Regarding the horse in the March race, if he was 7/2 that was a mental price even if you didn't take into account that the horse had been to Dubai and had a problem. It was a competitive race and the winner has mentioned above was two on the bounce over CD and had been clocking good times. I certainly didn't have any interest whatsoever in backing Pearl to give her a stone. I thought he had a lot on his plate and he genuinely ran better than I expected he would.
Am not going to comment on the horse going down to post early. I can't help think you are overplaying it's importance, Chris but I wasn't there and I haven't spoken to Mick about it at any time. It is a shame you feel the experience was soured, he is/was a great horse to own and I maintain that Mick has handled him superbly to improve him two stone and win six races with him.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 23 Mar 17 23:44
barstool, Chris Dixon has just texted me to say he is still up and he would like to speak to you to discuss your allegations in person. He added that he is both taken aback and disappointed with your accusations, especially as you have never mentioned any of this to him prevously. So if you could give him a ring I am sure he would appreciate it.
By:
flukes
When: 23 Mar 17 23:49
Shocked
By:
Nosuchthingasvalue
When: 23 Mar 17 23:59
Here comes the threat of a gagging order!
By:
thegiggilo
When: 24 Mar 17 00:06
That race was a track record would've needed wings to beat moon river,the price 7/2 must've been a joke both the other Appleby horses the winner and philba were justifiably infront of it in the betting,the run behind westwood hoe philba and highland colori had the beating of it just briefly looking at the race.Don't know about the 12/1 but there wasn't a strong reason to think it was going to win that race,looked an 8/1+ shot and that's without looking at some of the other runners..
By:
garychesterrrr
When: 24 Mar 17 00:16
Obviously this is somewhat of a private manner and not really any business of me or many on here, Though I can see Barstool's point that his horse didn't seem to be ran on its merits (If his conversation with MA is accurate that if the horse broke well it would be handy) - The horse may have been handicapped badly but because of the drift compared to the gamble on the winner, from the same stable who was given a forward ride which tends to bode well at Southwell, I think I'd be pretty peeved too!
By:
ProSniper
When: 24 Mar 17 00:24
"its wrong for others to assume anything without all the facts." Nobody tells BB to pipe down in so many situations where he obviously "doesn't know all the facts"

It's highly convenient that all the drifts or backs can be "explained"/justified by anyone inside the tent pissing out. But as soon as the the roles are reversed..
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 00:30
I would have been most interested to read responses from people connected to a few horses where I have questioned the integrity of rides in the past, ProSniper. Not that what I think about other races/horses is of much relevance here anyway.
By:
ProSniper
When: 24 Mar 17 00:43
Maybe they had the same "legit" excuses as you put forward? Perhaps the game isn't as dirty as we all believe? Let's all have a w@nk at the beautiful purity of the "sport of kings"
By:
MJK
When: 24 Mar 17 07:40

Mar 23, 2017 -- 6:24PM, ProSniper wrote:


"its wrong for others to assume anything without all the facts." Nobody tells BB to pipe down in so many situations where he obviously "doesn't know all the facts" It's highly convenient that all the drifts or backs can be "explained"/justified by anyone inside the tent pissing out. But as soon as the the roles are reversed..


I don't know BB but sems a decent person. But as we all know there are the same few others on here who only really post to defend the indefensible(poor,crooked rides etc) and we have to ask ourselves why? Again kudos to Barstool for his post.

By:
ProSniper
When: 24 Mar 17 11:34
"I don't know BB but sems a decent person" I'm sure he is. Barney Curley seems a decent person as well but it didn't stop him ripping the hole out the game.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 13:12
I think that's the first time I have ever been likened to Barney Curley. This is all getting a bit strange. The implication that I am ripping the hole out of the game is an odd one also. If you want to accuse people of ripping the hole out of the game then perhaps you should be focusing your attention on bookmakers who will not a lay a bet, have wilfully relegated the sport in favour of electronic machines designed to rip people off and give them no chance of winning and have taken a stranglehold on racing to the extent where the sport cannot control its own fixture list. If making a profit from gambling is ripping the hole out of the game then at least I have put a very substantial back into the sport from ownership.
By:
Dav_vin03
When: 24 Mar 17 14:06
His reply " it was Midge, he thought he always went down early"

It would appear you and your horse got used barstool
By:
duncan idaho
When: 24 Mar 17 14:28
why is going down early a big deal? thought it was only done when a horse is prone to getting edgy in paddock...dont really see a negative to going down early
By:
timeless
When: 24 Mar 17 14:35
I blame them Islamics.
By:
Dav_vin03
When: 24 Mar 17 14:35

Mar 24, 2017 -- 8:28AM, duncan idaho wrote:


why is going down early a big deal? thought it was only done when a horse is prone to getting edgy in paddock...dont really see a negative to going down early


It is when the horse has a documented issue with going down early and this has been discussed with the trainer Tongue OutTongue OutTongue Out

By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 14:36
A "documented issue" that none of the other owners had a clue existed until yesterday.
By:
Dav_vin03
When: 24 Mar 17 14:41
barton bank - do you watch your horses go down to the start and behind the stalls?

since the snobs ended banded racing, many people have missed out on ownership
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 14:43
I don't go on the majority of occasions when the horses run. Doesn't the enthralling debate about banded racing have its own thread?
By:
Dav_vin03
When: 24 Mar 17 14:44
banded racing was good fun and a good first step into ownership

once again, the snobs killed it off
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 14:49
If you can afford a banded horse, you can afford a horse that runs in 0-50 and 0-55 grade.
By:
ProSniper
When: 24 Mar 17 15:17
BB, maybe the bookies wouldn't be so reluctant to lay a decent bet on the horses if there wasn't so much cheating going on in the game. It amazes me that the Curley's and the Fretwell's of this world have the audacity to whinge about struggling to get their bets on after obviously and continually fixing the odds in their favour to an obscene level. 

Incidentally, Curley used to convince himself he was giving plenty "back" to the game. I also understand he did/does a ton of charity work. Whether he did this purely because he is indeed a decent man? or because he had a conscience that was eating away at him? I guess only he and his closest would know for sure.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 15:28
I think you are incorrect in your suggestion that bookies would lay decent bets to anyone who knows what they are doing, even if every runner in every race run on their merits and they knew with complete confidence that is the case. It isn't just about limiting insiders. The bookmakers refusal to lay bets to largely unconnected winning punters, some losing punters who had the audacity to try and take a favourable price (hiding behind the accusation that these people were "arbing") on numerous occasions. Exchange betting flourished partly because of the above.
I can't comment on Barney Curley's motivation but I own horses as a hobby. I don't do it to give something back to the game and never claimed that is my motivation. Nonetheless, racing is better off (albeit slightly) with my financial input as an owner than it would be without it.
By:
stewarty b
When: 24 Mar 17 15:32
Just read this thread. Well done on your winner BB. I would have given up trying to explain myself long before this. I smell a tad of jealousy on the thread.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 15:45
Thanks, stewarty.
By:
ProSniper
When: 24 Mar 17 15:54
"even if every runner in every race run on their merits and they knew with complete confidence that is the case." They've never been given the chance - and never will be as long as the game is littered with so many cheats. Stew, what exactly are people supposed to be jealous of? I just wish people would OWN what they do. Otherwise they can come across as sheer hypocrites.
By:
barstool
When: 24 Mar 17 15:57
BB.

I take on board what you said about the trainer improving him, he did a great job and the horse always looked fantastic. I can understand the prep run before Dubai and I would not have wanted him to have a hard race either. I can also understand that he may well have been injured at Chelmsford and then needed a long rest to recover. Likewise you running him in a claimer in his comeback if you felt that is his level. The run after at Wolverhamton was disappointig but again you can make a case for the distance being too far.

What I can't accept and what has not been explained is how come Pearl Nation went from tissue favourite out to 12/1 while Moon River went from 7/1 to 11/4 fav.
It takes a lot of money to do that. Also, what would Moon Rivers opening price have been if Pearl Nation had not been in the race? Not as juicy that is for sure.

Why did he go to the start early? I don't know, you don't know, Mick Appleby does'nt know (so he blames the Jockey). Any one who saw him at the start at Catterick when he went down early would never have let him do so again, he was a nervous wreck awash with sweat and ran an awful race. We where aghast at Southwell when we saw him sent to the post so soon, thankfully this time he was ok.

Finally why was he ridden in the manner he was for the first time in this race? Mullen clearly had the option to take the front line yet he pulled him back so far he had no chance after two furlongs.

I will leave it at that now and wont post again but I will never be convinced otherwise that some people had it right off at our expense that day. This is the real reason we sold him. We did not want to make a fuss at the time and thought it best to walk away. I know CD has been trying to call me, Eileen got a message last night. If he wants to defend what happened then post it on here.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 16:01
And if they were given the chance they wouldn't lay bets.
They don't lay bets to anyone with a clue on any sport.
Is every sport bent?
By:
timeless
When: 24 Mar 17 16:06
where there is money involved, there is always dodgy dealings going on,

it would be naive to believe otherwise !
By:
JetLoneStar
When: 24 Mar 17 16:17
Cant see alot wrong with the race behind Westward Hoe, Mullen is a smart jockey and had ridden a good race imo before the horse didnt have the pace to take the gaps when they were there.

The Moon River race however sticks out as a 'jockeys race' as they're often labelled here (not that Pearl Nation would have gotten close to Moon River imo); The sale of the horse to America story lends itself well to the theory.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 16:21
Barstool, it takes nothing like as much money as you think it does to shorten a horse or lengthen one. Particularly when they are running in what is not the main meeting of the day.I think that most formbook punters would have fancied the winner to be honest. The prices were almost certainly miles off in the first place and you could find many, many examples of much larger drifts. I am glad to see that you now believe the horse was actually injured and it wasn't a smokescreen as your earlier accusations suggested. Moon River would have been shorter initially if Pearl Nation was not in the race, not longer. How could it possibly be otherwise.
I think Andrew Mullen riding Pearl Nation might well have been influential in the betting forecasts/very early prices but Curtis had ridden the winner for both her previous two wins and I have no idea whether or not Midge had the choice of which horse to ride.

As I have said several times, I had no idea the horse had gone to the start early or whether he has ever gone to the start early before or since. I am far from convinced it would have made much difference to his performance and in my honest opinion and I would be fairly sure the view of most handicappers, the horse ran very near his best on the day behind Moon River. Watching the race again I would say that Midge did his best. The horse was drawn hard on the inside which is also a factor that will have contributed to his weakness in the betting and his priority was to get him off the slow inside rail which he accomplished. He got stuck into the horse in the straight and he just wasn't good enough in a warmish race off a career high mark. That's all there is to it as far as I am concerned. If you want to continue to believe the horse was stopped, then that is up to you. I don't agree with you and I think the statement that he has "never tried to win a race in England" is simply not true.

Chris Dixon doesn't post on here. He would like to speak to you though.
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 16:34
"A jockeys race" where the winner broke the course record! Have a word with yourself, Jet. Seriously.
By:
JetLoneStar
When: 24 Mar 17 16:41
Hadn't noticed that BB, I dont bet at Southwell so just looked at the race and saw the apparent easy lead upside its stablemate. Should have looked through the formbook before I started typing Whoops
By:
everton1978
When: 24 Mar 17 16:49
Interesting read this. General consensus is the trainer knows the time of day so can you confirm whether or not the 2 worked together leading up to this race?
By:
everton1978
When: 24 Mar 17 16:50
Sorry, that question is to Barton Bank
By:
Barton Bank
When: 24 Mar 17 17:02
No, because I didn't ask. Sorry.
By:
flukes
When: 24 Mar 17 17:07
Abareeq another easy winner to come out of the Lincoln Trial
By:
kingscurate
When: 24 Mar 17 17:07
Another winner out of the Nimr race there...
By:
kingscurate
When: 24 Mar 17 17:08
Well done flukes, great minds!
Page 4 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com