Segal's Comments On Flat Racing In Today's Post

drew stumps on debating it on here about 6 yrs ago...serves absolutely no purpose

A few winners from one individual provides balance? Anyone looks impressive if they just quote winners.

if you're referring to my 15.12 post, dd, it was purely in response to onlooker's post dissing gigolo

the fact is the overwhelming majority of horse race punters just dont care, rightly or wrongly. i would guess the % of that total posting on here is well below 1%. the biggest threat to the industry is when this generation is gone, there places wont be filled. football,sports and machines are taking over and horse racing will continue to suffer regardless of how bookmakers operate.

I've been following the sport for 50 years and betting on it for 40, and there hasn't been a moment during all those years when you wouldn't have heard all these complaints - the jockeys are sh1t, it's all bent except for the big races, the game's finished unless you're an insider etc. Believe me, there were a damn sight more rides like the one Starkey gave the Brave in the Derby than the one Swinburn gave Shahrastani in the same race. And there's nobody around today doing the sort of things Ken Payne, Albert Davison and Geoff Toft got up to around the gaffs.

The only new moan is the one about inconsistent and excessive watering, and I agree with that moan wholeheartedly. You could add elastic running rails to that list, but Ken Hussey was ranting about that in the Handicap Book 30 years ago. God knows what the poor man would have made of the latest wheeze to shaft the punters - remeasure the distances and move the starts, rendering decades of time data useless at a stroke.

I will have to take your word re: posts about thegiggilo selections - that must, apparently, appear elsewhere - where I do not view - such as those comps type threads, presumably.

As,I have only ever seen him post long dissertations, waxing lyrically, about times at Wolverhampton - usually posted in the early hours - that appeared to be his beloved methodology.

Lack of pace in races has been a boon to bookies and a nightmare for form experts for many years. I do think we see more races run now where they crawl through the early furlongs making results a lot less predictable. On Saturday we had the July Cup and the John Smiths Cup both run at a crawl, so anything held up had no chance. Same in Northumberland Plate the previous week. We saw this a lot at R.Ascot including in the Gold Cup which led to OOSG's defeat.

This means the outcome of races has a lot more to do with successful, tactical rides, like the one Doyle gave Ballet Concerto. But trying to second guess how any of these races will pan out beforehand is next to impossible.

The best horse not winning has almost become the norm so from that pov I have sympathy for Segal.

Just back front runners/prominent racers. Who wants to be on Frank Spencer showboater's anyway? As I tell my brother, time and time again, front runners...............

Do you find that out-and-out front runners are profitable, McCoy Carp? It seems to me sometimes that these get artificially shortened by in-running punters backing them pre-race, in order to lay off for a few pennies' profit after a furlong?

But I'd agree with you about horses you know are going to get a decent position up with the pace, e.g. something ridden by de Sousa,

If being in front is a good place to be why are most of supposed 'top' jocks hold-up merchants. Dettori used to be noted as very good on the front end but even he more often than not chooses to sit in behind these days. It wouldn't be so bad if they could get horses to settle off the slow pace. It is pathetic watching a horse rack up an excuse after a few hundred yards.

Jul 17, 2017 -- 3:14PM, roadrunner46 wrote:

think your being a bit disingenuous about thegiggilo only being an aw fanatic, he smashed in 660/1 double at royal ascot, he onlyput up 3 horses and the other won was unlucky to be beaten into 2nd, which he then selected at 10/1 for its next race and wonharrys angel. if this tom sagal was actually doing a decent job , he might of selected some of those above winners himself.there are far more things these days for people to spend their leisure time on, you cant think that all the cheating or bad jockeys are putting off young people betting on the sport, wouldn't even cross their minds. theres just so much more on offer these days.

The problem is it's putting off people who have always bet on horses. When they're all go who will take their place?

'greed & corruption have driven punters out , & now the trust has gone- after all - you don't have to have a bet on racing (stick to football)' you gotta laugh

completely agree regarding watering the tracks but as for everything else,short memories if you ask me.

as for Segal his rant sounds like a typical mug punter,he wasn't moaning about all this when he was tipping winners but now its all 'their' fault.

also regarding the lack of pace in races it might be down to so many horses being bred by shorter bred stallions which is why Coolmore have monopolised middle distance races as they seem to be the only ones breeding proper middle distance horses,just a thought

gd luck all

Millhouse is right, all the changes and tweaks to the system by tptb have been in an effort to make races less predictable. Plus you have the premier tracks (Ascot, York, Donny) that have added drainage systems which appear to make things even more random. Handicapping for group races can't be too far away!

The watering has become farcical, the best part of the track changes from one day to the next

It's the perceived bias more than anything. At a big meeting like RA, in the morning you just can tell what the jockeys will do, chasing shadows half the time.

If there is a predictable bias, fine, but jocks can negate any bias, perceived or otherwise, by doing the exact opposite to what you might expect. All studying becomes a complete waste of time. You are better off using Agnes Haddock's pin.

so if that's basically what seagull is saying, why would anyone buy the rp to read his tips ? 

better off buying a daily and a packet of pins

I have no doubt that Ascot this year, they watered one side more than the other to try and equal it out, that was after day 1

screaming from beneaththewaves
17 Jul 17 16:45
Joined: 30 Jan 05
| Topic/replies: 9,914 | Blogger: screaming from beneaththewaves's blog
Do you find that out-and-out front runners are profitable, McCoy Carp? It seems to me sometimes that these get artificially shortened by in-running punters backing them pre-race, in order to lay off for a few pennies' profit after a furlong?

Not sure. What you're saying would seem to make sense. There's so much going on on the exchange, backers, layers, arbers, scalpers, traders in running punters and yet from stats produced on here by stridingedge, a horse seems to find its true sp ie it's an accurate reflection of its chance.

I have no doubt that Ascot this year, they watered one side more than the other to try and equal it out, that was after day 1


i have no doubt that they didnt do that

duncan idaho    17 Jul 17 15:12 
thegigolo been making hay on Turf too this summer (zhui feng, heartache, harry angel etc), to return further balance


Good to see you reading in duncas for onlooker i've been putting in 12-15 hour days minimum for 20 years on the turf as most on here know,i do 90% of the form and have always done so throughout every summer with virtually no holidays.As i said before WALOFS

What does doing 90% of the form mean? 12-15 hours sounds like torture to me but maybe that's where I have been going wrong. If I can't find something in a couple of hours I will just give up.

I suppose the proof is in the pudding. We know where we can find Segal's tips, where can we find yours? Perhaps a head to head with Segal would be interesting?

Been betting horses for 50 years and the last year or two have been the hardest I can recall. Plenty of smart alecs will claim they are doing well because their system/pattern has come to fruition but for most  form is not as reliable as it used to be.

Ask someone to pm you the site i post on i'm sure someone will oblige..

there is a winner in every race, and the places per race have remained the same, the goalposts have moved but Seagull has been stuck in the mud.

how a prominent tipster, maybe in the highest tipster position in the UK can go 80+ tips without a win and still be in a job is simply staggering.

if I was Gordon Ramsay's head chef and I ruined the main courses in 80 consecutive nights service, would I still be in a job ? I don't think so.

Seagull wants to try betting on here, the shark (sorry bot) infested waters it has now become, with dwindling liquidity and no end of system issues to deal with day in day out.

The mere fact he is putting prices up for selections, that you still cannot get a decent bet on, if at all, speaks volumes about the current state of the industry.

when i first started betting on horseracing more then 35 years ago there were very few televised races but the median standard of jockeyship on the flat (NH jocks have in fact improved over the same period) did appear to be better than it is today and certainly the halycon days of cauthen riding winner after winner from the front have been forgotten by the current crop of jocks (and trainers) with bigger emphasis on horses coming from behind - sure willoughby could write a weighty tome on the relationship between 'new' methods of handicapping and this trend i.e. how to hide your lights under a bushel...

now you can see every race in UK/Ireland live, it's obvious there are many more poor/incompetent and in some cases suspect rides than there were even 10 years ago, again perhaps down to the handicapping approach but more likely confirmation that the median standard of jocks has deteriorated (which in itself should not be a suprise as the number of humans who weigh between 7 and 10 stone gets less by the year and therefore the number of potential jocks falls accordingly) and that the amount of cheating has increased as more and more connections are desperate to lay one out for one payday every few years to go some way to fund their 'hobby' which has seen training fees increase to around £1600-£2000 per month whereas prize money for 90% of races, has fallen year on year apart from the mad concentration at the high end festival meetings (which only benefits the big owners who rarely have a horse in worse than a CL3 race before it gets sold on)..

it does seem that we are reaching the perfect storm and with £M being thrown at football in particular the numbers betting seriously on horseracing will continue to fall and at some time not too far away unfortunately, we'll have cheltenham, royal ascot and a few big saturdays interspersed between a plethora of ladies days/ gentlemens nights / wet wet wet concerts and endless AW /C5/C6 fare...so in summary, it's likely to get worse than better,

Maybe his predicament had been compounded with the defunct of Channel 4 Racing. However, how he had not envisaged this scenario is mind boggling; betting/punting in horse racing had been getting progressively challenging for the last 10 years for joe public, to say the least, and for someone who had been/was supposed to be the top tipster in his game only writing/speaking about it now is disingenuous and unprofessional.

Maybe he needs to man-up...stop bleating and/or leave his profession entirely.

Seagull is now a fully fledged member of the Racing Gravy Train, time to hang up his pin, give the job to a fresh face with fresh ideas....

Plenty of changes the last few years on the flat mostly low grade racing everyday that would have been classed as sellers years ago just low grade handicappers taking turns to win The distances of the races daily are changed moving rails adding many yards to races see the notices everyday so they don't run at the correct distance every race every day in the older days they didn't moves the rails The consistency of trainers has fallen dramatically its seems the newish trainers do well then learn like the old school to start playing around Look at the stoute horses lately all over the place from one run to the next very clever and the mark Johnson horses that's changed beyond recognition The tracks watering with clerks levelling the draw up happens at Beverley every meeting and Royal ascot it went from one side to the next in one day nothing to do with the pace Lots of things causing the punter problems beyond his control and not in the public domain imo

^^ The BHA gets a share of the bookmakers' profits, not turnover, so all of the things above are in the financial interest of racing...

The apparent "up-and-coming" trainers made novicey mistakes eg:-

1) Palmer - over-running their best horse eg Galileo Gold, last season
2) Appleby - easily influenced by the opinion of a jockey despite repeatedly saying horse would be better going up in distance
   eg Wuheida winner of the Marcel Boussac and much fancied for the 2017 Oaks; horse ran in the Falmouth as a prelude to
   the Nassau but now is having 2nd thoughts despite the horse could not even manage to beat Roly Poly (AOB's 3rd string) there.

I agree there are too many average/mediocre jockeys riding regularly in too many nondescript races for the benefit of bookies and connections but not to racegoers and/or punters.

http://www.bettingtools.co.uk/tipster-table/tipsters/pricewise/23

last 5 years

Profit for 2013: 542.50
Profit for 2014: 402.00
Profit for 2015: -1296.50
Profit for 2016: 793.30
Profit for 2017: -281.20

160 points up, less than 1% of turnover

considering the theoretical access he has got the EPs across the board, that is frankly pathetic

whatever methods/systems he was using years ago to turn a profit have clearly been eroded

sounds like you should all pack it in, lads....the current crop of jocks, trainers, clerks just simply not up to the standard that punters of your calibre deserve 

Seagull don't use betting exchanges, clearly a dinosaur that needs another ice age to come along and wipe it out

isleham    16 Jul 17 23:37 
After a 80+ losing run it really isn't MY fault..pathetic!!


Quite !!

treetop    18 Jul 17 00:06 
Been betting horses for 50 years and the last year or two have been the hardest I can recall. Plenty of smart alecs will claim they are doing well because their system/pattern has come to fruition but for most  form is not as reliable as it used to be.


Yes it is. You need to be selective.

can't imagine his followers are too happy, most ball deep in an 80+ losing run and the leader comes out and says it's all got a bit too difficult ...

regarding jockeys and yes i agree with most people that they generally don't seem as switched on as they used to.

I'm wondering if perhaps there's some mileage in the fact that they aren't getting the support and advice required.

Has the role of the agent changed? don't the play golf and wait for the phone to ring these days?
Sure they used to have a small book of jockeys , spent all day in the form book and advised accordingly.

This time of year , with so much racing, its just so hectic and impossible for them , trainers too , to keep up to the minute with everything thats going on.

i'm convinced a good proportion of us ,24-7 , avid race watchers are much more aware of things like a track bias or tactics then any jockey or trainer .
They just don't have the time and i believe many spend the summer running around like head less chickens on auto pilot.

All top jockeys should employ a brain man.
seeing SDS stand out day in day out , i'm convinced he must be working closely with a sharp mind?

Many on here finding excuses for backing the wrong horse and Tom Segal is no exception but he gets paid for his selections.

never followed a tipster but might start with this guy, purely on the basis that he must be due a winner.

My comments relate to the bigger picture, FELTFAIR. I no longer regularly bet on horse racing to make a profit. Racing remains my first love, but it's now a recreational pursuit in the main. I found something else to bet on that I have a much larger edge in, and that takes most of my focus and concentration, so I'm unbiased by and large.
I maintain the vast majority of changes make things more difficult for the dedicated horse racing punter. That doesn't mean that it 'can't be done' but just that it's more difficult. Cumulative penalties, selective watering, capped field sizes, compressed weights, split races, 48 hr decs, rail movements, sun issues, foreign guess up handicappers etc etc. I'm not sure I agree with some others that the standard of jockeys is an issue. There's always been bad/unlucky rides, and always will be. It's more systematic changes that tend to add to the lottery of it all.

hulk23    18 Jul 17 18:29 
never followed a tipster but might start with this guy, purely on the basis that he must be due a winner.


FOBT mentality

Moan whinge moan moan whinge whinge, ive seen every excuse on here why we cant back winners or make a profit, either stop betting or take a loss like a man, place the bet so accept the result win or lose, jeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Spot on mansy

Agreed

Jul 18, 2017 -- 10:53PM, mansfieldman wrote:

Moan whinge moan moan whinge whinge, ive seen every excuse on here why we cant back winners or make a profit, either stop betting or take a loss like a man, place the bet so accept the result win or lose, jeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I think some of us are referring to the state of racing as a whole. 'accept the result win or lose' is a ridiculous statement to make, woeful jockeyship and blanket cheating should be applauded?

I have been full time on here since 2007, have to admit, probably the toughest it has ever been to try to make a profit

BB
Do you know why ?
Do you keep records.
Do you only bet in certain races, or ' across the board'
Do you bet in level stakes ?
Where are your biggest wins / losses coming from?
Is their a pattern to the losing bets ?

Agreed - "accept the result win or lose' IS a ridiculous statement to make"

Might as well just bet on the virtual racing with that philosophy.

Facts - good advice, but one thing I'd pick up on- I do all the above with the possible exception of restricting to certain races. I used to be rigidly disciplined in doing that, but there was a very clear indication that my edge was disappearing and I took time out to do some thinking. I now scan the whole card, but can quickly dismiss races where there is not a shape I like. Shortlisting the races I'm interested in allows the focus on those to the exclusion of the rest. This adds about an hour a day, (as I don't just navigate to certain races blindly)  but my thinking  is that a bet can come from anywhere if you have a clear idea of what you're looking for.

Onlooker - I think that phrase is meant to be read as "man up" - accepting doesn't have to mean submitting to it.

Are you saying that any race in which the market is not a good guide to the result is bent in some way? Of course most people bet on shorter priced horses but a significant number don't and they back winners. If the form book was a more reliable guide what price would the favourites be? We all have our methods and objectives when betting and that is what makes a market. My priorities list on the flat would be something like:
1. Owner.
2. Pedigree.
3. Trainer
4. Going and draw.
5. Jockey.
6. Form.

I tend to avoid races in which the runners have all run 6 or more times.

horse racing is no different to a lot of sports, some parts of it you want to be towards the front of the market (for various reasons), other parts of it you want to be looking at the rag end (again for various reasons)

getting to know what to look for and where is part of being a successful punter because it is certainly not a 1 size fits all sport

Trainers and jockeys cant be trusted, its always been that way, but far worse now than ever before. One huge improvement the sport could easily make is to couple a trainer/owner horses for betting purposes when they have 2 or more in the same race. This simple rule would stop punters leaving the sport in disgust while Coolmore, Godolphin, Hamdan Al Maktoum and Co (the list is almost endless) continue their filthy games winning with no hopers while their red hot favourites cant pick their feet up. I tend to think most jockeys are capable of winning on the best horses when they are told too, but so many are simply riding to orders like "not today Josephine". I have been gambling for over fifty years, and horse racing has never been as corrupt as it is today. I have seen it all, done it all, and quite frankly Im staggered at the total and utter lack of integrity in horse racing today, its deplorable, and Segal is actually 100% right in what he has written

I used to make money for years betting on the horses...

Big money if truth be told but you have to be able to back a horse each-way at the top price..

Betfair is useless as the place prices are ****..

Packed the game in as sick of the alleged "bookmakers" closing me down.

Sick of multiple identitys and trying to cashout..

DO NOT OPEN AN ACCOUNT WITH MARATHONBET..

Coupling horses for betting purposes is a truly terrible idea. If you want to back the second/third strings at a big price then you can and that's the way it should be.

strange attitude to place prices. They are often not much less than 30% of win prices in competitive races and I find that place betting in maidens when there are only four or five horses with a realistic chance is quite profitable. With any other betting medium you only get 1/10 of the odds unless the horse wins. I know someone will tell me that the win and place bets are separate but you don't have another option of place only apart from Tote which are taking a 25% cut.

Agree with Barton Bank. You are free to couple them yourself if you want to.

Individual comments may apply about integrity and could vary according to type of strategy,some will be patient,some bet shorties,some bet each way or be selective. My opinion remains, I reckon the clerks and framing of races is causing upsets.Morecompetitive handicaps and selective watering to offset well known draw advantage or maintain bigger fields (better grants for this ) all contribute as much as corruption to my mind.It is harder and anyone who makes it pay just now has my admiration.

What is the issue with marathonbet, homefortea? One of the few online books that still lay me a decent bet. I know they are Russian-owned, which might be a bit of a red flag…? But have had no probs withdrawing so far.

standard of trainer,jockey,ground,rails moved a fot here or though etc,etc maybe the reasons of the punting snob,or no all punter,but for your everyday social punter,even in the better races ,the games up when you hear 3 or 4 times a day ,commentators ,pundits say they really fancy a horse for their life,but the price is to big,its drifted for the last few hrs et ,etc,borrocco last night another example,basicaly all racing code for in 99% of cases you,ve done your dough the minute you've passed it over

Do you think that the racing is a lot less of a closed shop now so much harder for trainers to collude on a result. Loads of new trainers and owners who may not be willing to "wait their turn" as in the past. I agree that the number of class 5 and 6 handicaps will produce more strange results as the horses are inconsistent and many run far too often. I have never subscribed to the view that horses that have run more than 4 or 5 times will reproduce their form (with a few exceptions) so I like to concentrate on maidens and condition races.

There are so many imponderables in horse racing thus a good knowledge of the subject is no guarantee to successfully picking winners.

I think Segal needs to change with the time - his present methodology of picking a prospective winner no longer is reliable and/or accurate. Also, I think to pay sole emphasis on value is a beginner's error eg on paper, a 100/1 shot could represent more value than a 16/1 but it usually is not; one might be lucky to catch it after a sequence of a long losing runs eg 30 runs, but that is not value just sheer luck, in my opinion. On the other hand an 11/10 shot could be value assuming all relevant factors had been considered.

Segal is just much of a muchness in his profession, and nothing special.

first decent thing ive seen posted on the subject

what more to say-80 long price losers and a 14/1 winner

Realisation of the difficulty we are faced with frequently occurs when the going gets tough - blaming the game for you're own failures is not cool.

When Seagull advises 2pts win on a 16/1 shot in a 17 runner handicap, tells you all you need to know about his betting knowledge

disappointing from seagull this, he's having a bad run and then throws the toys out pointing fingers, he's got form for doing this before so no surprise

Rider,correct, he does this every time he has a bad run.
Every course bar Bath has artificial watering. CoC's love to use it.
Net result is grass doesn't bother putting down deep roots.
So when a load of racehorses gallop over it it knocks the top off and chews up the surface.
So when you have a meeting like the July meeting the faster strip nearer the stands rail gets chewed up so the fields move to race on fresher ground.
Seagull doesn't appear to have noticed this. Time he was 'retired' from his current duties.
He's only 47 ( today,Happy Birthday loser!) so perhaps the RP should redeploy him to answering their complaints telephone number. You know, the one that usually goes straight to answerphone

Why shouldn't he advise 2pts win on a 16s chance in a 17-runner handicap?

Because he's run out of points? Or does he keep a reserve bank of points under the floorboards?

If I ran a tipping rag they'd all start with a set bank of points, lose them all and they'd be shown the door.

Good idea for this place mouse, would certainly shut a few up!

Why shouldn't he advise 2pts win on a 16s chance in a 17-runner handicap?

cos the win market is 132% and the place market approx 105%

Win market would be much less than 132% - remember he can take his pick of the mythical early prices.

Tom give you a clue   favs win 33%  of races .. 2nd  favs win 16%  .. 3rd  favs win 9 %
that's 57%  .. so you picking  16/1 shots   .. your on a sticky wicket...hope this helps

The horse may not be an each way proposition though.

zipper ,plenty of 16/1 shots at early prices in big handicaps such as he tips in end up in the top three or four in the betting.....

yeh but in most cases there genuine 16 to 1 shots,that tom thinks are 2nd,3rd ,4th favs but after 80 loss,s you have to admit that the bookies no more than tom regards prices

I do not know Segal from Adam,...does he only do handicaps for value? If so, no wonder he's on a good beating already; handicaps are mainly for those with stable inside info; if not, desperadoes/fast buck merchants. In the old days - if one was lucky, astute and informed - one could actually come out on top backing big race handicaps like the Lincoln (Cataldi); Ebor (Kneller); Cesarawitch (Bajan Sunshine); etc. But not in the daily/weekend run-of-the-mill handicaps especially on the all=weather surface.

Segal, take a break...for your own sanity and that of your followers.

I do not know Segal from Adam,...does he only do handicaps for value?

The bookmakers choose the Pricewise races -- not Tom Segal, not Bruce Millington. They are the races the bookies price up for their adverts in the Racing Post.

handicap are all about cheating ... most other countries do not have  handicaps

handicap are all about cheating ... most other countries do not have  handicaps

They have cheating though.

how does he explain Hugh Taylor and the losingpunter forumite?

apologies if this has already been stated on the thread

Ramruma...

The races actually pick themselves fella as they would be the ones on the TV..

I believe in some countries in Asia a jockey who'd ridden an injudicious, according to course punters, would not even make the weigh-in; the individual could be hauled off his mount and given a hiding not to be forgotten for a long time. The country's regulatory horse racing body does not come into the equation of (punters') justice.

Actually I used to make a good living backing horses EACH-WAY in handicaps..

ram  horse racing  is all about cheating    take phill smith a  horse   has 4 runs   beat   59  lengths    every race.  no way  could you give that  a   rating

TOM SEGAL column in this week's WEEKENDER

'...I could go back to Royal Ascot I still think I would struggle to back a winner of any of the handicaps

Last week we saw the third from the Hunt Cup, Tashweeg, finish 16th in the Bunbury Cup; the winner of the Wolferton, Snoano, finish 15th in the John Smith's Cup at York; the winner of the Wokingham, Out Do, finish 8th of 11 at York; and the King Georege V Stakes winner, Atty Persse finish tailed off in the Bahrain Trophy

Meanwhile the horses who finished 14th, 27th and 29th in the Britannia were one-two-three in the big three-year-olds' handicap at Newmarket on Saturday, with those who finished in front of them at Ascot well behind

It seems to me that these big handicaps are equine bingo at the moment.
You put all the horses in a tumbler, whirl them around for a minute or two and hope yours comes out first.

Maybe it's always been like that, but you could perhaps trick in a winner by using a draw and pace bias.

The jockeys and trainers have put paid to that, though, with their muddled thinking and once again the supposed draw advantage moved from one side to the other and then to the middle in the July festival last week

======================

from TOM SEGAL column the week before - (around the time of the start of this thread)

Is it just me or are the older-horse heritage handicaps getting just too hard for punters?

Three of them at Royal Ascot -  the Hunt Cup the Wokingham and the Wolferton - and last Saturday's Old Newton Cup all went to horses who looked either out of form, badly handicapped, or on the downgrade

All were 25/1 or bigger and I reckon there were only about a handful of people who found any of them, two of them going by the name of Nostradamus and Uri Geller!

Snoano had been seventh at Ripon before winning at Ascot, Zhui Feng had bee beaten in his last seven handicaps before winning the Hunt Cup; Out Do is an eight-year-old who hadn't won a handicap for more than two years and was 17th of 18 at York two runs before Ascot; and Dylan Mouth had hardly beaten a horse in his three most recent runs

Of course they all had pieces of form that gave them a chance, but so did every other horse in the race.

In this modern era, where there are far too many horses rated between 90 and 105, you simply cannot write off anything in these valuable handicaps anymore

Some say that is good as it provides an opportunity for all horses, but if punters give up on these races it certainly won't be good for the sport as a whole

WALOFS

Id argue that it hasnt been a bad year for decent class 2/3 flat handicaps.

The very nature of them means that you'll get big priced winners. Percentage wise its been my best April-Now for a few years, of course that can change, but if you try and study so much instead of specialising then you're bound to hit some problems.

Yes there have been a lot of middle distance h'caps run at a slow pace, but ive found the 6-8f ones very readable this year, the Spring Cup being a goldmine.

Has Segal finally cottoned on these races are/have been near impossible to decipher? If not, he needs to learn quick otherwise his professional tipping demise will gather pace and ruin him for good.

These races, in the old days, one would just go on big stables entrants/gambles eg Cecil, Stoute or Cumani - if they were involved. Otherwise picking them on names of family members, contemporary events, etc, could be just as valid/successful, in my opinion; these were also races for the weekends one would do multiples with...fantasising a mega return for a small outlay.

These days races of this kind are solely for the benefit of the bookies and very seldom for anyone else.

Id argue that handicaps are the best betting medium. Most good punters that i know have around 9/10 bets in them..

handicaps are the best races to bet in and for reading form, anyone that says any different is talking a load of rubbish, I can
appreciate other people like to specialize in certain types of races, handicaps will always be the best races to bet in, apart
from the occasional good things you get in maidens.

As he hints at I think that Segal's success came in the main from angles like draw and pace more than form and the unpredictability of the jocks has put paid to that approach. Probably feels he has no edge left at all. Personally, I would like to see this sort of reality check given greater prominence but can you imagine him spouting that kind of stuff on ITV Racing? Cheerleaders only required.

The people who say betting in handicaps is a good idea perhaps you can provide some evidence? As I said before at least we see Segal's tips.

Do you really believe that the vast increase in the number of handicaps (including divisions) has been done to benefit punters?

@homefortea
The races actually pick themselves fella as they would be the ones on the TV..


To a point, though not all will be priced up. Either way, Segal does not pick the races.

Hugh Taylor has it easier in that he can pick the races he tips in, but the crucial disadvantage of no "pricewise guarantee" that prices will be available for a few minutes, so the prices are invariably slashed to ribbons almost immediately.

didn't segal make his name by tipping that Jarvis horse at ascot 33 to 1 that won against all the evidence of previous races on the straight track at ascot that week, according to segal you back a big priced winner of a handicap these days and your pins got lucky,.but when he did it and you didn't over the last few years ,it was because he was a genius and you were bookies cannon fodder,strange code he lives under

Tipster paid to find big-priced winners moaning because winners are big prices.

But he can't find them.

I find it very odd that people think betting in handicaps is all about inside info, as opposed to betting in maidens/bumpers etc when there is very little public form on display.