How does MIDGELY suddenly SWITCH that horse ON?

Well backed too.

I've never ever backed Tylery Wonder when it's won so don't take this post as me being a clever so and so it's just a potential reason for an improvement,I backed him when I thought he's get an easyish time on the front and was gutted that day he came out on elastic at York when unbacked by myself.
The 2 quotes below are from former trainer Bill Mcreery in 2015

Tylery Wonder is very hard to work out. If I could get inside his head it would be great. He's a good horse and has plenty of ability. He carried plenty of weight there and was going away at the line. I think he sulks when he has horses around him so Billy [Lee] kept him away from everything. He knows him well - Willie McCreery, trainer.

Tylery Wonder is a funny horse. He got a break after the last day and the lads that own him (Tylery Road Syndicate) took him home to Laois and threw him out in a field with cattle for a week! That draw suits him as he likes to race on his own. He doesn't even work with other horses at home - Willie McCreery, winning trainer.

Plus they switched to blinkers today.

Interesting quotes - Denzil.

However - with regards to the Blinkers angle ...

It has worn Blinkers - 47 times before.

Including the self-same, "switched to," - unsuccessfully 6 times.

So I feel we can leave that angle out - especially as it has always been wearing a Visor (which is, almost the same as, a Blinker) previously.

Yes that put me off today.

I considered it afterwards as something which might've tricked or humoured the horse but having watched the replay not being pushed too severely for the lead was probably the main reason.

Admittedly, it is a horse that anybody would find it difficult to 'get your head around'

When it won as FAV at the Curragh, back in 2014, I remember thinking 'why FAV?'  - as it had 'weakened' on it's last 3 outings, including twice over the minimum trip.

When it switched to MIDGLEY, 2 years later, you expected a Renaissance - But it took a year to come, and was not well-backed (went off 14/1) when it won.

More recently, it has had those 13 beaten runs - which can only make you wonder why the stables ONLY entry today - and sent from Yorkshire to Windsor, too.

We know now, as it won - But why the SOLE ENTRY  and the apparent CONFIDENCE in the betting? ... on this horse that can be renowned for 'downing tools' once joined in a race.

It's a puzzle alright I'm admittedly no further forward than before the race.
On paper he looked a likely leader though by no means certain to have it easy,he won a 26K 103(top weight) handicap last September off 80 which he may be targetting again?? so would need to go up,other than the 2 place runs at York I have no more and definitely couldn't be confident that it was the seemingly point and shoot which it turned out to be.

seems to be money coming for giant spark 4.15 ayr 33s into 14s ,noteworthy given a string of duckeggs next to his name and a lowly mark

With hindsight, and looking only at the form listed in the OP, Tylery Wonder was running in (and duly won) a class 5 handicap -- two races after being runner-up in a class 3 race. Provided you were happy to put a line through the race in between which was over six furlongs, he was almost a good thing. Two races before that, second in the jump jockeys' race, also class 3.

No, I wasn't on either.

Other than that, I can't work him out either. There is just a hint in the form that he may be a good weight-carrier, doing well against lesser opposition.

Onlooker, a question here without meaning to sound rude.

Do you look at form and figures at all ?

The horse ran well at York over 5f twice this season, first of all when 2nd off 72 and then again 2 runs ago when 2nd off 75 to a progressive type. The horse has consistently shown that it is best suited by 5f on a galloping track and is effective off marks in the low 70s. It could be forgiven it's poor run last time out again off 75 running over 6f which stretches his stamina, but the handicapper dropped it 2lb to 73, so it was back in the winning marks bracket for it and was back over 5f on a galloping track. The horse started the season too high in the weights off 83 having had a fruitful year last season and found 80 to be about it's ceiling mark. I would imagine the run in March and April were nothing more than not off runs when the horse was unfit. Possibly trained on the walker it had two runs close together in May and I would hazard to guess it was only in May that they started training this horse to get it fit again. Dropped to 74 (a mark in the danger zone) the horse ran very well over a galloping 5f at Newcastle, probably benefiting from being fit and dropped in the weights but there was no money for him. He was then backed next time but I doubt by connections. Nottingham is a tricky track and doesn't suit horses who like to go forward and he has run a few stinkers at Nottingham in the past, he did again here but I personally feel the money was not connections. They also removed headgear which was a tell tell sign to me, he wasn't off. Since that run he had been largely consistent in the right races on tracks that suit him over a trip he likes, in headgear and off and around his dangerous marks. One could argue he should't have been dropped lb for not staying a trip the handicapper knows he doesn't stay, but it opened the door for him on Sunday to win. It should also be noted that he ran in a 0-80, 0-95 and 0-90 in 3 of his four previous starts and dropped into 0-75 on Sunday. He ran in a 0-70 at Carlisle too but he had to run off 75 (as it was a Saturday, and whilst entries were done on the Monday, they are only confirmed on the Tuesday which was when the handicapper put him back to 75) and he isn't suited by a really stiff track like Carlisle, I personally think Midge was just looking to try and take advantage of the drop to 72 and turning him out quickly before he went back up 3lb to 75.

There had been enough in his profile to say enough boxes were ticked on Sunday and that he was back on the right sort of track, over the right trip and back into the winning marks bracket.

These older horses are all very similar especially up to a mile. They got to a point they can't win. They may be a solid 80 horse but they need to be 8-10lb well treated to be well enough handicapped to beat improvers and win. So the handicapper knows, this horse is well in, in the low 70s, capable of running well in the mid 70s but too high when he gets to around 80. Horses like this aren't hard to find as bets, but they are fairly obvious to most form students and as with the case of this horse, he's had a couple of runs already off the correct dangerous marks bracket where he has run well, when he would have been a bet to form students. They don't win all the time, as this horse has shown, but in the right grade, over the right trip and in the area of mark they are well in and above the grade, they will normally run their race.

This horse was no different and certainly isn't a case of switching him on or off. The signs were there, if you put in the time to study horse and race profiles.

Also something to note, it's owned by a football agent, whose money is earned between May and August getting his players deals and so on, the time he prob has a few extra quid to bet big would be after the transfer season ends. Just something to bare in mind.

Domino - as the owner of TW I would just say there is more chance of me being a drug dealer than a football agent. I am neither.

PBT

Sorry about that, I had always been told off someone that Andrew Taylor was a football agent. My apologies. They were a mutual friend through Ned Curtis who rode a few for you a few years ago.

you've got love domino,s outlook on puinting in races where if they were again on the same day you,d get a different result, doms confident that horses like this are beat because they arnt fit,wrong track,trip,got out of the stable the wrong side and even if all the above bare spot on in every case there beat by an improver,most of which the race before wernt fit,wrong track ,trip and also got out of the stable on the wrong side,
in other words when theres 100,s of races a month with unfathomable outomes besides the money been down , domino can find logical reasons to support the result,
how much for a ticket to spend a day in domino,s world,

if punting isn't hazardous enough the racing post now spotlighting horses owned by football agents running after, during the transfer window ,

that's got to be up there for all time best post on the racing forum

Did make me as well

Love to start the day with a good larf, thanks Dom.

I don't see anything wrong with my post at all and it's pretty much how all older handicappers are.

Problem is too many idiots on here, think racing is fully corrupt and horses are just stopped left right and centre until the day the money is down and like a machine the day you say go the horse will win. That's like 99% of punters are so bloody thick it's untrue.

Horses have a ceiling to their ability, when they are well in they run well and win, when they aren't they don't. However the amount of idiots who don't understand, horses, form and even racing who bet is unreal. If you believe a game is that bent, and it's a case of horses win when owners and trainers want them to, then you are seriously clueless and should pack up betting, especially if you think the game is that rancid.

99% of punters should stick to roulette. FACT!

problem with your argument is that taking in to account track,ground,jockeyship,draw,opposition,stable form, oppositions stable form,pace of race,luck in running etc,etc,etc you cant say a horse cant win because a handicapper has judged him to a 80 horse instead of a 79 horse, and when stables have runs of 40 winners in a month and none in the month before or after is that because they've all hit a mark they can or cant win off and the opposition on marks they cant win off

@1stimeposter

Every horse is different, but this horse won't win above 80 anymore, he's not that standard of horse anymore, but there was enough in his recent runs and profile to show the horse was off a mark he can be competitive off. Once the handicapper has a horse it wont win until it's back down to the marks it can be. A horse called Juneau is a classic example of such horse that is running today. Very few yards if any would have 40 winners in a month, having had none the month before or after, I know you're randomly speaking, but Paul Midgley is a good trainer who has a number of horses who currently are around their winning marks, so makes sense they are running well, the same that once they are too high in the weights they will struggle. You will see in small to medium yards they will have one blinding season with horses when well treated but the following year they struggle because the horses are badly handicapped and need to come down in the weights. The difference between these yards and bigger yards, is the bigger yards often have fresh new stock, and move on badly handicapped horses, but smaller yards are unable to do so, so after a period of success will come a run of results where it looks like the horses are no good, but they are just badly treated in the weights.
That is basic training of horses.

@Chavman mentioned a horse called Giant Spark earlier in the thread. I have a theory on the horse, which I suspect is correct. I don't think he was busy the other day, I believe he is nearly where connections need him to be to resume winning ways, but he is been trained very shrewdly and there has definitely been a long term plan, that ANY competent race reader or forum student could pick up on quite easily. It mirrors the pattern I've mentioned above.

winners for mjk for instance have nothing to do with handicap marks, they can be last one race when fav ,well fancied and sluice in of the same mark sometimes in the same week,as for giant spark I doubt those pay training fees for over a year before winning an egg and spoon race will consider the horse been very shrewdly trained

1sttimeposter

That depends. I can't say too much, but owners in a lot of yards have agreements, they wont pay full fees if they have a number in training. If you had a horse which you could get down to win 2 or 3 races, and spend 20K doing so, and then have everything right for it and get £5000 on at 5/1, that horse has been trained for free, and that's how smaller yards have to operate.

MJ also trains for the sheikh's and has 250-300 horses, it's a production line. He wouldn't be operating in a way a small trainer like Midgley would and it would be foolish to think so. Midgley would have a plan for most of his horses, MJ will have a plan for his best 10% of horses, the rest will just be dart board trained and run in whatever races they can run in, and win what they can and then be sold. He wont care those horses run erratically. No punter will make money backing horses from big yards, but looking into smaller yards assessing the horses and gauging an opinion of each horses ability, ground, trip and patterns will definitely point you in the right direction as to when these horses will likely win.

so if mjk and a dozen other trainers with 200 plus owners have a dartboard attack why would shrewdy owners, shrewdy trainers pay 12,18 months fees lay out plans months in advance when theres a good chance they,ll be meeting 2 or 3 dartboard hitters on the day of the shrewdys big race

5000 on at 5 to 1 IN LOW GRADE HANDICAPS,

IN the type of races your,  talking about regards Midgely imo your completely and utterly wrong
we,re always told in the sprinting division theres little difference between handicappers and listed ,group races and everything else is aligned, ground,trip.track,form,luck etc,etc,the horses mark is almost irrelevant

@1sttimeposter

Please explain to me these Shrewd owners who pay 12/18 months of fees to have their horses trained by big trainers ? Most of the bigger owners send to these trainers because they want results and the best out of the best horses and the rest can be sold. If you want a horse to be trained properly and given the time it needs you send it to Haggas/Stoute/Gosden or Varian, not a Hannon/Fahey/Channon or Johnston who will just gallop the crap out of it and get what they can from it before moving it on.

Yes you could get 5K on a horse very easily.

There won't be a lot of difference in a Premier Handicapper than a listed or group horse at the sprint level. But there is a huge jump between those levels and say an exposed 80-85 rated handicapper who needs to be a 70-75 to be able to have the class to beat unexposed improving types. Stick an 85 horse in listed or group race and whilst it wont run badly, it won't be competitive.

2k sportsbook, 2k paddys, 1k betbrite, job done

5k profit IF it wins. Luvly jubbly.

and if miracles happen and you get your money on with them,where do you go next time,

And if it's unlucky and gets beat a head, then there's always next year.

I supposes NAGGERS is another 18 month shrewd coup about to come off ,but no one including Midgely no,s when or where

People close to the horse will know, just study horses form, it really isn't hard.

people like you and the tv pundits will always in hindsight juggle different reasons around to justify a horse suddenly winning from no where, but the truth is no matter how much studying you do unless you,ve been to at least half a dozen funerals ,theres absolute no one including Midgely and the owners only turn up on the day of the wedding,so the wedding day is only making up or partly making up for all the funerals for most people the end result means they might as well have not bothered in the 1st place ,hence why the racing game ,this forum etc is dying on its arse, imo of course

Great thread guys love it although I think there a lot of anoraks who have too much time on their hands lmao. I do think form is important in a race but there also lots of other factors going,jockey,trainer,handicap mark and biggest of all is the horse ready to win. I think we are all intelligent enough to know that especially in lower grade handicaps horses are laid out for races. Imo it is a form of cheating as the insiders know what they are doing having Said that the horse still has to want to win and we all know that a lot haven't got that message lol. There fore no matter how much planning and scheming connections do if the horse doesn't want to win they are ferked. On top of that in a 20 runner 0-75 how manny said connections have the same plot. I prefer to back inform horses than relying on a horse to win after it hasn't won for 20 races no matter how much the handicap mark has dropped. Backing every horse that's dropped in the weights would make you pretty skint. If you put in enough study I'm sure one or two will jump out at you but as I mentioned earlier how do we know other connections don't have a similar type ready to win!!!! I've got to admit a horse that wins with form figures 8096089799797979889 at 33/1 makes me vomit. Imo totally bent and the stewards should be grilling the sh.t out of connections. Some of the results we see on a daily basis are worst than the biggest fa cup shocks of all time bearing in mind a football match is a 3 horse race.

Davetheat

I would be amazed if any horse with those sort of figures won a race !

As for TW, his back form in that type of race was there for all to see and bar a run over 6f (a trip he doesn't stay), he had been running well and was in  grade of race you would expect him to go close in.

I do agree in those 20 runner races, you may 3/4 similar types but it's all about value and these horses will often be prices where you could couple them. I would rather back 4 6-10/1 shots that look potentially well in, in a grade they can win, than gamble on a horse up 12lb for winning a race and placing in a couple of others at fav taking on horses who are back in the right grade.

1st time poster big up on your comment about your comments on pundits. nothing more annoying than them trying to explain that a33/1 shot won its last race 3 years. Makes them look tw..s.

a horse may have gone up 5lb for beating in your words 4,or 5 horses which were were well handicapped and plotted up,in which case you,d assume a penalty wouldn't automatically stop them from winning again, sprinters are known for clocking up multiple wins and most drop in the weights because their out of form noit because they cant win at a certain mark,the range in marks during a sprinters career from the highest to the lowest is huge for multiple reasons to pinpoint this to a narrow weight range in which it cant compete is wrong imo

I prefer to believe that the likes of Midgely, fahey, Nichols before them, get them fit run them mob handed and hope they get the luck on the day with as much chance as the stables mot wanted winning as the stables most wanted, Midgely often interviewed on tv pre race when mob handed gong for the wrong one,saying so and so wont like the ground,not well handicapped,poor draw  etc,etc before gashing up and running down the field a week later

should have read unwanted

It happens everyday domino14. Ok this isn't as bad but pensax boy 14/1 at Wolverhampton yesterday last 6 races 13 7 4 8 9 12 your telling me that any sane person wants to back a horse with **** figures like that. There are much worse aswell. I get the value angle but backing lots of horses that are supposedly good value isn't any good if the ferkers don't win is it. I take the opposite view as I'd rather back an horse that wins on merit and not when connections decide it is ready to win. The point is in. 29 runner race you can make a case for virtually every horse if you look at ratings blah blah even 50/1 shots. You can't back them all so if you highlight the best 10 that are supposedly well in do you back them all? Any horse is well in if it's below its last winning mark but not if the ferker hadn't won for 29 races. We al, have angles and each to their own but at the end of the day we are at the mercy of wether the horse is trained and ridden to win. That's the one race no matter how much we study we can win and that is for definite. Unless your domino14 and you have privileged inside info!!!!!!!

Anyone who struggles to understand the running of the winner here, had better keep their stakes to a minimum. Because they're going nowhere until they approach the game from the right direction.

@Davethehat

I think Pensax Boy is a very bad example. His record prior to yesterday read 3 wins from 5 runs on the all weather, and he was returning to the all weather where he had run 2 OK races in December off higher marks but had still run to around 80-85 in each of those races. After 3 turf runs he returned to Wolverhampton over a trip that suits, and dropped in class.
He may not have been the most obvious of winners and I for one didn't bet him, but his solid record on the all weather was there to be seen, and both his efforts in December gave him a chance down in grade after 2 decent runs in 0-85 and 0-95 races. The trainers horses have also been running well since moving to his new yard.

pensax boy obviously not owned by the agent who manged to screw 70 million out of Chelsea for a goalkeeper has he started at 14,s,

I agree domino14 that the horse has decent record on all weather but his mark reflects that and your correct there are much worse examples than that everyday. That was a quick pick to prove my point and even based on your info I still wouldn't back it with someone else's money. All the running in higher grade etc happens all the time aswell like I said you can't back every horse that's supposedly well in. Why isn't a fave that's won half length and gone up three pounds well in? At least the ferkin thing has proved it can win a race. It's not just the form figures you see horses regularly that have won 1 in 40 then muppets making excuses for why they popped up at 40/1.  I do agree the horse of midgelys doesn't really fall into the wtf category of winners as I'm highlighting. I just think that making a reason for every horse winning at a big price is pretty sad. If every fave won we would all be bored but way too many no hopers win in my view. If you have. 2/1  3/1 7/2 and a 6/1 wins that's acceptable but 16/1 25/1 and bigger just shouldn't be happening unless it's in say a stewards cup etc. We all have opinions just some of us don't try to look for the good in every scenario lol. Let's face it there is lots of cheating if every sport it's just some are easier to detect. Look at lance Armstrong unbeatable blah blah then we find out the **** is a cheat. Takes the shine off lmao

It's not cheating if a horse with proven ability bounces back to win at a decent price.
It simply means that on balance the market thought that a return to form was unlikely.

Yet that wasn't the case with the runner here anyway.

@Davethehat

I think the problem here is you don't evaluate form and study it. Just because a horse wins a race doesn't mean it's better than a horse who has finished 10th in another race. Too many people are blindsided by form figures rather than what horses actually achieve. Only when you learn this concept and evaluate will you see the value of actual form.
The reality is when you access a horse like Pensax Boy and take in all the factors, 14/1 would be a big price and you would want him on your side in the race. I'm not saying when you study form every bet you have or horse you suspect is well treated and in the right grade will win, but I guarantee you that you will do a lot better than blindly following a betting market or reading form figures as gospel.

You may well be correct that a horse who has won say a 0-75 off 74, goes up 3lb and could be well handicapped still off 77, but the difference is, he is now against betting opposition in a 0-80, and what if one of his rivals won by 4L off 75 last year over this trip and on this ground, went up to 86 as a result, and has subsequently struggled off higher marks but over time, having not ran over this trip and in this grade and on these ground conditions, has dropped down to 75 again. His form figures may not look pretty as you say, but the form of what he done the last time in this grade is there for all to see, only many will see say form of 34145874906 and automatically assume the horse is no good without taking into consideration the company he is now in, the ground he is now racing on, and the trip he is over. All of which he is proven over. He is this grade would be a player and proven, whilst the horse who won last time stepping up in grade has to prove that he has further improvement in him, and is up against horses who have already proven themselves to be better than this grade.

I don't buy your view of the betting market reflecting the outcome of a race. If the front end always won, then bookmakers would cease to exist and it would be easy for the punter. The fact a horse is 3/1 or 4/1 is normally based on recent form, reputation or from the volume of support but it doesn't mean IT WILL OR SHOULD WIN. Okay I won't disagree there are shock results which take some explaining and are baffling, but most of these well backed winners or even not so well backed winners can have a case for them on form.

A lot of people don't like Rachel, the US bird on RUK when she does Kempton, but she thoroughly assesses the form, wont just go for the favourite and whilst at times she is blinded by American pedigree's she actually is a very good reader of form, can talk a lot of sense and has highlighted numerous well treated horses in her time, putting up some decent priced winners and placers. She may not be everyone's cup of tea, but unlike the more popular presenters she does her homework and is more knowledgeable than many give her credit for. You would not go poor following her advice which can't be said for most on there.

@Dr Crippen is bang on the money.

As I tried to point out above, THIS HORSES WIN WAS NO SHOCK TO ANY FORM READER, The clues were there for all to see and it was in the right grade, over the right trip, on the right ground, it was not some rancid plot job where you could only guess at it's ability. It's back class was there for the world to see and had actually been running well in grades better than this one, prior to a poor run over a trip it doesn't stay. Putting at line through it's previous run, you couldn't have had it out the frame. It was good placing by connections, but by no means was there another untoward.

Stop looking at form figures thinking they reflect the value of form, and you may start to understand.

onlooker needs to spend more time on form study that relying on reading Templegates pics...

Agree with Delta

Think we are taking it all too literally domino14 lol. I've been betting on horses 40 years and have never been comfortable with complete rags winning likewise I'm not expecting the first three in the betting to win every race, I'm not into digging deeeeeeeeep to find a winner but do take form into account. We all know about going,times of the year, trainer form and countless other factors. Think a horse dropping down a grade Is down to the fact it's not run a decent race in last ten. In theory it is well in based on its mark and grade but It still doesn't explain how a horse beaten more than 5 lengths in said races can suddenly win. Handicappers are usually at pains to drop a horse but if you backed every horse on a lower mark you would soon be skint. Btw I don't back horses on form figures I back horses that actually win races. As you well know a large percentage never win a race so regardless of their dropping marks you will always lose on them. I take your point that studying and finding a horse that has everything in its favour at a good price is a value bet but for everyone that wins in such a position I reckon their are 4 or 5 that still won't win. Good look with your angle each to their own. Even if I had the time to study in the detail you do I would choose not to as I feel most horses that win at big odds should have the connections explaining improved form.

Think we are taking it all too literally domino14 lol. I've been betting on horses 40 years and have never been comfortable with complete rags winning likewise I'm not expecting the first three in the betting to win every race, I'm not into digging deeeeeeeeep to find a winner but do take form into account. We all know about going,times of the year, trainer form and countless other factors. Think a horse dropping down a grade Is down to the fact it's not run a decent race in last ten. In theory it is well in based on its mark and grade but It still doesn't explain how a horse beaten more than 5 lengths in said races can suddenly win. Handicappers are usually at pains to drop a horse but if you backed every horse on a lower mark you would soon be skint. Btw I don't back horses on form figures I back horses that actually win races. As you well know a large percentage never win a race so regardless of their dropping marks you will always lose on them. I take your point that studying and finding a horse that has everything in its favour at a good price is a value bet but for everyone that wins in such a position I reckon their are 4 or 5 that still won't win. Good look with your angle each to their own. Even if I had the time to study in the detail you do I would choose not to as I feel most horses that win at big odds should have the connections explaining improved form.

You sum it up correctly when stating that for everyone that wins, 4 or 5 wont, but the difference is those bets are seldom under 7 or 8/1, so you will make money.
Horses dropping in the weights and grades, that haven't won races wouldn't appeal to any form student, as it wouldn't have the back class, this appears to be the angle you're missing. All the form horses are ones who have done it previously in that level, not ones who have shown nothing and long standing maidens.

domino14 14 Aug 18 07:30 Joined: 28 Jan 18 | Topic/replies: 2,426 | Blogger: domino14's blog
Onlooker, a question here without meaning to sound rude.

Do you look at form and figures at all ?

Can't wait till that new kid on the block Onlooker reads this!

Nice one domino14 get your point no prob with that. We all have our own peculiar ways to bet not all the same lol. I do back a bigger price if I know the horse and when it has its likely time to win. Nothing better than an old handicapper who comes back year after year lol. Must congratulate you on your knowledge and effort for the sport very impressive.

Hey domino14 just been looking at the Pensax boy form over last 2 years. Run around 12 tines won 4 14/1 14/1 14/1 16/1!!!!!!!   Either they get it ready or the bookies are thick lol. Not too much variance on its mark either. That would be a horse to have followed blind lol. Massive profit too level stakes. Did we miss that one lol.

stewarts rise    14 Aug 18 14:50 

domino14 14 Aug 18 07:30 Joined: 28 Jan 18 | Topic/replies: 2,426 | Blogger: domino14's blog

Onlooker, a question here without meaning to sound rude.

Do you look at form and figures at all ?

Can't wait till that new kid on the block Onlooker reads this!
----------------

stewarts  -

My 'Pot is boiling' ... quite literally   

I will return later - When I have more time - from my continual FULL FORM STUDY

1st time poster 14 Aug 18 11:44 Joined: 25 Dec 05 | Topic/replies: 27,256 | Blogger: 1st time poster's blog
I supposes NAGGERS is another 18 month shrewd coup about to come off ,but no one including Midgely no,s when or where

Naggers is retired after severing a tendon.

Let me explain my reasoning for starting this Thread.

It was NOT claiming that the horse could not win - based merely on mathematical interpretations, as per domino14's REBUKE - and (disappointingly, and somewhat surprisingly) by Dr Crippen's remark.

I am not an, "idiot," who does not, "look at Form figures," - as domino, so rashly, implies.

As stewarts rise counter-intimated in his post  - Quite the contrary.

There will not be many on here who Do spend as much time on FORM STUDY as I DO - nor have done - all day, every day, and for Decades - subscribing to the Official Raceform Loose-Leaf FORM BOOK; even before domino14 first rode in a race.

To claim the TYLERY WONDER was, "well-handicapped," last Sunday can be easily questioned - as ...

Despite winning off 73 on Sunday - TYLERY WONDER had twice been beaten by 4 lengths, off just 75 in two of it's 3 previous outings.
Immediately before that - It was also beaten a twice, off 72 and 74, in a further 3 prior runs ...... So - it was hardly 'thrown in' - was it?

Yes - it had won off 80 - But that was 14 outings and 11 months ago.
----------

FORM STUDY is not just about Handicap marks - it is all about a horse's PROFILE, too - 'getting inside it's head' - that IS how (top) Trainers work, aswell.

What is it running style? - Most importantly, what Going does it like? - and crucially dislike - Course conformation favourability, etc, etc - and other factors.

There can be no denying that TYLERY WONDER 'has a mind of it's own' - as highlighted by Denzil's reproduced previous Irish Trainer quotes - in the 3rd post on this thread.

The horse appears to readily accept any, and every,  opportunity to say 'after you' whenever another horse comes alongside.

That the beggars the question that prompted to me to start this thread.

Just how could connections be so confident as to make just one single Entry from the yard on Sunday - sending a horse from Yorkshire to Windsor - and, apparently, BACK the horse accordingly?

That's all - The fact that the Thread diversified into a debate on Handicapping is not entirely relevant - But, interesting, nonetheless ... and I thank all contributors of such ... even the abusive ones.

I didn't see anything unusual about it onlooker. TW had been running well recently - placed in 3 of his 4 previous races and then mid div in a big field sprint handicap at York and dropped 2 lbs.

More importantly,Paul Midgley's horses are flying now after a quiet season - 6 of his 26 winners this season have come in the last 10 days. TW was entitled to be well fancied and to win as he did.

^ Fair dos - But you miss my point ...

Only if you knew that TYLERY WONDER was not going to 'dog it' - AGAIN - and also to  have the [confidence that it would not down tools.

However - Each to their own interpretation and opinion.

But they didn't know, you can never be certain. I'd say, in common with the rest of the yard, the horse had been working better lately. He didn't have any more than a length or two to find to have a serious chance and was worth a punt at the price. No more than that.