Thanks for posting, very enjoyable.

I'm not knocking Bull, Howard. Just not interested in a look at me punting set up. We have no idea what ended up on the cutting room floor but you can bet it wasn't winners. I was more interested in how he started Timeform and how he/they run it in the early years.

Late 40's to mid-60's Bull made millions betting ( adjusted to  today's money )  Every pound for every season is fully detailed in Howard Wright biography.

thought there'd be more race track shots,
betting, more races to be honest.
How much would that £5k be worth today,
(Touchung Wood,St Leger?)

cheers.
I'm not one for everything was better in the
old days adage,but that's what the courses should
be like,the books,do away with these boards and
machines they use today and go back to the old
ways.

1981 £5k = £19k today.

I think Golden Fleece putting Assert in it's place wasn't bad form.

Won the group 3 Beresford at 2 easily and then the Gallinule at 3 before going on to do the things it did. It wasn't rubbish form was it.

Not sure If Golden Fleece or any other horse could avoid cancer.

no good

Sam,

I'm guessing you mean Merlins Charm, not Mullins. Those two fillies finished fifth (SP 4/1) and tenth (SP 7/1) respectively in the 1000 Gns won by On The House (SP 33/1) in 1982.

Agree with Brigust1, I found it boring to tell the truth , I was always in awe of Phil, well the myth was certainly broken for me there....His devotion to G.B.Shaw was obvious , even the lookalike beard . Sorry to say I found him very cold and not the genius I was lead to belief .

I admire anyone who makes the money Phil Bull did out of Racing irrespective of any TV programme.

workrider, there's very much something of an age thing here. Bull was 72 when this film was made. Men of that age would be very unusual if they had the same mental abilities of twenty years before. He had long retired from serious betting and was now betting for fun. And a very big point. If you or others on here understand the effect on profit /loss of a 4% course tax which was charged in '82 you will know that it can and did make the difference some years of making Bull a loss well into 5 figures when without the tax he would have made a profit. Alex Bird had said the days of the pro punter were over. That's why Bull was messing about. Totally different from his heyday when as he said he made 20k ( obviously worth much more now ) a year for over 20 years.

All that success from a miners son from Yorkshire.

He'd have ruffled a few feathers on the forum.  He was a dyed in the wool and socialist, extremely opinionated and could be very prickly.

I knew someone who wrote to him suggesting a change in format to his Racehorses annual.  He received a hand-written reply - a diatribe full of swear words!

To be clear, the won/lost figures are as in the book. There is a small difference in the cumulative figures. The figures shown here are correct, at least for the given win/loss figures.

Bull was a punter and I think punters are like anglers. 'It was this big' and only remember the good days.
I designed a book once specifically aimed at punters wanting to keep records. I went through discussions with The Sporting Life then after we had arranged a few things and put plans in place they pulled out saying they thought it wasn't viable. I still have all the letters. Six months later they bought out their own book. They couldn't directly copy mine so it was cr ap and disappeared after a couple of years.
I remember John Francombe's agent came round to see me about it. We sat in my office (kitchen) and he looked through my copy then, during the discussion said 'what about when a punter has a losing streak he'll just', and he threw it on the floor. Still tickles me today. And he was right, punters are fickle about keeping records.

Bull may have kept records up to a point but punters like to think they are either winning or not losing too much. When I started on here some time ago I couldn't believe my P&L and that soon made me pull up my socks, I can tell you. Now I have no problem my wife seeing my records.

About Bull I think it was a good publicity stunt to be a big winner. If it was you or I the bookie would not let it happen, and I have had accounts closed by all of the big bookies back then, and I am not a big punter, but it was good publicity for them (the bookies) to make him look like a winner and that they paid out winnings and it was good publicity for him selling Timeform tips.
Therein lies the answer in my opinion. If he showed Howard Wright closed bookies accounts and bank statements showing bookies payments in and out then that would be different. And, don't forget, HW wanted to sell books. Everyone was happy. A threesome!

I don't know Gazo, and you don't know, I am only playing the percentages. I've not read the book and if there is evidence then that would be a different matter and, may I suggest, if you are a diligent book-keeper, as Bull clearly was, he will have plenty of evidence to support his claims. And, had that been me, I would be waving the evidence around. It was in his interests as a businessman to appear to be a successful punter and it was in the bookies interests to sell their trade. What you believe and what I believe, from the evidence we have, may differ. So be it.

if you just look at those numbers there are some big minus years and from 1966 to 1974 it actually shows a loss of around £10,000,doesnt come across as trying to mask the numbers but its true that only he would really know