here we go..a Prescott runner...3 runs...1st time in a handicap 4/5 5.35 newcastle

probably bred to win a Derby and the expert racing press call him a genius coz he wins a cr@p race off 63 with it...

says everything you need to know about the racing press/media tbh...

and i haven't looked at it's mother so maybe it's bred to be a 63 horse in which case i offer an apology to Mark Prescott.

Called, working the system, but not exactly crooked.

it's just another reason why horse racing is a sport dying on it's knees imv.

You spotted it, so why didnt you just back it?

HH, horse racing is not on its knees.

May 8, 2023 -- 5:56PM, Jinxy1 wrote:

You spotted it, so why didnt you just back it? HH, horse racing is not on its knees.

£2 on a 4/5 shot isn't really my sort of bet

oh right...

cheers for that info Jinxy...

well they are just about to lose someone who has been in to racing for best part of 40 years i'm afraid.

Oh!

sad isn't it...

i'm glad i'm getting out tbh...

rancid sport it is.

a rancid sport full of rancid human beings.

Makes you wonder why you ever got involved in the first place?

Think you need to change your username Hibby.

just my opinion...

plenty of folk think it's a wonderful sport full of wonderful human beings who all love their horses...

just ask the racing press coz that is their view...

well it is publicly...

they might well think differently in private but don't have the guts to say so.

Agree with happy hibby

Thats becaause you are as thick as him, probably thicker.

stewarts rise 08 May 23 17:41 
Called, working the system, but not exactly crooked.





Should the system allow a handicap mark on those first three runs?

They should be required to finish placed before getting a handicap mark.

placed where though? 4th of 5 beaten 25 lengths counts? 9th of 20 btn 4 lengths but doesn't count? Impossible to frame such a system. Handicapper to blame. He should assume those that show little are possibly better than those that show a bit and handicap them accordingly i.e. mark plus 25lb, connections decide if they will want to wait 5 more runs to get to the mark to where they think they can win off or play straight from the off. Frankly any system is impossible to frame and police if people cheat it, and they all do.

They should need to have run previously over the distance of their first handicap run.

I will get the tin helmet on here but in fairness to him a lot of these are big backward sorts, who would never do themselves justice at 2. Taking them to the races does give them the experience of travelling away from the yard, the experience of going to the track and everything else connected to a full race day routine. It's obvious a bonus to him that the system gives him a mark for these runs as he can't run them over 12f at 2. Personally I don't see anything wrong with taking them to the track to gain experience
I'm with swifty though it's very difficult to bring in a different set of rules re extra runs, being placed or a mark based on race distances.

Ready......Aim.......Fire.....!

it's an age old system that I can't see being changed.

I agree it's not perfect by any means but for all the ones that do win on their first handicap run, there are hundreds and hundreds that don't, many with a mark that I would suggest the trainer thought were well handicapped. Its not quite as easy as run it over the wrong trip 3 times and it scoots in on  its 4th run stepped up in distance. Imho

Second and third yesterday for Dunlop and Johnston both had the same sort of form. Three runs down the field, into a handicap up in trip off a low mark, start favourite. But they both got beaten first time and again last night. As Dealer says, maybe not as easy as it looks.

And Prescott is the one that always get criticised, but Cumani and Dunlop (John) did the same for years. Gosden got a five time Group 1 winner Halling a mark of 75 for his first handicap.

I agree withthe dealer, far too much being made of this. If you know how trainers operate then its up to yourself to follow and take advantage as you see fit, if you dont/cant, then thats your problem.

A few days earlier Sir Mark had Pledgeofallegiance, ran 3 times at a mile, then upped 4 furlongs at Lingfield for his handicap debut, went off odds on fav and lost (three previous race prices were 50/1, 100/1, 100/1) - nowt said on this forum about that though?

And the runner up cost twice as much as the "probably" winner.

A thread about Prescott exploiting the system for financial gain after all these years , who'd have thought.

Yes you would think people should have some respect for the baronet.