There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 61
|
By:
Winner 1.16 in the photo very nice....
 |
|
By:
yeah looked 3 munney tbf!
|
|
By:
Stooooards
|
|
By:
Sometimes you just have to laugh. Didn't fancy the fav and backed the second ew. Did everything right and gets thinned by a 100/1 poke. To make it worse I backed Hobbs in the first purely seeing as they're running into form
  |
|
By:
1.2 vs 5s
Would be a travesty. Small novices bump a long way from the line and the runner-up never looked like getting past |
|
By:
one went on sunday btn nose but was worse than this !imo.
|
|
By:
Oh dear
1.4 vs 3.5 now |
|
By:
fair chance it will be slung out
|
|
By:
Already settled on the photo and money in my account
|
|
By:
it was jumping the last whats the problem..not the run in.
|
|
By:
How can you say it didn't cost the r/u a nse. can't. so comes down to whether they are accountable for interference whilst jumping.
|
|
By:
The bump was over the last. rare to see them thrown out that far out.
|
|
By:
bosh
|
|
By:
revised result
|
|
By:
WoW
|
|
By:
Wow - amended
Shocking decision. Nearly a furlong run in and best horse 'won' |
|
By:
Mat22 24 Jan 24 13:50
Already settled on the photo and money in my account not for much longer mat..ysc.  |
|
By:
Obviously happy to get the win but think the other one is unlucky to get thrown out
|
|
By:
Interference is interference,but the fact remains, the further out that interference happens, the less likely it is that the stewards can be of the opinion that on the balance of probabilities the result was affected.
|
|
By:
Winner 1.16 in the photo very nice....Cool
ouch |
|
By:
shocked there. oh well guess they will take it of my account now
 |
|
By:
generally you're looking at odds against result stands if there was interference, and the distance was a nse (or dh) imo. that's the starting point.
|
|
By:
wtf?
|
|
By:
Cider - it was 1.3 to stand?
|
|
By:
if anyone backed the hobbs winner on here3 woulda shirley laid it in the stoowards or photo
|
|
By:
FFS when last time you seen one thrown out when interference that far out over the jumps?
|
|
By:
1.2 vs 4.8 last matched odds on Stewards
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
thought it was more 1.45 vs 3.2
|
|
By:
Cider, I disagree with your first point, but of course the finishing distance is key, but how far out the interference happened is also (usually!) an important consideration.
|
|
By:
the one on sunday was 2 bumps on the run in and looked a lot worsen than this but its outta our hands !
|
|
By:
Last matched prices before Stewards suspend
|
|
By:
true odds I'm talking about. so anything odds against is value.
obviously you have to apply that logic to what actually happened. but logic dictates if there was confirmed interference, it cost something, and if the distance was a nse, that's the race. |
|
By:
so anything odds against is value - for the reversal
|
|
By:
Mat22 24 Jan 24 13:59
FFS when last time you seen one thrown out when interference that far out over the jumps? was one i think at exeter few mths ago happened 3 out. |
|
By:
Only £1700 matched in the stewards market. There would have been a lot more had they not stupidly settled the win market so early.
|
|
By:
Cider, I disagree with your first point, but of course the finishing distance is key, but how far out the interference happened is also (usually!) an important consideration.
It doesn't happen too often at the obstacle, with a nose the difference. I had in my mind the well reported reversal in the stayers hurdle at Chelts for the placing. So felt more than likely it would be chucked on the day. Also likely it will be challenged. |
|
By:
Cheers Rico
Another lesson learnt. Thought the photo was being to generous... Saw the bump,,,,thought even with an Enquiry did not expect reversal. |
|
By:
Sandalwood at Taunton. Interference after 3 out.
|