There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
both bigging it up pre-race...
you hear nowt about their shocking selection after the race...
clearly they could not have watched the Newcastle race coz it looked a complete and utter pig and nobody with a brain could have been with it today...
these folk are supposedly experts...
experts at talking complete nonsense if you ask me...
absolutely shocking stuff that...
embarrassing imv.
you hear nowt about their shocking selection after the race...
clearly they could not have watched the Newcastle race coz it looked a complete and utter pig and nobody with a brain could have been with it today...
these folk are supposedly experts...
experts at talking complete nonsense if you ask me...
absolutely shocking stuff that...
embarrassing imv.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 46
|
By:
freshened up...
no hood today... straight track didn't suit it... stiff finish didn't suit it... absolutely clueless... and these are what we are told are EXPERTS ??? laughable imv  |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I hear these sort of chittering yammering voices pre race...hitting mute rapidly...
|
|
By:
i specifically listened to hear what the experts were saying about the hound stu...
embarrassing stuff tbh... any credibility they thought they had has vanished... with me at least. |
|
By:
Any significance attached to Quixall and yourself being able to answer each other quicker than most can read a post hibby?
|
|
By:
Bet they get a monkey a show
|
|
By:
Credibility rests with disagreeing with them before the outcome, imo
|
|
By:
Are you backing or laying that Quixall?
|
|
By:
Cider 06 Apr 24 18:41
Credibility rests with disagreeing with them before the outcome, imo ----------------------------------------------------------------------- i agree... and i did. |
|
By:
HappyHibby 06 Apr 24 18:07
this is an absolute hound aceform. HappyHibby 06 Apr 24 18:08 how anyone can be backing this woofer is beyond me tbh. ------------------------------------------------------------ look Cider... it's there in white and black. |
|
By:
Backing Cagliari as predicted
|
|
By:
at least a monkey aceform...
to talk complete and utter rollox. |
|
By:
Tbf to Chris Dixon he did say he couldn't back Blacklion having seen his demeanour, having been the one he was most interested in; and we got a good view of the horse playing up and then unseating Callum Shephard.
Imo I think you need to be careful about letting that sort of thing put you off but on this occasion it evidently was a negative. |
|
By:
Backing a monkey per show when you don't know is reckless imvho Quixall, a tad more so you would have lost that bet!!
|
|
By:
Did it need a new thread then? I was thinking that you felt so so strongly pre race, it warranted more than a couple of lines (like this OP)
George Baker selected multiple big priced winners today. Of course Blacklion looks a fruitcake, but had been smashed in the market the last twice and theoretically not fully exposed off the platers mark. I believe there was a fair enough argument to have a dash in a very weak race, but there was always a chance he could blow out again as well. These people are expected to find an angle in every race, and that was a fair enough angle. Neither of them were putting it up as a strong play I don't think. (and no, I didn't back it!) |
|
By:
GEORGE...
if he'd have done his job properly he'd have seen it's demeanour at Newcastle... pre race and during the race it looked a complete and utter pig... as it did today.. anyone with a brain would have known that... yet two 'experts' didn't... dreadful. |
|
By:
There are much better pundits to target your ire at. Baker in particular is worth listening to (imo)
|
|
By:
Cider...
if these folk don't know it's a fruitloop then they shouldn't be doing that job and they shouldn't be getting called 'expert pundits'... simple as that imv. |
|
By:
Hibby, presumably he did see the horse run at Newcastle, they don't call themselves the 'Horsewatchers' for nowt!
|
|
By:
If you felt so strongly Hibby why would you not lay it big time?
|
|
By:
i have no idea tbh GEORGE...
but ANYONE who saw it at newcastle 100% knew it was/is a fruitloop... and if either of them didn't see it on the day they should have seen it whilst doing their homework (if they do any that is ?). |
|
By:
So again, why didn't you lay it for good returns Hibby and make a thread of the fact it was so bad?
|
|
By:
Fruitloops can and do win. So then it comes down to price and opposition. I'd actually say that he didn't pull particularly hard today, and maybe he burned too much energy chasing the pace of a well handicapped winner. But quickly running out of excuses!
|
|
By:
Hibby, he said in the paddock preview that he thought Newcastle hadn't suited the horse, having run keen without cover on a stiff track, but was of interest on the previous Chelmsford form when he'd finished ahead of Profitman, albeit over a mile; but the horse was already playing up when he said it and that he couldn't back it therefore.
|
|
By:
Looks a dog tbf but never stopped similar winning e.g The Mad Moose, Vodkatini et al but still no explanation of the post race slating of presenters when it could have been done pre race and earned some credibility?
|
|
By:
i didn't like it's run at Chelmsford Cider...
that was when the short-priced stable-mate was whipped out and this one was punted (before easing dramatically late on)... it looked a thorough rogue at Newcastle... how on earth any 'expert' could put that up as a selection today is something i just will never ever understand... in a million years. |
|
By:
it wasn't 'keen' at newcastle GEORGE...
it was acting like a complete and utter rogue... there is a difference... a big difference imv. |
|
By:
So as asked Hibby?
|
|
By:
Criticism doesn't make a lot of sense. Perhaps you prefer the Zoe Bird style punditry. The favourite has the best chance, the second fav is the biggest danger, and the third fav has an each way squeak.
I get that you didn't like the horse, and you would've have backed it with counterfeit. People don't always agree on horses' chances pre race, and nobody is always correct. |
|
By:
Cider...
nobody with any sort of racing knowledge could possibly have put that horse up as the most likely winner having seen it at Newcastle especially imv... these folk are getting well paid for their 'expertise'... i am an RTV subscriber therefore i am contributing to their fee today... i'm fully entitled to comment on their 'expertise' which was severely lacking in this particular instance. |
|
By:
and btw Cider..
i have no time for ANYBODY on the Sky Racing / ATR side of things whatsoever. |
|
By:
Anybody can comment how they wish but after time is not clever or advised, subscriber or not as the simple fact is had the dog won you would have kept quiet or sung their praises and claimed some insight.
|
|
By:
HappyHibby 06 Apr 24 18:07
this is an absolute hound aceform. HappyHibby 06 Apr 24 18:08 how anyone can be backing this woofer is beyond me tbh. |
|
By:
Why can't you answer direct questions Hibby?
Has Quixall removed the sock? |
|
By:
RP verdict too, I was surprised they picked such a rag. It's like they're too embarassed to tip the mega obvious fav.
|
|
By:
Like I said, there are two elements. 1 what it most likely to win or run well. 2 the market, and what price is most out of sync with the true chance. They aren't always aligned. Horses that are heavily backed and flop in their previous race is an angle I use. As it often means that the yard expected much better, and for whatever reason the horse didn't perform on the day. It means that a much better price can be had next time. I feel like a rational argument could be made for Blacklion, based on that, the price it was trading at and the weak nature of this race. They won't always come off.
|
|
By:
no probs Cider...
i know you are a decent bloke on here and i'm happy to listen to your view... i was just absolutely shocked that these two went so big on what i considered to be a complete pig that's all... and it looked a lazy selection with very little homework done imv quite frankly. |
|
By:
the fav was a cert, there was nothing to speculate about
|
|
By:
Sure, thanks, no worries. The flip side (your side), is that 'they've' smashed it twice, it's flopped twice and gone backwards. That's equally valid.
Part of it is in my view that they have to talk about every race, and try and find an angle. There must be a temptation therefore to reach for them sometimes, just for something to talk about. |