Dixon telling us all about

Thanks 1st Time: Not near a telly or bookies today, was wondering if either of the Dixon boys broke their vow of silence and blew the horn on their well-punted 5/1 winner Hornsea today! Silly question that! Why do the media gurus continue to employ these pair of charlatans?

to be fair he was at ponty with nial but still had a 10 min chat about racing bets/pre racing and no mention but spent 2 mins post race at ponty talking about a yr winner as horses were going in the stalls at ponty

you lovely guys would tell everyone when you're buying a horse for 45k and paying 20k+ to keep it training.  lovely or stupid ?

1st timer, would you back it if they said it was fancied to run well?

the market tells us that anyway

Howard: what do you think the role of the paid pundit is? Surely it's to inform the betting public, not inflict the "Mushroom Strategy" on them - "keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em shhite!? Bookies love masochists like you!

Can't win can they as if they said it was fancied and it subsequently bombed out, people would be moaning about being put away. MD is actually pretty open about the Appleby horses in general. Just got to read between the lines a little bit.

it was more no mention of the horses pre race then giving a 2 mins to talk about it aftert it had won,telling us how it was going at home, how they liked it and fancied it to run well ,all of it of no use to viewers/punters,

Of course they are going to ask him, just had a nice winner. Would be very weird to ignore it. They nearly have a runner every day so it would also be pretty weird to get them to provide a rundown of their runners every day. They DO disclose valuable info on Appleby runners if that's what you want, but they won't tell people to back them. Just read between the lines.

Anybody remember the trainer who said his horse had no chance when asked in pre-race paddock and when it won easy 10 minutes later, he reappeared on screen, overjoyed and shouting, "I knew it would win today, biggest certainty I have sent out", or words to that effect. Answers on a postcard. Late 70s early 80s perhaps.

Now if he had said nothing, fair enough, or came back on and said the horse completely surprised him by winning fair enough too, but his actions were rancid that day, so bad, that I still remember it because I was going to bet it and cancelled the bet after he said that.

Regards the Dixon bros, I like them and I can understand them keeping their cards close to their chests, as they pay the bills and they never ever have put anybody away intentionally. Good luck to them.

read between the lines
THERE WERE NO LINES TO READ IN BETWEEN pre race 
or are you suggesting backing every horse they don't mention pre race ?

if hannity wanted to talk about it post race he could have at least asked Dixon if he,d backed itr

Cider: there seems to be recently an arrangement where the rest of the studio "pundits" are not allowed to ask or even mention the connection between pundit and ownership and only becomes a topic after the beast wins. Chapman, love him or loathe him (I belong on the latter category) at least attempts to get an honest answer into how connections feel about their chances.

Surprised Matt has lasted so long because love him or hate him, he asks them all the right questions and doesn`t give a toss of they all don`t like him. Good work Matt.

I have no problem with the Dixon's keeping everything to themselves ,but once they do that I don't want to hear blah,blah,blah after its won

You're overthinking it in my view 1st timer. They aren't on to preview their own runners. But if they had a winner and it was completely ignored, that would be very weird.

I'm stating that they do disclose information that only people close to the yard would know (before the race). It's up to the viewer if they want to take notice or not.

I concur with 1stTP

Chapman did the betting people thing and discussed his MO at length.

what was  that sprinter they had a few yrs ago beginning with A, on a big Saturday at ASCOT  they,d both been talking for over an hr on tuk one in studio one on a ruk course previewing races ,giving selections as they were speaking the one at the aways [ ASCOT ],was been hammered 10,s in to about 4,s and slucied up,and despite banging on for an hr it never got a mention

comfort yourself in the knowledge your subs are helping keep them in clover.

horse watcher update in sportinlife
long write up about their 2 yr old winner but no shares available
but they've got share available in a horse they bought of varian for 30 grand ,which wont run before Feb 2025
and shares available in a horse they've bought but will be having the winter off, ,
how many horse watchers are their ?, why would shares be available in a 30 grand horse. to them 30 grand  is sheckles between them all isn't it, rather sounds like selling tkts to a funeral after ignoring you for the wedding,if at 30 grand it had been flying up the gallops would shares be available ?
santac is name of varian horse

the other is monsieur melee bought out of jed O'Keefe's yd nowe in Rebecca Menzies yard,no fee mentioned,previous winner for O'Keefe

could make a nice juvenile hurdler that one

I didn't no the  horsewatchers sold shares in their horses and you could pay to become a horsewatcher not a great article when the 2 horses they mention have shares available in are  both of action for 6 and 9 months, does buying a share get you a newsletter ,info/tips on other horesewatcher horses ?
is anyone on  here  or does anyone no anyone   who,s bought a share to become a horesewatcher ?

They should bin off most of the punditry for racing coverage, as 99% of it is pointless.

A studio presenter and course commentary team is enough. I know they have to fill time, but then instead just show more coverage of horses parading or going down to start instead.

Feature on Horsewatchers in the RFO today.I wasn't aware the Dixon boys have generally 10% each and they are effectively syndicators.

The poster Barton Bank was involved with them but he rarely posts now. It's not surprising they syndicate out, you would need a fairly substantial bank to have 10 horses in training on you own

Never mind the funds to buy the horses

Google their website, it's all on there

Laurence Bellman has shares in them all, I see Lydia H  has a share in one

It must be impossible to make money from buying horses that in nearly all cases have no stallion value when you add training fees.  So the profit angle could strongly involve punting. So yeah they won't be coming on tv to tell us everything.

They’ll fall apart like the rest tbh

From my limited experience the vast majority of owners do it for the enjoyment in the sport. They go in with the mentality of getting anything back financially at the end of the season is a bonus.

yes but if you bought shares on the 2 available ,would you get info on all the others ? .

There is very much a misconception on here imho  that trainers are a font of all knowledge and what they say always come true. That is simply not the case. I would imagine with the people involved in their syndicates, they will talk about all the horses in their syndicates. Will that make them long term winners punting ? I would guess with most syndicates it's to buy one at £10k for example and sell it after a few wins for £50k.

Lamont Racing for example, have sold 2 over the years for over £100k from a purchase price of £10k.
Imho that's is the only way that most syndicates will ever make any decent money. Slainte Mhath has won 5 times and been placed 20 times, if lucky I will just be about break even on fees paid and that is because Katie only charges £140 a month per 10% share, the majority would be £250 plus

“all funds go back into racing “ Middleham Park must have thousands the dealer…..can’t see any of them getting rich….

I doubt many syndicates pay there way but like I said, the majority do it for the fun and enjoymen.
Makes you wonder though if the prize money was on par with france, how much better racing will be.

Will they be trying to get back that 50k they paid for Walsingham in the next at Redcar? Should be running on late....

To be fair, Chris did say he'll need the race and a longer trip.

between the lines, it's a prep run don't touch it today. that's what I was alluding to above, they do provide info they don't need to. viewers just need to interpret it, whi is not exactly quantum mechanics.

Exactly, Cider. They can't really tell you they're having it right off with one of theirs. Well, I wouldn't expect them to. But, as a punter you can use your experience at playing the game to read between the lines. On a side note, I would suggest that one will need some cheek pieces at some stage.

I'd agree we can't expect them to tell us about one of their own, and their own gambles.

But what exactly is the point of them, for anything else....

99% waffling that means nothing much to an actual punter IMO.

I feel like they are decent pundits myself, especially Martin. But obviously that's not going to be the same for everyone.

Because they're knowledgeable and passionate about the game and both are good at their jobs as pundits/presenters?

It's not entirely their fault I agree cider - as much about the organisation of coverage too.

Pundits IMO just often list endless facts, and putting any of into use is usually pointless, as anything said about a horse is usually already well in the prices.

they give all there horses decent mention  this week in sportinlife column including 50,s shot Penzance in cambridgshire,I thought there  might have been a plunge on rhoscolyn today but easy enough to back