There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
11 Oct 25
12:43
Joined:
Date Joined:
14 Jun 25
Another one enters the ring, looks about 19, and from
Barnsley, and also has trouble speaking English, Ffs.
Diversity equity and inclusion, clearly doesn’t apply at
Timeform
Barnsley, and also has trouble speaking English, Ffs.
Diversity equity and inclusion, clearly doesn’t apply at
Timeform
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 17
|
By:
then there's Big John big eater and west ham fan doesn't know much about racing apparently
|
|
By:
Followed by an interview with the obese Big John
|
|
By:
Luck not wearing blinkers today
|
|
By:
did the c oral rep tell him to eat responsibly ?
|
|
By:
Think Big John rides most of my horse selections
 |
|
By:
Big John ffs, thé coral ambassador, looks like he
Don’t miss too many meals, big John, diamond geezer no doubt  |
|
By:
melish thinks the fav for cess has the potential to laugh at his mark and handicapper,so what does a pro punter do
double,treble,quadruple your stake ,off course not you back the 4th fav as well who melish doesn't think can laugh at his mark and already been hammered by horse who he thinks can laugh at his mark, hope he,s right as I've backed balding horse  |
|
By:
Belgravian is screaming out to be given another chance to show what he did at Goodwood. In the trial he was very weak in the market, in what was a trial after all. And a fair bit better in at the weights today. Along with a decent prospect of this being a much stronger test (which might suit others, but what Belgravian definitely wants).
|
|
By:
In the context of Steve's bets then the logic holds. If we see the Newmarket Belgravian again, it probably won't be good enough. But there is plenty of scope in the price today due to that run, and arguments why he might do better today anyway.
|
|
By:
logic that you think he might laugh at the handicapper but not confident he,ll beat the horse he hammered last time let alone the other 17, I've back baldings but I don't think the fav will laugh at the handicapper,if I did I wouldn't be backing any of the others to beat it
|
|
By:
They are both unexposed. Along with a few others as it happens. So yes either one of them 'might laugh at the handicapper'.
|
|
By:
so like me he should also be backing the unexposed 3 yr old pole star
 |
|
By:
How about the unexposed 11 yo
 There is an unusually high number of theoretically unexposed horses in this type of race. Partly because of the comparatively low entry I assume. |
|
By:
One of the (several other) well handicapped ones wins.
|
|
By:
" In the trial he was very weak in the market" 11/8 f ( from 6/5 ) Certainly wouldn't say "very" myself. Don't think the horse wants a yard beyond 2m and unlikely he will ever run further again. Doesn't help at the trip by not settling but even without that confident he's best at 2m or a bit less.
|
|
By:
not knocking the selection btw. Thought it had a big chance off that mark/weight if it stayed. That was the big doubt in my mind before the race. Goodwood 2m /Newmarket 2m 2f chalk and cheese
|
|
By:
I don't recall exactly but it was something like 1.5 out to 3.0 on here. Very weak. Certainly for the profile of the horse going into the race.
I don't believe Steve selected it as such, he just said he had backed it. As I stated before the race, there were several runners that were unexposed, including the winner. The winner had had of course lots of runs but improving rapidly for stepping up in trip and was 5lb 'well in'. The discussion really was that 1st timer scoffing that Steve had backed the fav (saying he could be laughing at the handicapper) and also backed the Balding horse. I didn't feel the positions were incompatible at all. |