Willie Mullins and gambling.

In fairness they are very clued in wildman, i get word from time to time from somebody very close to the stable and they are usually spot on. The weekend just gone i got told to back Dorset Square, Lambro (stupidly backed Shinrock Paddy instead ) and Supreme Carolina (didn't see her but i'd say they where disappointed with 5th).

In the past as well i've got planty of good info from said person

I doubt he gambles wildman either. But when the money is down be it owners/stable lads they are rarely wrong

I agree entirely and fortunes are won on his horses but my point is Willie is not involved as he hates gambling,this goes back to the days of Grabel and the antics of a large punter of that time.That was the reason he wouldn`t train for McManus for years and he only got in by buying a horse already in the stable.
If Willie ever knew the amounts of money won by the Youghal mob and Sidney Greenstreet laying and backing his horses he would be in shock.

I have never seen him in the betting ring unlike other trainers. I agree with you yourlack.

I suppose his attitude is similar to that of JSB then, races for big prizes etc. nothing stopping the staff having a good insight though.

He is probably the only one in that big operation so.  Everyone else does.  Horse racing = Gambling hth.

Was told some time ago that he's a big punter but a seldom punter and has a few big sorry large bets evry year but no more than 2or 3.....finding it difficult to lye strait in the leaba

JaytrumpOldTom he doesn`t bet at all and hates betting,he won a 500 pound bet years ago at a charity christmas party the bookie who put up the prize waited and waited with the intention of lumping on,nothing happened for eight months so the bookie approached Willie Mullins and explained,Wilie had the bet 2 months later with the inevitable consequences.

OK wildman I bow to your knowledge on this then.......

You're correct Wildman, W P has zero interest in punting

Maybe wildman he's stopped gambling because he has built up such a powerful string with a host of powerful owners the need to gamble has been sedated.

A Mullins who hates gambling? well I never thought I'd see the day!.

can you explain what sous les cieux winning a brutal maiden hurdle tells you about willie mullins and gambling..because it tells me jack sh1t

I am not surprised you don`t get it.
What does Dark horse mean to you?

a horse that has never run for him before that might go on and win a few good races..wud that not be a dark horse..

If Willie Mullins does not gamble at all i would be completely in awe tbh.

He has landed some massive punts in his time, does anyone not remember Micky D on his debut in Ireland...the lads on course were cleaned out after that race. Mullins knows what he has and if the bookies are offering a mad price he would be some man to refuse.

im sure he knows what he has but that doesnt mean he bets them!!

granted imo it would take a very special person not to exercise their will to make potentially a lot of money but if he doesnt fair play!!

its certainly a mugs game but i guess he would be in a v good position to 'make it pay' even tho he wouldnt really need the money! he certainly could supplement his income tho and no doubt the yard know what they have!!

must have done a few quid on zaidpour tho

Dermot Weld punts,Jim Bolger punts and they both lose.
Jim Bolgers spats with otter head Donnelly were over gambling debts.
The backers of Mikael D`Haguenet that day were the gentlemen i mentioned in my post of 18.19.
Bobbybocala i would partly agree with your definition of a dark horse but any punting man would equate a dark horse with a big price.

I think the point a lot of us are making wildman is that you seem to be painting Mullins whiter than white when we all know that he and the rest of the Mullins family tree were notorious for trying to pull off betting coups.
Just because he doesn't gamble anymore (hearsay btw) plenty involved with the stable do, a former amateur jockey of his now a trainer in his own right has now got that annoying shrewd tag, nothing shrewd about it just plain and simple skullduggery.

Even a person with a singular IQ could understand what context the dark horse was mentioned in.....the trainer put it up as an unexposed maiden who he expects to have a say in a championship race in Cheltenham next March......he was in the 33/1 upwards region before today ..... He is a little less now I assume......maybe Wildmanfromborneo thought he was going to tip a horse that was going to win a bumper first time out at 25/1

Oh by the way Wildmanfromborneo if there is one person who talks more bull on this forum than you it may well be silvergreaser........it's definitely close anyway

elaborate then lookingforthewildman, or did the yoke between your legs suddenly get an extention from your oh so brave juvenile retort.

Bobbybocala you posted from the Lookingforthewildman account but no matter.
Sous Les Cieux cost huge money and was the talking horse last Christmas,when he finally emerged at Fairyhouse your pals punted the living daylights out of it,started 4/7 his owner Mr Ricci said he was better than Mickael D`Haguenet at that stage.He started at around 1/3 today that does not constitute a dark horse to me but my general point was Willie Mullins doesn`t comprehend betting and therefore is oblivious to price.
Silvergreaser have no doubt if he knew what was being won he would look for a cut.Sidney Greenstreet is shrewd and he keeps him happy by letting him ride his horses.He was the head of the syndicate who owned Cousin Vinny and persuaded the other members that Patrick Mullins got on better with the horse than anyone else that ended in glory,also let him ride Uncle Junior at Cheltenham so has got very close to Willie Mullins.

It's a general observation silvergreaser that's all..... From your posts I can see that you talk rubbish much the same as Wildmanfromborneo ........ye both claim to have a knowledge of the goings on in racing when the reality is one is a bigger bulltalker than the other.....that ok for you mr silver

I'll take that retort with a pinch of salt then wildman, I always knew lookingforwildman was another user in disguise, interesting to know too he and his other self's connections.

Like most of these guys they hate to see the truth outed, their only defence usually amounts to childish put me downs.

Bobbybocala makes a mistake as usual because he didn`t realise Sous Les Cieux had run in Ireland,tried to set a pathetic ambush and failed so then changes into one of his other guises and again fails to refute anything i said.
To you Sous Les Cieux was a dark horse i just don`t agree,i am sure Mincer/Robo and Bigwillystyle along with Mongoole,Dublin Barman and Donegal Publican will agree with you about this dark horse.

Sorry silvergreaser  it's not a put me down.......it's actually a fact really ....you are just a simple fool but Wildmanfromborneo is the ultimate keyboard warrior who rattles off lie after lie.......even some apes like yourself silver actually believe him

Lookingforwildman or whoever you are, tells us all about what goes on in racing then seeing as nobody else is worthy of an opinion, or would you much rather keep it to yourself for fear of been arrested?

I don't know what goes on silvergreaser nor do I claim to.....Wildmanfromborneo knows nothing either but shouts his mouth off as if he does.......he specialises in dangerous hearsay.......very nasty individual really......shouldn't be allowed post really .......no way would he have the balls to repeat what he says here to the people he regularly slanders......nasty nasty begrudger so he is

Who have i slandered,point out the alleged lies and i will discuss.I will be in Thurles tomorrow and will say what i said here,why are you so afraid and why the veiled threat about not allowing me post.
If i was as you state you would ignore the ramblings of a deluded old man but no you are frightened and angry....why.

even some apes like yourself silver actually believe him

I don't know why I'm bothering to reply to somebody who just called me an ape. I've often disagreed with wildman, I'll give an opinion as he does usually without malice.

Maybe a lot of what he says is hearsay, but I'm pretty sure that a lot of what he has to say has some foundation in truth it can't all be bollicks, too much information for it all to be the stuff of fairytales?.

There are some on here who should not be allowed post imho.... wildmanfromborneo is not one and neither is silvergreaser.... both of them put up posts here that again imho are always of great interest and a good read.........

Wildmanfromborneo you seem a little cross......there was no veiled threat...... I just say that you shouldn't be allowed post because you are a liar and a known bulltalker so therefore you shouldn't be given a platform to air your begrudging sentiments.......a nasty begrudging attention seeking lying bulltalker would just about sum you up......silvergreaser it is a fairytale, every bit of it.......he won't b in thurles either and if he is he wouldnt open his mouth.......just another mouthpiece

3 grown men ballzing up 1 thread

I am not angry and i don`t really want to embarrass you,you think by repeating the word liar that it becomes true but point out what you think is a lie.Why do you feel the need to defend people who on your own admission you no nothing about,why do you need to have all these user names and how come you lose every single argument you have ever had on here.You specialise in personal abuse and managed to harry Workrider off here but i told you before i have broad shoulders and can take it.When i said you could tell lots about people by the way they post you were driven to distraction because you knew you were caught.Constant use of the word leave or left when most would say let and then your favourite insults cretin and ape most beloved of Bobbybocala and Robo.
I don`t expect the truth but maybe you would explain what exactly you are afraid of and please the word hyperbole which you have used in three different user names and misspelt on each occassion.