Forums

Irish Sports

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
ChildOfMine2
02 Oct 13 13:21
Joined:
Date Joined: 11 Apr 07
| Topic/replies: 2,880 | Blogger: ChildOfMine2's blog
I think you're looking way too much into this Wildman. Willie cant run a horse in every bumper going and the Meade horses are running well, as they tend to do at this time of the year. Very little in it imo!

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 6  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 204
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 02 Oct 13 13:40
Is it not remarkable that when the Meade punters punt the living daylights out of one in a bumper Mullins has no runner in the race or a dud,how many times did this happen last season.
By:
keen leader
When: 02 Oct 13 13:44
Wildman on a related issue to your theme, I encountered Sydney G recently and I hear that SG and junior do monitor these threads. he mentioned he was disappointed you failed to compliment him on the monster gambled landed when his horse Morning Mr Norris won that nursery at southwell in august. not all of the feasts come thanks to WPM. keep your eyes peeled, it can be "character building".
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 02 Oct 13 13:55
That's an intriguing name for a horse probably should be trained in Waterford.

Ted Walsh has come up with a few disguised decent wins for that team but its the two trainers mentioned that seem to enable him have horses all over the place.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 03 Oct 13 00:57
My opening post has been removed which is standard now that some are combining forces not unlike the Meade and Mullins punters.

Big gamble landed on Mondays bumper in Roscommon when Meade given a solo by Willie Mullins.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 08:34
Willie Mullins turn in Clonmel yesterday with Goldboy although the combined forces lost their nerve over the ground and the jockey.

Today in Gowran no Willie Mullins horse and a Noel Meade newcomer viewing for favouritism.

Maybe Gowran too far for Willie Mullins to travel.
By:
Bigwillystyle
When: 04 Oct 13 09:04
Spot on Wildman.  Has happened too many times for it not to be true.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 09:57
Not sure has Meade too many bumper runners, but thats maybe a moot point because also agree with the topic. Seems Willie will be given a clear run at Tipperary with two entries for Sunday(no Meade) and four for Tuesday(Meade one entry). Very unlikely Meade will take on Shesafoxylady if she is declared for Tuesday,we,ll see.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 10:11
I don't agree with this at all,this time of year is skewed because it's the only time of year Noel Meade will have a decent strike rate.Mullins is generally quiet at this time of year with his bumper horses-finishing off with the good ground summer horses and won't be bringing out his better bumper horses for a while yet.

There is no doubting they're friends and do communicate but to suggest it's set up for betting purposes on a regular basis is ridiculous but it does happen on occasion,when it suits both of them and is motivated by selling not pulling of betting coups.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 10:37
Think it could be an interesting thread DJ and by watching the entries with regard the two stables quite sure there will be a few pointers at least until Christmas, maybe time will tell.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 11:00
I don't find it in the slightest bit interesting tbh Pa,it's very easy to manipulate findings by taking a small biased sample-I don't expect many clashes over the next few weeks because of the reasons stated and frankly think it's very far fetched to suggest that WPM is avoiding Noel Meade runners so they can pull of betting coups ala Dick Francis.
By:
silvergreaser
When: 04 Oct 13 11:08
Do you no harm to have an open mind dj, its horse racing after all and it has a notorious reputation for skullduggery since its very inception, not all conspiracy theories are baseless.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 11:46
With respect DJ I don,t think it was intended that way with WM is avoiding NM for the sake of betting coups think it could be plausable that someone is making money on the basis of this we will call it "so call arrangement", no harm whatsoever to monitor the betting in whoever runs,there may or may not be something in it.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 12:06
I didn't see the original post but was going on last years thread and the now second post.
The reason I won't be following the thread is the following will be presented as conclusive evidence to verify the theory where in fact what you believe as the motive is subjective.

1)Noel Meade Bumper winner without a Mullins contender-further verification if well backed.There will be loads of these over the next 2 months.
2)Wpm Mullins bumper winner without a Meade challenger.
3)Both have runners,the favourite wins shock horror -further conclusive evidence.
4)Both have runners and the drifter wins-they can't get them all right.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 12:24
Pa Lapsy has got it right.

They avoid each others good ones,that's why Angie Balafre got a solo in Roscommon,the trainers don't do it for gambling purposes but their punters knowing about this loose arrangement are availing of this and punting the living daylights out of the selected.

It is remarkable that two of the biggest stables in the country can win bumper after bumper without clashing.

We know from RicksonG and One Last Chance that the Meade punters are risk averse and leave nothing to chance which is why they will never back one of theirs to beat a Willie Mullins trained one.

It has also spread to maiden hurdles admittedly to a far lesser extent but when Willie runs all these so called good things he bought in France over the summer Meade will not take him on.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 12:29
You have moderated your views so Wildman because you clearly stated on a very similar thread last year that it was for gambling purposes.
By:
p_r_e_m_i_e_r__f_a_n_t_a_s_y
When: 04 Oct 13 12:32
Do they run their good ones at Roscommon??
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 12:38
How many times have I stated that Willie Mullins not only doesn't bet but has an aversion to betting.

Its a coterie of gamblers using this agreement they seem to have about not taking each other on and combining the punting forces of both stables that has fuelled these massive gambles.

Another feature of the Meade gamblers is that when they get one marbh like Cops And Robbers they punt the lights out of the live one and lay the bejaysus out of the not so live one.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 12:47
You clearly stated on a similar thread last year that they were races being set up for punting but as always you move the goalposts when it suits.
If you are referring to the cops and robbers and Sizing Rio,your understanding of betting markets isn't what you believe it to be.
8/11 and 13/8 is a 95% book and every action one one outcome would have an almost direct inverse reaction to the other price.
By:
silvergreaser
When: 04 Oct 13 12:58
How many times have I stated that Willie Mullins not only doesn't bet but has an aversion to betting.

I find that very amusing that any Mullins could have an aversion to betting?.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 12:58
From memory DJ they only backed one horse that day as if the result was predetermined(it wasn,t obviously and being fair its not unusual in Irish racing in that there is sustained backing for one horse just before the off as word spreads) Remember being quite stunned that day with the market and it drew considerable comment on the HR forum.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 13:06
4/9 to 8/11 and 100/30 to 13/8.

When they're taking up that percentage of the book,punting one and laying the other are practically the same action so any decent bet on Sizing Rio would have caused Cops and Robbers price to drift proportionately so how can you say that they "they punt the lights out of the live one and lay the bejaysus out of the not so live one"
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:15
That aversion to betting was caused by a silver batchelor.

This is not an exact science this constant mantra about moving the goalposts is just your desire to win but its not a contest as such just a discussion.

I have never claimed to be a betting expert but your description of the market is far too simplistic and only relates to one aspect of the market.

What was different in the Cops And Robbers case was the backers of Sizing Rio were the same gentlemen laying Cops And Robbers and there was no real fancy or any real money from the De Bromhead camp for their own horse.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:19
Normally if you have one under the arm you just lay it on here.

Years ago if you had one no good or genuinely didnt fancy a favourite you backed some to beat it,this led to many a painful race when you got the race right with the favourite being beat but still lost your dough as some outsider triumphed.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 13:21
You just confirmed it for me.
Far too simplisticCrazy,get your calculator and start correlating 2 prices that take up 95% of a 102% book.
We're not talking about the outcome we're discussing the variance in the odds of one outcome in response to the movement of the other.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:22
Dj876 your post of 13.06 is stunning and I presume just an aberration.
By:
silvergreaser
When: 04 Oct 13 13:30
Wildman, Silver Batchelor?, I presume you're talking about the point to pointer rather than a grey haired human, could you elaborate?.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 13:32
No aberration Wildman and shows the extent of the gamble, a little more so even with another source saying the morning price was 2/5 and 7/2.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:33
The human.

Dj876 is a good poster and a good judge and always worth a read but I am still reeling at his contributions on this thread.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 13:33
We're not talking about the outcome we're discussing the variance in the odds of one outcome in response to the movement of the other.

My god this is a struggle,now he thinks I don't know the difference between backing and laying.I'll have to leave it there with you Wildman if you can't grasp it.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 13:36
Pa,he's struggling with this part "punting one and laying the other are practically the same action" but doesn't seem to understand that I am referring to the response of one price to the other that take up 95% of the book and not that they are the same in reference to the outcome.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:42
I know you to be both well informed and intelligent but you are blinkered on this.

I agree the outcome is irrelevant but the statement you took issue with was " they punt the daylights out of the live one and lay the bejaysus out of the not so live one " implying one was the same as the other when it most certainly is not.

In the Cops And Robbers case they backed Sizing Rio morning prices at 7/2 for what they could get on whilst at the same time laid the favourite here,they then backed Sizing Rio on course at 3/1 down naturally this was reflected on the market here but there was always the chance that another horse could win the race,the most important aspect was knowing one was going to lose.
By:
pa lapsy
When: 04 Oct 13 13:46
If one is backed the other naturally drifts,(and visa versa)otherwise the book is overround. Thats fair enough dj and technically right maybe the "laying the bayjus" part isn,t, as you are in effect backing the field which in this case mightn,t have been right.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 13:49
CryCry[:cry:
I was talking about price responsiveness not outcome for the fourteenth time.
You lay 10k @ 1.72 or back 4k @ 2.6-they will cause the direct response on the other price when taking up 95% of a book.
Not for a second was I suggesting that backing Sizing rio was the same as laying cops and robbers in terms of result.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 13:59
Major moving of goalposts going on.

DJ876 original statement was " how can you say punting the daylights out of one and laying the bejaysus out of another "

The presumption there was there is only way one way to back horses which is why I called it an aberration on your behalf.
By:
Ozymandius
When: 04 Oct 13 14:00
dj, he admits not to being a betting expert.  No point getting down in the weeds with him, he won't understand.

These conspiracy theories are aimed at his barstool cronies and don't hold up to any sort of scientific examination.

Best not to engage, the goalposts constantly move and anyone who disagrees is labelled 'blinkered'.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 14:01
When they're taking up that percentage of the book,punting one and laying the other are practically the same action so any decent bet on Sizing Rio would have caused Cops and Robbers price to drift proportionately.

Take my full post and I would have thought it was self explanatory.
By:
wildmanfromborneo
When: 04 Oct 13 14:12
It is self explanatory and is a given but you didn't take into consideration that you can lay one here and back another elsewhere.
By:
dj876
When: 04 Oct 13 14:16
Of course I did but you're talking about morning prices when there is no liquidity on here so is irrelevant.
When there was liquidity,the 2 took an even greater percentage of book so one price movement had an inverse reaction to the other price.
By:
kingrat
When: 04 Oct 13 14:21
its bread and butter stuff wildman.stop digging a whole for yreself.Wink
Page 1 of 6  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com