All Star Mile - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



All Star Mile - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: All Star Mile  (Read 33511 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Jan-24, 05:18 PM Reply #200 »
There have been many decent, honourable people that have been 'moved' out of the way by a politician before.......Donald Trump has only got mobsters left.  :lol:

I can't remember what Peter Mair was doing in his role as "punter's advocate" back then .......maybe he will explain.....I would hope it wasn't "inflated fields".  :biggrin:

Credit to him for putting his name to every comment.


Nem, his ego results in him putting his name to stuff. A desperate form of self promotion. A pity that what he posts exposes why he was sacked.

Jeunes posted a rather self flagellating letter that Mair wrote about his “achievements” on another thread.

 Sadly for Mair it just highlighted what a fool he is and why he was sacked

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-10, 07:09 PM Reply #201 »

Armchair Punter raises question -- 'is smoking 'something' still allowed in the Racenet bunker?'


ALL-STAR MILE DESTINED FOR GREAT HEIGHTS

There’s little doubt in my mind the All-Star Mile has now claimed the title as Australia’s No.2 ‘mile’ after the Doncaster and I reckon there’s a good chance it will be challenging for the top spot in years to come.
All-Star Mile on target to becoming a juggernaut

The clock is ticking down to the All-Star Mile and I’ve got to admit to being pretty excited about not only this edition but the overall future of the race.


.................. the concept of this race is fatally flawed ...... combining 'punters picks' with 'promoters selections' entails staging a contest of 'can wins' and 'no-hopers' while risking the consequences of an inflated field delivering a 'blowout' result --  a knockout to the concept of punters voting in contenders.

Let the owners put bucks up to decide the field -- skin in the game counts!

Contenders for the best races should have the best ratings and the best recent form ----  punter 'votes' are compromised by allegiances to runners unlikely to be qualified.

... that the very idea of the no-star mile devalues racing is, alas, consistent with the apparent determination of RVL and the Victorian government to devalue the legacy entrusted to them.



Offline gunbower

  • Group 2
  • User 2463
  • Posts: 1005
« 2020-Feb-10, 09:06 PM Reply #202 »
Wily, after reading many of Mairs' ramblings the question that often intrigues me is ; Why was he appointed to anything in the first place ? Who thought that he had some special skills that could enhance the Industry in the first place ? Suggest that selection panel have not been used again.

Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-11, 06:33 AM Reply #203 »
Gun, the good news is someone woke up to his ineptness   :lol:

Oh & I voted for the west aussie, Regal Power :thumbsup:
« Last Edit: 2020-Feb-11, 06:42 AM by wily ole dog »

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-11, 08:36 AM Reply #204 »



A WFA EVENT


Allowing and encouraging voting for runners in a WFA event is hardly sensible.

.... on the other hand, RVL policy inflates fields with no-hopers -- those voted-in meet this preference.

Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-11, 10:00 AM Reply #205 »
Those voted out (sacked) are no hopers as well as you know only too well peter  :lol:   :lol:

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 3959
« 2020-Feb-11, 10:40 AM Reply #206 »
The All Star Mile has way to goto meet the Everest hype. Saying that it has more hype than the Sydney autumn races so far.

If it brings more people to racing, it should be a good thing PM.


Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-11, 11:12 AM Reply #207 »


Putting on unfair racing is never a good thing


                                           If it brings more people to racing, it should be a good thing

New people attracted to dud racing on a dud day out will not come back  -- lost forever.

Like most of the racing RVL is promoting these days, a no-star-mile featuring cluttering also-rans as well as the very best is likely to be unfair to the best horses and their connections.

It is almost that RVL has a death wish for this race -- it will be scrapped when the cluttering delivers a bradbury-boilover.

........ never forget 'tears i cry' leading in a $1m First4 after the Flemington track was 'off'  -- the TIC was then a G1 weighted-out certainty.

Online sobig

  • Group 2
  • User 583
  • Posts: 3697
« 2020-Feb-11, 03:33 PM Reply #208 »
Looking at the voting so far I do not see any "no hopers" making the field and this promises to be an excellent race.

The concept is basically the sane as the Arima Kinen in Japan which was the 6th highest ranked world last year

Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-11, 07:01 PM Reply #209 »
Looking at the voting so far I do not see any "no hopers" making the field and this promises to be an excellent race.

The concept is basically the sane as the Arima Kinen in Japan which was the 6th highest ranked world last year

Yes, looking like Mair is wrong again.  :lol:

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 3959
« 2020-Feb-11, 07:43 PM Reply #210 »
This is dedicated to PM and Tears I Cry. I could be wrong but in those days there were no corporates as we know now so the pools were much bigger.  Also there was a jackpot on the race as in those says jackpots used to roll on to the next race or similar. That may partially explain the big dividend. You don’t get many F4 pools that get to $1m now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=40HXkzXDInU

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-11, 08:27 PM Reply #211 »


No 'bradburys' suggests a managed outcome

A capacity for RVL to learn from mistakes -- voted bradbury-runners -- is encouraging.

How did they do it?

Is the field of candidates now limited to credible runners?

BM 80 is not a credible WFA entitlement.

To be eligible for the race, horses must have satisfied new minimum performance criteria over the previous year at the close of nominations, as well as have an increased minimum handicap rating of 80 if aged four and above, with three-year-olds remaining at last year’s minimum rating of 70.

Is the voting managed to exclude 'bradburys'?

Presumably, with RVL deciding 4wild card nominations,  the inclination to run 'elected' runners is a function of prize-money for running 14th?

....... how much does the horse running last get paid .......... $90k was suggested last year..... this year?  $50k

Owners Prizemoney First $2,250,000 Second $720,000 Third $360,000 Fourth $210,000 Fifth $150,000 Sixth to Eighth $120,000 Ninth and Tenth $100,000 Eleventh to Fifteenth $50,000


This is inviting no-hopers from a syndicated-stable able to swamp the ballot-boxes at the cut-off.

................... as the voting stands, a well organized stunt could start a bradbury or two or three, hoping for the best, but most likely to be impeding the fair-chance of a better and well-qualified runner.

...... this race is a disgrace ....... RVL is covering its initial stupidity with a still risky strategy begging for a bradbury to win and destroy the concept of democracy determining race fields

...... be mindful .............. the Trumpster and Scott from marketing, et al, starting favourite!

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-17, 10:05 PM Reply #212 »


Real-time voting -- slow-time counting

The n-s-m is starting to smell from the head down.

If voting for the no-star mile field were a modern electronic election process, the votes would be published within minutes of the cut-off -- what we are being told is that 'connections now must wait four days' to know if they got a start.

That is not right -- it smacks of a vote for a Ned Kelly, as class-captain, which the teaches may not like -- and eastern-bloc rulers 'managing' wishes of the people they may want to 'correct'.

Was there a free vote or not? -- if RVL does not trust 'free votes' why would they not change the selection process to rule out those hoping to run last!

The present n - s - m concept is not credible -- allowing punters and stables to vote is nonsednse.


This is disturbing:

Aristia was right on the cusp of an All-Star Mile start when voting went into the blackout stage but connections now must wait four days to find out if the mare has a shot at a huge payday next month.

Aristia was just inside the top 10 when the voting tallies went dark at 10pm last Friday night but voting remained open until midnight on Sunday.

The runners voted into the All-Star Mile will be announced on Thursday.


Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 3959
« 2020-Feb-17, 10:46 PM Reply #213 »
PM, I thought you gave up betting on Melbourne racing.


Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-18, 06:28 AM Reply #214 »
Just another lie from Mair  :lol:


Offline ianb

  • Group 2
  • User 329
  • Posts: 1149
« 2020-Feb-18, 10:45 AM Reply #215 »
I don't have a problem with them taking 4 days to make sure there is none cheating the system.

However I think they should have waited until at least this weekend before closing the vote.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-18, 02:34 PM Reply #216 »

Surely not -- racing folk 'cheating'

How could RVL have put a voting system in place that allows cheating.

Perhaps the AEC could run the ballot -- and deliver the results promptly.

That said, who has an incentive to cheat? ....how is it done?  and ....... how is it detected?

On my last look not many had voted -- and that does invite a swamping last-minute rush to vote.



Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-18, 02:39 PM Reply #217 »

Some other misapprehensions to be addressed

Not betting on MM racing does not imply not taking an interest in protecting most punters that do.

Other posted misapprehensions about my representative role, previously let go through to the keeper, are probably also best corrected .... and I will address that matter soon.

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2020-Feb-20, 01:43 PM Reply #218 »
Really punters are sometimes like a bunch of old sheila's....why does anyone care what a race is worth or how they pick the field etc.......all total BS from a punting perspective.....when you see the final field you decide if it is a betting race or not.....end of story.......only connections should concern themselves with stuff like that, why does anyone else even care? just gossip, Punters opinions on prizemoney and the politics of racing are always going to be ignored cos they have no relevance and no one really cares.........

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-20, 08:42 PM Reply #219 »


Punters (and owners) care -- they pay the freight


When funds contributed by punters pay the prize-money, it is important that the punters, and the owners, get a fair run for the money they put up.

Too often they do not -- paying generously for no-hoper runners to run 10th is a corruption of the idea of a fair go -- these 'cant wins' turn a fair race into a pinball game as they block 'could wins' in the run.

........ the composition of the field matters a lot ... the no-star-mile is corrupted by allowing 'populist votes' to inflate the field with runners that should not be there.

Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-20, 08:48 PM Reply #220 »

Punters (and owners) care -- they pay the freight


When funds contributed by punters pay the prize-money, it is important that the punters, and the owners, get a fair run for the money they put up.

Too often they do not -- paying generously for no-hoper runners to run 10th is a corruption of the idea of a fair go -- these 'cant wins' turn a fair race into a pinball game as they block 'could wins' in the run.

........ the composition of the field matters a lot ... the no-star-mile is corrupted by allowing 'populist votes' to inflate the field with runners that should not be there.


“No stars”? Are you seriously going to claim this?


Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-21, 06:49 PM Reply #221 »
Hey Pete, are you waiting till after the event to answer the question.

Come on, be the advocate that you claim, tell us who isn’t a star or who shouldn’t be in the field

Online Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 3959
« 2020-Feb-22, 08:57 PM Reply #222 »
After today, you have to wonder who else will make the field?

I would go left field and go for Miss Siska or even Castlevecchio.

I just think there may be a couple of drop outs after the Australian Guineas.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5252
« 2020-Feb-23, 10:17 PM Reply #223 »


Do not mix  'good and better' with 'also-runners['/b]

A voting-entry option is just wrong -- punters should not be faced with wfa-weights for elected but unqualified runners.

..... and qualified runners should not be faced with a buffeting bagatelle of no-hopers.

The NSM concept is typical Melbourne-madness -- promoting a 'democracy' of numbers in a den of thieves is plain nonsense.

............ RVL does not want a Ned-Kelly to be a class-captain mocking its ratings.

The rules will be changed -- hopefully before a Bradbury wins.


Online wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27239
« 2020-Feb-24, 06:37 AM Reply #224 »

“No stars”? Are you seriously going to claim this?


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap