Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold  (Read 139064 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-03, 06:25 AM Reply #1125 »

The 'last year's results' form-guide for Saturday

..... scroll through last years payouts ....... the big numbers are sobering ........ in total, the 4 quadrellas 'paid' $70,000 and that is just a clue.

https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2019-12-07/PAKENHAM/M/R/7/Win

https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2019-12-07/ROSEHILL/S/R/9/Win

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-03, 07:31 AM Reply #1126 »
Your links don’t lead to the meetings that you want them to you clown. You can’t even get that right  :lol:

Failed administrator. 🤡

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1357
« 2020-Dec-03, 08:00 AM Reply #1127 »
They did on mine Wily.
Don't really need reminding about Etah James, all the same.  :lol:

Thank God she won the Sydney Cup.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-03, 09:38 AM Reply #1129 »
 :wacko:



Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-06, 01:38 PM Reply #1130 »

Ascot was not good for racing


Saturday's Kingston Town Classic: how can this be good for racing

G1 status ... why? ........ this WFA race at Ascot on Saturday has almost half the field with pre-post SPs greater than 50/1 ............ some as long as 100/1+.


........predictably so unfair, the race should not have been run ...........  the whole Ascot day was not much chop.

[Conversely ..... if Monty is the benchmark ........... the racing at Packenham was right on the money for 'winners' and only 3 F4s were 'over the top']

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-06, 02:01 PM Reply #1131 »
So you were wrong about the standalone meeting at Pakenham 8-)

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-07, 07:43 AM Reply #1132 »

AN EACH WAY BET ........... DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS


“Upon mature reflection, it is increasingly looking as though angry reactions to social media ......[are a mistake]...........  lashing out broke one of the cardinal rules of social media. A political strategist says, he always advises ‘not to feed the trolls’. It is best not to bite because you only magnify their message and give them the attention they were looking for in the first place.’”

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-13, 08:18 PM Reply #1133 »



HONK HONKS BIG DAY ............... was no endorsement of inflated-field racing

................. and one can only hope that the China takeover and related aggression will see a protest vote against HK racing from the rest of the world.


Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-23, 06:04 PM Reply #1134 »


INFLATED FIELDS IN 1400M RACES AT FLEMINGTON ARE UNFAIR


Last Saturday there were three 1400m races at Flemington.

Race 3, 9 starters,  F4 paid $550 ......Race 5,  12 starters ... $4,000 ..... Race 8, 14 starters $26,000.

Not even Monty can make sense of this administrative corruption.

[.... races run at Caulfield over 1400m are also unfair if the field is inflated ...  Race 4 to be run on Saturday has 12 acceptors.]


Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-23, 06:33 PM Reply #1135 »
 :censored:  off idiot and spew your poison elsewhere
Go and boo Santa you loser   :lol:

Offline Maximus

  • Class6
  • User 2900
  • Posts: 97
« 2020-Dec-23, 08:15 PM Reply #1136 »
Not even Monty can make sense of this administrative corruption.

[.... races run at Caulfield over 1400m are also unfair if the field is inflated ...  Race 4 to be run on Saturday has 12 acceptors.]

Where does 12 starters sit on the corruption scale - Fair, Dodgy, Smelly or Corrupt? And can a race be reassigned to a different category if there is a late scratching at the barriers - i.e. can a race initially labelled as "Corrupt" be downgraded to "Smelly" if there is a scratching?

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-26, 06:16 PM Reply #1137 »

............. Where does 12 starters sit on the corruption scale?

Close to the top .................. races run at Caulfield over 1400m are also unfair if the field is inflated ...  Race 4 to be run on Saturday has 12 acceptors.

Does RVL have no shame:  Not even Monty can make sense of this administrative corruption.

Race 4 was just the start of the rot served up at Caulfield today ......... the F4s for the last 6 races paid 6.000, 7,000, 8,000, 1,000, 3,500 and 33,000 ............ the average field size was 12 ........... Monty could not find the winner in 5 of the quadrella races ...........[in Sydney he missed one]

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-27, 08:46 AM Reply #1138 »
You’re not a good advertisement for old Monty. It appears he keeps losing.
5 tips in a race and can’t find a winner  :lol:

You clearly didn’t follow the Creedence form and back Defibrillate :bulb:

Mounty may need to upgrade his failing rating system or actually do the form properly

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-27, 06:11 PM Reply #1139 »

THEY JUST DON'T GET IT:

The review of the ....... Sydney spring is under way .................it has been a boon for Racing NSW in terms of turnover and field sizes.

................... a change to the rules for The Kosciuszko ............ a showcase of the best country horses .............   clear in the rules from next year............ runner-up ........... returned to a city stable .............. against the spirit of the race .............. it will not happen again.

.............inflated-field racing risks losers all round ......... big bucks on an unstable table get stolen.

The main problem with Australian racing is administrators blindly milking monopoly rights over punters.

Offline sobig

  • Group 2
  • User 583
  • Posts: 3829
« 2020-Dec-27, 06:57 PM Reply #1140 »
You keep insisting that punters do not want your "inflated" fields.

Explain then why bigger pools occur with larger fields. Surely if punters want smaller fields the pool sizes would be reversed to what actually happens?

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-27, 07:19 PM Reply #1141 »

Inflated fields mean punters include more options across all bets..........


................. to cover the risk that 'no-hopers' will impede some runners there to win ....... denying the best runner the entitlement to a win.

Its like knowing some boxes of cereal will be stale and 'off' ... buying more to ensure you get a couple of good boxes.

......as well, unfortunately, inflated fields allow smokeys to be salted in under the radar of too many 'no-hopers'.

No names , no pack-drill .............

Offline Maximus

  • Class6
  • User 2900
  • Posts: 97
« 2020-Dec-27, 07:57 PM Reply #1142 »
"Punters" prefer small fields, but bet more in larger fields as long as they haven't had stale coco pops beforehand.

All seems straightforward when you boil it down.  :bulb:


Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-27, 09:19 PM Reply #1143 »
THEY JUST DON'T GET IT:  :lol:

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2020-Dec-30, 05:43 PM Reply #1144 »


Rough ride ahead -- ask the bride to mind your wallet


Most of the 'accepted' to run on Saturday at caulfieldshould not have been ............ most are just filler most likely to be disruptive to the fair running of their races, impeding those there to win.

This is 'loser-racing'. 

Be very wary of some standouts at Caulfield in these should-not-be-run races:

On a soft track, Races 1 , 2 and 7, over the notorious 1400m, have 14,16 and 13 starters in, respectively,
races for 3yro fillies, a BM 64 and a BM 78 ............. last year the F4's for these three races paid  $800, $23,000 and $14,000.

Race 9 a BM 84 over 1600 has 14 starters ........... last year the F4 paid $25,000.

.....the fun in Melbourne does not stop there ..... on Friday at Flemington, Race 6 over 1400m has 16 starters in a BM 70 for F&M ............... what do you think will happen?

[There is no relief in Sydney ........... racing on a heavy track at Kensington-is-not-Randwick ............... you know not to go anywhere near it.]

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 13021
« 2020-Dec-30, 10:54 PM Reply #1145 »

Rough ride ahead -- ask the bride to mind your wallet



.....the fun in Melbourne does not stop there ..... on Friday at Flemington, Race 6 over 1400m has 16 starters in a BM 70 for F&M ............... what do you think will happen?



You know you don't have to bet right?  :what:

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2020-Dec-31, 07:26 AM Reply #1146 »
Mairs narcissism lends him to think he is smart enough not to bet but everyone else is so stupid, they do.

Incredibly he believes They need his brain farts

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5689
« 2021-Jan-01, 08:19 PM Reply #1147 »


Melbourne Metropolitan Racing 2021 .. so far, so predictably not-good

............. most disappointing is the clear failure of punters to realize that some races are just raffles.

These outcomes make someone from RNSW look smart .........someone inclined to say 'punters do not know what they are doing'  ...... that looks like it is true, that's a worry!

In both NSW and Victoria, the F4 pools on all the Flemington races was about the same ............. including on Race 6 where the F4 paid $5,000 ..............

[....Race 2, a Bm70 over 2000m, 'paid' $90, 000 ...........and $45k in the pool of $60k went through to the 'jackpot keeper'.............. that is a wipe out!]

Tomorrow, at Caulfield, a similar display of punting stupidity is likely ................ this notwithstanding the punters.com.au 'selections' advising 'no bet' in Races 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9.

............. anyone betting on the Caulfield races tomorrow should be referred to the 'master in lunacy ......... there will be referrals ............ looking forward, TAB account records will be evidence in disputed wills.

................ there is a message here for RVL ................  one of the bolted-on newscorpse 'conscripts' has failed to toe the line ................ a welcome display of independence.

............. this cannot go on ................ a proper inquiry would demand reforms.............. not only at newscorpse!


Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 13021
« 2021-Jan-02, 10:34 AM Reply #1148 »
Maybe my head has the Chrissy / New Year fuzz but I've read that four times and I have NFI what you are trying to say?  :shrug:

You drone on continually about F4 divvis like it's some shining light but you do get it's a tote pool right? The same money is paid out (not withstanding JFCs kickbacks etc) regardless  :huh:

As for Caulfield I'm betting in races 4 (#9 looks promising and unlucky last time out) & 8 (#1 Terbium looks to have come back well after losing his way - save 9/10)

You don't need to bet in all of them  :bulb:

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28065
« 2021-Jan-02, 11:47 AM Reply #1149 »
He uses F4s as yardsticks.    :lol:   :lol:   :lol:   :lol:


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap