Author Topic: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold (Read 310142 times)

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-22, 05:53 PM **Reply #1575** »

Calling Saturday races in Melbourne on Wednesday

As foreshadowed, the races to be wary of on Saturday at Caulfield are Races 8&9 over 1400m and Race 6 over 1600.

Race 8 for 15 inexperienced 3yros should not be run and the same goes for Races 6&9.

These low-grade races inflated with Bradburys defy any expectation that reading 'the form guide' would be likely to overcome the consequences of running too many horses over a CD that is known to be unfair, and known to RVL to be unfair.

And that is the point: RVL administration makes reading the form guide irrelevant except as it points up the problem.

[Needless to say inflated fields will handicap punters in Sydney and Brisbane but Melbourne racing stands alone as 'no go']

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-23, 10:31 AM **Reply #1576** »

The logic behind your rambling is confused and misguided.

You are Putting the Cart before the Horse.

The primary basis of racing, is an owner/trainer team attempting to win races, and win prizemoney. Betting on these races is secondary to this. Pretty obvious for most, in that if there was no race, there would be no betting.

Yet you continue to argue that if betting cannot be facilitated when form-lines do not easily reveal race outcomes, the whole operation should be shut down.

That's a bit like saying that if you go to watch the footy, and you have an uncomfortable seat, then the game shouldn't proceed. So you, and your point of view (Horse races with inflated fields shouldn't be run) may be the centre of your universe, but saying that the game should be called off, is a complete overreach.

If you are unhappy with the status quo, and your rear-end is hurting, find something else that you like.

fours · « 2022-Jun-23, 11:15 AM **Reply #1577** »

Quote from: peter kamenzind on 2022-Jun-19, 05:53 AM

Posted by: fours
"If you want an easier time of it try the new preschool year they are preparing for you"

Unsure that it would be easier for everyone.

Looking Race 1 at Ascot/ 13 runners
1st 7. HOLLOWAY BOY $40.20
2nd 10. PEARLING PATH $82.10
3rd 14. LAKOTA SIOUX $36.50

And comparing it to Race 3 Flemington/ 12 runners
1st 12. GRINZINGER BISHOP $95.20
2nd 2. MAGNASPIN $10.80
3rd 13. ZOE'S PROMISE (3) $37.40

In both cases / NSW TAB win Divs are 2YO races of abt 1400m. Would have thought that

1. Immature horses with little/no previous racing form

2. Racing over abt 1400m

3. Often untried over the trip

would be the primary reasons for these long-priced results, rather than the "inflated fields" excuse so frequently being offered.

Peter,

I simply be an adult on such races and choose not to bet.....

Fours

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 11:35 AM **Reply #1578** »

Positioning carts and horses

If there were no betting there would be no racing -- beting taxes fund the business.

Administrators, and the media, have an obligation to ensure races are fairly run -- this obligation is not being met.

The prospect of 'unfairness' can then be exposed, independently, to warn those being misled to bet on a not-fair race.

Some 'tax takes' are explicit deductions from tote pools and levies on turnover. Some 'de-facto taxes' unfairly affect winning and losing -- in this case, inflating the fields with 'no hopers' affects who wins (the corporates) and who loses (most punters).

Keep your eye on Races 8&9 at Caulfield tomorrow.

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-23, 11:58 AM **Reply #1579** »

Pumping up the tyres on a broken bicycle.

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 12:34 PM **Reply #1580** »

2Ys UR 2Ys UB -- I C UR 2Ys 4 ME

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 05:30 PM **Reply #1581** »

Did someone realise a mistake?

...... one like 100% incorrect .... that has now been edited ... and this substituted:Pumping up the tyres on a broken bicycle.

Not sure of the forum rules but editing/correcting a prior post, after it had been responded to, to suggest a mistake was not made is questionable.

« Last Edit: 3 hours ago v. last post 4 hours ago.

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-23, 06:35 PM **Reply #1582** »

No mistakes here.

You were 100% Incorrect.

Just the repeated pumping up tyres on the broken bicycle is tiresome.

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-23, 06:59 PM **Reply #1583** »

Today Race 5 @ Gosford, a 1600m Maiden, was not so "inflated" with 9 running.

Interested to hear comments as to why Superargo was priced at $1.40 / why he came 3rd.

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 07:04 PM **Reply #1584** »

I am used to being '100% incorrect'

............. I am not used to others contributions to a discussion being, effectively, edited and back dated.

A guy wrote a book about that ......... Winston Smith, the re-writer, did repent but sadly finished up in Room 101.

wily ole dog · « 2022-Jun-23, 08:06 PM **Reply #1585** »

Quote from: Peter Mair on 2022-Jun-23, 07:04 PM

I am used to being '100% incorrect'

............. I am not used to others contributions to a discussion being, effectively, edited and back dated.

A guy wrote a book about that ......... Winston Smith, the re-writer, did repent but sadly finished up in Room 101.

Have you found 1 person who’s agreed with your repetitious nonsense since

Date Registered: December 29, 2008, 14:04:23

No you haven’t

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 08:09 PM **Reply #1586** »

Not easy to believe

I share the disappointment about Race 5 @ Gosford, a 1600m Maiden -- a red hot, odds-on favourite ran third in a field of 9.

My disappointment may have a different focus -- anyone betting on mid-week provincial races, anywhere, needs to carefully consider the likely results of an intelligence test. Betting on 'a maiden' event only compounds the error.

Cut your teeth on Sydney on Saturdays.

As a newcomer on the forum, things are not going well for you, K.

Try not to dig a hole and then dig it deeper -- I know, do as I say, not as I do, being buried can be smothering.

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-23, 09:14 PM **Reply #1587** »

I thought that you might have at least a rudimentary grasp of basic form, at least to be able to tell me, with supporting evidence or argument, whether Superargo is a horse of below average ability that ran at about it's best, or is above average, did not run accordingly, and supply a reason/reasons for that.

If you cannot address this, then will assume that you are unable to do simple form on horses.

wily ole dog · « 2022-Jun-23, 09:15 PM **Reply #1588** »

Peter K is running rings around you

Just like everyone else, found anyone to defend you over the past 13 years?

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-23, 09:36 PM **Reply #1589** »

Keep running in rings around me

I am about to make K a member of an exclusive kennel klub -- he has passed the entry test, with distinction.

Above all, betting on races I suggest are best left alone -- it is how many will learn.

There are some 'in an inner ring' who understand what I say ..... some run in outer rings who will get the message in God's good time. Thoughts and prayers.

Education is expensive ---- Victorian punters are investing heaps but, being slow-learners, it is a slow and costly trek to graduation.

Wait for Saturday!

peter kamenzind · « 2022-Jun-24, 08:58 AM **Reply #1590** »

Peter Mair

2022-Jun-23, 08:09 PM
"anyone betting on mid-week provincial races, anywhere, needs to carefully consider the likely results of an intelligence test. Betting on 'a maiden' event only compounds the error"

2018-Aug-02, 09:07 PM
"these predictably unfair outcomes unfold in NSW will be told every Saturday"

2022-May-30, 10:22 PM
"do not bet on Melbourne metropolitan racing. You will not win"

Perhaps there is an opening somewhere for you as a motivational speaker.

gunbower · « 2022-Jun-24, 07:12 PM **Reply #1591** »

Where ?

wily ole dog · « 2022-Jun-24, 07:25 PM **Reply #1592** »

There is nowhere. Some nuffties thought it would be woke to have a representative fir the incapacitated, many moons ago, but the bloke was so inept he got the boot

Peter Mair · « 2022-Jun-24, 07:39 PM **Reply #1593** »

Where ?

Fair go Gunner.

As a motivational writer I am legendary -- on this forum.

Until I speak up, top-dog does not know what he has to say next -- only then does he know to promote my views by always opposing them. He is a priceless asset -- a driven, just not motivated participant, drawing attention to what I say.

There are other kids in the kennel that take writing-initiatives from top-dog -- including a newcomer Special-K, now motivated well beyond the hopes of all that want someone reliable to remind people what I just said.

I sent a full case of Tucker-Box as a reward -- if you listen carlefully you can hear them singing the familiar strains of .. rough, rough , rough, oh gosh oh gee, Tucker Box is the food for me

wily ole dog · « 2022-Jun-24, 08:49 PM **Reply #1594** »

Happy to “promote” your brain farts Peter. Those in the industry are laughing at you. Hence you are no longer employed and sentenced to posting on a forum with 6 others.

You’re make such good inroads....what a winner

peter kamenzind · « 13 hours ago **Reply #1595** »

Where ?

Guest speaker at the Broken Bicycles Club.

"How pumping up your tyres is an alternative to fixing your bicycle"

Makes perfect sense to those who live in a parallel world.

Peter Mair · « 10 hours ago **Reply #1596** »

...... confirming 'be wary' today

Thanks again guys.

Owners are helping RVL with its decisions on acceptances. The scratchings at Caulfield today are indicative.

From Race 6, out come the runners listed to start from barriers --16,13,11,14,17.19. Even so it leaves 14 to run over a 'no go' rough-race CD. Implicitly the owners were not confident they could run 10th to get $1,500, and paid the penalty to scratch.

Race 9 loses 3 roughies from barriers 12,16 &17 -- even so 14 to run over the 1400CD is 'no go'.

Race 8 loses four roughies -- from barriers 4,5,7,&8 -- even so, with 11 to start it is still a 'no go' just less so.

Given the problems with RVL race-stacking, it seems unfair to require owners to pay a fee to scratch from wide barriers.

Peter Mair · « 3 hours ago **Reply #1597** »

mixed fortunes

Like most I came unstuck on the 7th -- 4,7/3,8,11/5,9/8,10,11,12 CAULFIELD Gallops - R6.

Contrary to my fears, Races 8&9 went to the favourites. My other, concern Race5 (not 6) over the 1600 was justified.