Racehorse TALK

Thoroughbred Racing Talk => Racing Talk => Topic started by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-02, 09:07 PM

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-02, 09:07 PM


Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold

The new racing season will be an opportunity to assess the impact of RacingNSW paying at least $3,500 for horses running down to 10th in most races on Saturdays.

That the intention to inflate the size of race-fields will be achieved is beyond question – the issues are about the consequences.

Horses not ready to do their best will be having preparatory runs in races rather than in trials.  This matters if, as often, can’t-wins clutter and disrupt the fair running of a race, impeding the free-running of favoured horses.

It is beyond question that the losers in this deal will be most punters and the owners of the better horses – most punters will find that the form guide is less relevant and owners there to win will run into interference from those not.

The beneficiaries, of a contrived policy to inflate fields, comprise a de-facto cartel – it ranges through administrators taking more money from increased TAB and bookmaker betting turnover; corporate bookmakers (now racing sponsors) taking fixed-odds bets from punters more likely to lose; trainers and jockeys having expanded employment opportunities;  owners of low-grade horses getting a better chance of recovering costs; syndicate betting operations given rebates to plunder TAB pools and, not least,  state governments feeding racing-tax revenues, that first belong in the public purse, directly to racing -- including to subsidize racing in rural areas that has no chance of covering costs.

The mantra of ‘too much racing being never enough’ is flawed.

The consequences of this consensus assault on the pockets of most punters will unfold as the $3,500 inducement to ‘just give a horse a run’ kicks in.

Wait for it: more race outcomes will become ‘rough’ and dividends declared for many race outcomes will look more like a lotto-strike than a race running true to form – especially for trifecta, first-four and quadrella bets.

The way these predictably unfair outcomes unfold in NSW will be told every Saturday – as they have been for Melbourne metropolitan racing for some time now.

My prescient ‘cautions for Melbourne’ now embrace ‘cautions for Sydney’.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Aug-03, 06:29 AM
Peter,

Kindly provide a mathematical proof for your claims.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-03, 07:13 AM
Yet again Mair displays his lack of knowledge regarding racing
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Authorized on 2018-Aug-03, 01:23 PM
I think he is pretty much on the mark.

On our tight turning tracks big fields are more about luck than talent.

Encouraging big fields with prize money down to 10th is just going to mark racing more of a lottery than it already is.

INstead of prizemoney down to 10th why not just wave the entry fees for all races below black type ?

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-03, 04:41 PM


There are no entry fees for races below black type -- at most there is a fee of $200 for a scratching.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-03, 05:13 PM
I think he is pretty much on the mark.

On our tight turning tracks big fields are more about luck than talent.

Well, we know in some instances that does happen. Especially the valley as both you and I have agreed on
Everyone’s smart enough to know when to pick their marks., except Mair who has his own agenda which is driven by self interest

On the other hand,it has been proven over the past months that mairs ramblings have been completely wrong.
The results prove that time and time again. Especially in those 1400m races he bangs on about. That’s why he doesn’t respond to the numerous questions put to him by other forum members

The Massive majority of those races are run trouble free and favoured runners are winning more often than not.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Antitab# on 2018-Aug-03, 05:55 PM
Peter

I have been involved in bookmarking for a long while and your premise is wrong on 2 counts

1. Every year our worst performing tracks in terms of revenue are small tracks. Punters are better able to map and are harder to betat. Margin is always best at Randwick, Flemington and Eagle Farm.

2. Punters want BIG fields.

They have voted with their wallets. We always hold mor money and write more bets in fields ofv12 plus. Under 8 horse fields and people don’t bet.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-03, 06:01 PM
Mairs other premis is wrong as well
He thinks horses are machines and should perform as such :tin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Authorized on 2018-Aug-03, 06:29 PM
Peter

I have been involved in bookmarking for a long while and your premise is wrong on 2 counts

1. Every year our worst performing tracks in terms of revenue are small tracks. Punters are better able to map and are harder to betat. Margin is always best at Randwick, Flemington and Eagle Farm.

2. Punters want BIG fields.

They have voted with their wallets. We always hold mor money and write more bets in fields ofv12 plus. Under 8 horse fields and people don’t bet.

That is probably because it is shoved down their throats there is more value in big fields when we all know that is not necessarily the case.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-03, 06:35 PM
Value is in favoured horses winning for the average punter.
The races Mair has been bemoaning have been dominated by favoured horses winning and mostly trouble free
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-03, 08:44 PM

Wily is my saviour

The rumour that I am paying the wily-one to promote common sense is not true.

                                 ..... inexplicably he has dedicated his influence to endorsing what I say.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-03, 09:06 PM
You’re a liar Mair
Nothing you say is endorsed or believed by anyone  :thumbsup:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Aug-03, 10:38 PM
Why are big fields better,

The answer is the take out.

In big fields the chances of parts of the market being incorrectly priced goes up and it is this error area that gives punters a chance of profit.

The smaller the field the the less chance for errors.

There is a strong possibility that the more jammed packed the days racing program is the more chance of errors in the market as well.

As long as a punter concentrates on their niche, jammed packed racing days of big fields helps them make a profit.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-04, 08:46 PM
Well, the quaddy only paid;$300 or so bucks so once again Mairs predictions failed to eventuates.
Now if only rhythm to spare saluted I would have got a fatter divvy :sad:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-04, 09:14 PM

This is true

In big fields the chances of parts of the market being incorrectly priced goes up and it is this error area that gives punters a chance of profit.

The problem is that the 'punters' taking advantage of any miss-pricing are the big-betting, rebate-getting syndicates that do while the 'most punters' are disadvantaged.

That's why it is important that TABs show the distribution of TAB pools by the  class of punter -- big and small --that get which share of the dividends, in total and proportionate to the value of bets staked.

...... big fields are the nemesis of  time-precious punters relying on the form guide -- and a Santa Claus for the professionals.

[ .......... as for the wily-one ...... today was a remarkably good day for those betting at what is usually a vale-of-tears.........one day among few.]
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Aug-04, 09:42 PM
errrrr Peter,

Punting is a competition and in competitions those that :-

1) prepare thoroughly and do the work required

2) 'the work required' rather than what they might psychologically like

3) stay where they have an advantage as a result and simply dont bet where they don't

4) have the requisite IQ and time to both know 'the work required' and actually do it.

are the ones that are going to do win the spoils.

An inept lazy punter deserves what they don't get but are welcome to pay for their race day enjoyment all the same.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-08, 09:36 PM


An inept and lazy one observes

Compared to the results for the comparable meetings in SY and MN there is no reason to be especially wary -- but 'straight' and 1400m races at Flemington are always risky.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Aug-08, 11:03 PM
Pete if you just bet with the TAB that is mistake number one!.....Punters have to give them too big of a start....and Punters like you could not beat them if they gave you a start.....so on that fact I agree with you..........lazy idiots can't win!!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-09, 08:30 AM

My experience is that TAB is 'best' when tempted to bet in the pre-post fixed odds market.

It seems that the corporates are scared to be exposed until late in the day when the market is being fine tuned.

Even then it is rare to get more than a marginal advantage with a corporate just shading the TAB offers -- for that reason Iam inclined to say that the corporates should be 'taxed' at TAB rates lest they just make profit at the expense of all others.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: arthur on 2018-Aug-10, 10:28 AM
Even then it is rare to get more than a marginal advantage with a corporate just shading the TAB offers --

It is not rare . . in fact it is common

The other day I got 91.0 about a horse that was returned @ about 8.5 . . failed to salute of course, but that has nothing to do with the argument

And another, where I secured 20.0 . . 15.0 after 2 scratchings . . SP'd about 4.5 . . which did salute

A bit more than "marginal" . .

This is why many / most corps ban successful 'early shoppers'
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-10, 02:17 PM

TAB v other corporates

Thank you Arthur.

My concern with the 'others' is the poor odds before Saturday until the market firms.

At that point, the 'others' can see their book and blow out the prices on longshots -- but TAB, needing to pretend they all have a chance, encourages punters to put some of those longshots in their exotic bets.

There are problems in mixing 'tote' and 'fixed odds' betting  -- the big problem being the shift to inflated fields and rough results benefiting bookmakers and syndicates.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-10, 08:05 PM

Tomorrow

Already field sizes are increasing for Sydney metropolitan racing -- even so, Sydney still looks the best bet tomorrow.

In Melbourne there are short priced favourites in Races 5 and 9 which are modest benchmark events with big fields.

The 'worry races' are the three 'straight races -- 2, 5 & 7 -- and the three 1400 m races -- 3,4 & 8 -- with inflated fields when barriers are important.

Forum members that like 'big dividends' will be pleased -- but the probabilities are for most punters to be ripped.

.................... RVL must know that these likely race outcomes will disadvantage 'most punters' (and favour fixed-odds operators and rebate-getting TAB syndicates) .

..... I hope this probability is not true ..... but the die is cast.

 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-11, 06:35 PM

The 'worry races' are the three 'straight races -- 2, 5 & 7 -- and the three 1400 m races -- 3,4 & 8 -- with inflated fields when barriers are important.

Well, will Mair attempt to put his case forward in an honest manner.

One doubts his ability to.

R3 saw the barriers of no relevance and a trouble free race with the best horse on the day winning

R4= a trouble free race with punters cheering home the 4-1 2nd favourite

R8= Another trouble free race making a joke of Mairs claims.

Ditto the straight races that proved to be a punters delight as they clean up again
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-11, 07:49 PM

The early quadrella paid some $25 k

The F4 dividends on races 3,4,5&6 were $5.5k, 7k 7k &40k.

....... most punters did not win on those races.

The quadrella was Ok -- only I knew that Voodoo Lad was the lay of the day.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-11, 08:06 PM
so you agree that the 1400m races had no interference that affected the result despite your claims pre race meeting
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2018-Aug-13, 12:46 AM
The early quadrella paid some $25 k

The F4 dividends on races 3,4,5&6 were $5.5k, 7k 7k &40k.

....... most punters did not win on those races.

The quadrella was Ok -- only I knew that Voodoo Lad was the lay of the day.

I outlaid $20 on the Melbourne Quaddie but only got $16 back. At least I am satisfied with the knowledge that the integrity of the quaddie races passed the "Mair Pub Test"   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: pegasyber on 2018-Aug-13, 08:28 AM
  P. M. said above:
Quote
....... most punters did not win on those races.

  Actually 97% or thereabout, of punters do not WIN on ALL Races.  :what: :what: :what:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-13, 02:06 PM
It’s also noted Mair hasn’t been able to tell us what races and horses were affected by his supposed inflated fields.

He’s been exposed as being full of shite again
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-15, 07:24 PM

Caulfield quadrella wreckers for Saturday

Already one can say that two races scheduled for Saturday are likely to be 'rough'.

Race 4, a BM 84 over 1400m,  has a field of 16 + four emergencies -- wait for it!

Race 6, over 1100m for 3yro fillies, has a field of 16 + 3 emergencies -- and giving it 'G3' status is hardly sensible for a race likely to be another 'wait for it' event.

Even the main event -- aG2 over 1400m with 16 accepting --  is an invitation to a dance macabre.

Why would RVL do this?

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Aug-16, 09:53 AM
Well Pete I hope you are right, I will be backing a couple of roughies in both races.....but is you are that is only because punters are not very b-r-i-t-e..........big fields are great to bet in, there is a lot of "mug" money in the pool and for that I would like to say THANKS Pete
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-16, 11:49 AM
Hey Dave, here's a scoop. Even if your so incredibly ignorant as Mair is and cant find a horse to back, any sane person would just choose another race to bet on instead.
Not our brain dead advocate, Peter though  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-16, 06:33 PM

Best wishes Dave

The point to not be missed is that the outcome of inflated-field races is beyond the ken of those expecting the form guide to be useful and those expecting the form guide to be useless.

.......... only on Sunday morning does calm reflection show how what did happen was, incredibly,  predictable enough but overlooked by almost all on Friday.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-16, 08:46 PM
The main thing proven on Sunday is that You’ve been proven to be constantly wrong with your crap.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Aug-17, 12:52 AM
Pete if you and most punters were a detectives criminals would run rampant, unless they came up to you and confessed you would struggle to catch a jaywalker!!! Punting is like being a master detective trying to find a really smart murderer, there are not always a trail of bread crumbs leading you straight to a winner or a murderer....if winning was that easy every winner would be the same price as Winx, who would want that?.....you need to look for clues, sometimes they are subtle, sometimes they hit you in the face so even you could see them.....but the satisfaction you get from finding the subtle clues far outweighs the obvious ones.........people like you are either too lazy or too stupid to look under the surface for clues........but just finding clues is not the answer to winning on the punt.....you have to evaluate them, give them a value i.e. a price....once you learn how to do that, you will be well on the way to being a winning punter.....
You have had this explained to you many times, why are you still beating this drum? Are you obsessed with losing, are you a masochist by nature??, you are the definition of a Masochist...........you keep saying something won't work and you can't win doing it.....but you keep doing it??? is that crazy or what? if you are going to continue to punt, I have an idea that might interest you........learn how!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-18, 02:09 PM
Caulfield quadrella wreckers for Saturday

Already one can say that two races scheduled for Saturday are likely to be 'rough'.

Race 4, a BM 84 over 1400m,  has a field of 16 + four emergencies -- wait for it!

Well, idiot Mair wrong again.

Winner salutes at 2-1 and punters over joyed :clap2:
And the draw didn’t matter either so, Pete, you’re wrong on 2 fronts in the one race  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-19, 07:48 AM
Caulfield quadrella wreckers for Saturday

Race 6, over 1100m for 3yro fillies, has a field of 16 + 3 emergencies -- and giving it 'G3' status is hardly sensible for a race likely to be another 'wait for it' event.

Even the main event -- aG2 over 1400m with 16 accepting --  is an invitation to a dance macabre.

Why would RVL do this?


Oh well Peter. You don’t learn do you.

Monty told  you to throw 5 darts not 4.

Sadly for you all 4 were wrong, again

R4.....as discussed above, you were wrong
R6 sees the crowds favourite, Sunlight salute
R8 sees the 5-1 shot win and it was not your predicted “dance macabre”
4th dart peter, not a quaddy wrecker in sight. Quad paid a paltry $380

Mair goes home wrong but punters overjoyed  :bop:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Aug-19, 04:26 PM
Wily I must agree with Pete on one point, Barriers are very important at certain starts at Caulfield......the actual results not withstanding.......you must give credit where it's due or you risk your own credibility
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-19, 05:06 PM
Dave, Mairs problem is that if he ever raises a good point he ruins it by applying blanket coverage.
The bloke has zero balance.
Of course barriers matter at times but you just can’t  put a line through all of them without doing the form.
Mair fails on both fronts. Form & balance

Pace of the race,  distance, horses racing style, track conditions, what has drawn the “supposed better barriers” and a thing called track bias.

Mair takes none of those factors into consideration and it’s why his theories are constantly proved wrong
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-19, 05:49 PM

Some acceptable outcomes and some not

The early quadrella paid $8,000,  there were two F4 dividends of some $ 20,000 and four of the others averaged some $3,000.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-19, 07:44 PM
That’s the best you’ve got  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-19, 07:48 PM

My 'enough' always beats the 'best' of others!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Aug-19, 07:50 PM
There’s only one thing your beating is yourself
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-26, 06:28 PM

Bad tracks make inflated fields doubly bad

The Vale of Tears is notorious for rough results on a tight track  -- but, they still keep running capacity fields.

What may be passable for black-type events on the track is surely not with inexperienced and low-benchmark horses.

The four early quadrella races were illustrative shockers -- an early quadrella of $20,000 and F4s of $14,000 and $21,000 on races 2 and 5.

WEIR CALLS A SPADE A SHOVEL WITH MOONEE VALLEY TRACK

The Moonee Valley track has become a big concern ... he said “it’s racing terrible.”

Three quarters of the horses that raced at Moonee Valley on Saturday might as well have stayed at home with a stack of speed runners and those on the fence getting the chocolates.

It was basically impossible to win from the back or make ground when pulling wide.

Weir said what plenty of punters were thinking.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-26, 08:30 PM

What a (not) good idea

Maybe the best way -- at Moonee Valley -- would be to leave the rail in one position and let the jockeys find the best ground for themselves

................. except that the inside would soon be worn out.

The best way would limit field sizes so those accepted get a fair go.



The leader bias at Moonee Valley on Saturday was obvious for all to see as eight of the nine winners were in the first two around the corner ...

The Moonee Valley problem is that as soon as the rail gets out to four metres, where it was on Saturday, the leaders gain even more of an advantage.

.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Aug-26, 10:15 PM
while I must again agree with Pete, the "Vale of Tears" is a disgrace but I solved that problem.....I rarely bet there, when I see the races are at the Vale of tears....I just move on...if all punters did that they would do something about it(I would suggest close the track and build units there) with Tracks like Bendigo and others they have some of Australia's best tracks and Victoria is a relatively small state, so travel would not be a huge problem,why can't they hold races on a decent track?? why does it have to be in the city when the city track is too small even for goat races??
every 4th week races could be held at Bendigo, they could race on a circuit where they race at Flemington/Caulfield/Sandown and Bendigo in rotation and once a month hold a city class midweek meeting on each track.......even Caulfield is a little dubious for horse racing..........barriers should not be as relevant as they are at some Caulfield starts.....I don't think reducing field sizes is the way to go, I think racing on bigger tracks that can accommodate large fields would be a better solution to the Problem


Just sell the Valley(and maybe even Caulfield) and better utilise the funds elsewhere.....big spacious tracks is the answer and they have them!.....and Pete could get some rest and give us a break
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-27, 09:44 PM

Punters are vulnerable

...................... most are addicted to betting on Saturday.

RVL taking advantage of addicts is to be deplored.

Addicted punters will roll up to be exploited........  ending  their exploitation depends on RVL deciding to not exploit them.

Imagine if Judge Hayne investigated RVL after he has finished with the banks.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Aug-29, 09:49 PM


A story in two halves

The Saturday MN races seem to have settled on a rough run early ahead of favoured runners taking the quadrella.

On Saturday the rail is out 6m -- handicap races 3&4, over 1400m at Caulfield, with fields of 13 and 16 look risky.

Punters will struggle to cope with capacity fields in most races.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-07, 11:22 AM

Culling inflated fields

The consequences of paying generous prize-money for running 10th are ever more evident.

Race 8 at Rosehill -- a BM88 over 1100m -- has 16 starters and half of those are listed with pre-post odds of 25/1 and more.

Race 2 -- a Highway Robbery over 1200m -- has 17 of the 20 acceptors still in the field and 10 of those are 25/1 or more in the pre-post market.

Surely fair play demands that, for fields of more than 10 acceptors, those unable to be given any meaningful chance should be scratched -- i.e. if their SP with 10 minutes to go is 25/1 or more they just go home.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Sep-07, 02:38 PM
I got it, Pete I know how to solve your problem of roughies getting in the way......campaign for a rule where Bookies can't put up odds over 9/1.....problem solved! and Punters like you would never know they were being screwed.....they still couldn't win....but at least you would be a happy loser, eh Pete?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-07, 06:41 PM

Surely fair play demands that, for fields of more than 10 acceptors, those unable to be given any meaningful chance should be scratched -- i.e. if their SP with 10 minutes to go is 25/1 or more they just go home.

Ducking hell! That’s the biggest brain fart you’ve ever come up with

You’re clueless   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-08, 06:04 PM
Culling inflated fields

The consequences of paying generous prize-money for running 10th are ever more evident.

Race 8 at Rosehill -- a BM88 over 1100m -- has 16 starters and half of those are listed with pre-post odds of 25/1 and more.

Race 2 -- a Highway Robbery over 1200m -- has 17 of the 20 acceptors still in the field and 10 of those are 25/1 or more in the pre-post market.

Surely fair play demands that, for fields of more than 10 acceptors, those unable to be given any meaningful chance should be scratched -- i.e. if their SP with 10 minutes to go is 25/1 or more they just go home.

Well Mair, you got it wrong again  :sad:

Favourites saluted in both those races at Rosehill

Punters went home happy again :thumbsup:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2018-Sep-08, 09:38 PM
WOD when you argue with morons they will drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.........Pete has plenty of Moron experience
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-12, 09:51 PM

The rot has set in

Across Sydney and Melbourne on Saturday there are simply too many acceptors hoping to run 10th at worst.

These horses should not be accepted to compete if they are not there to win with a realistic chance.

Consider race 4 at Flemington -- 16 inexperienced 3 yro colts have accepted -- half the field is at pre-post odds suggesting 'no chance' and most of those have drawn the barriers closer to the inside.

The clear pre-post favourite -- Brutal -- has the right connections  --  is 2 from 2  -- has drawn 1 -- is expected to lead throughout -- and may well start odds-on.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-13, 08:41 AM
The rot has set in

Across Sydney and Melbourne on Saturday there are simply too many acceptors hoping to run 10th at worst.

These horses should not be accepted to compete if they are not there to win with a realistic chance.

Consider race 4 at Flemington -- 16 inexperienced 3 yro colts have accepted -- half the field is at pre-post odds suggesting 'no chance' and most of those have drawn the barriers closer to the inside.

The clear pre-post favourite -- Brutal -- has the right connections  --  is 2 from 2  -- has drawn 1 -- is expected to lead throughout -- and may well start odds-on.

Peter
Expand on this and tell us before the race the horses names that you consider should not be in this field
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2018-Sep-13, 08:47 AM
The rot has set in

Across Sydney and Melbourne on Saturday there are simply too many acceptors hoping to run 10th at worst.

These horses should not be accepted to compete if they are not there to win with a realistic chance.

Consider race 4 at Flemington -- 16 inexperienced 3 yro colts have accepted -- half the field is at pre-post odds suggesting 'no chance' and most of those have drawn the barriers closer to the inside.

The clear pre-post favourite -- Brutal -- has the right connections  --  is 2 from 2  -- has drawn 1 -- is expected to lead throughout -- and may well start odds-on.

Talk about lies, lies, lies & damn statistics.

16 horse field (1 scr)

$2.40 fav draw 1 (more than 40%)

Only two other horses under double figures - both drawn inside 9 (5 & 8 respectively)

Every horse drawn wider is double figures.

Simple facts don't back up your argument Pete  :no:

It's all good to have a rant Pete but at least be factual  :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-13, 09:12 AM

Simple facts don't back up your argument Pete  :no:

It's all good to have a rant Pete but at least be factual  :bulb:

Exactly why I challenge him in most of his posts

Even when he may have a valid point he backs it up with his lies and runs for the hills

His philosophy is that if you throw enough mud and lies some of it will stick. It’s clearly working on authorized  :sad:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-13, 09:21 AM
For what it’s worth I have a black booked horse in the 4th race. It’s massive odds. Not sure if I’ll back it or not
This is a high quality race with plenty of depth and should not be dismissed.
Plenty of value that will surprise those who are incapable of reading a form guide

I look forward to pegasybers pc thoughts on the race
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-15, 12:40 PM
Quote from: Peter Mair on September 12, 2018, 22:51:13
The rot has set in

Across Sydney and Melbourne on Saturday there are simply too many acceptors hoping to run 10th at worst.

These horses should not be accepted to compete if they are not there to win with a realistic chance.

Consider race 4 at Flemington -- 16 inexperienced 3 yro colts have accepted -- half the field is at pre-post odds suggesting 'no chance' and most of those have drawn the barriers closer to the inside.

The clear pre-post favourite -- Brutal -- has the right connections  --  is 2 from 2  -- has drawn 1 -- is expected to lead throughout -- and may well start odds-on.

Peter
Expand on this and tell us before the race the horses names that you consider should not be in this field

Oeter, I note you have failed to address this simple and polite question

One can only assume your waiting to contribute with 5he value of hindsight to make it easier for you to manufacture a scenario to suit your bent :chin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-15, 04:44 PM
Well peter.
Your concerns failed to matetialise  again.
Predictable results with punters winning again in a trouble free race
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-18, 05:47 PM


Chief steward appointed


Racing Victoria has confirmed Terry Bailey’s former deputy Robert Cram as the state’s new chief steward.

“I’m looking forward to helping each member of the panel continue to develop, while ensuring that we oversee safe, fair, clean and competitive racing for all participants across the state and for all punters betting on our racing,” Cram said.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-24, 06:07 PM

Reflect on Saturday -- low-grade and inflated fields

The 'worst' F4 dividends declared on Saturday were $75,000, 65,000 and 15,000.

The 75k was for the 1500m highway-robbery Race  2 in Sydney  -- 17 accepted, 13 started in a 'rural benchmark 60' event -- this is a warning for the Kosciusko-kaper in mid-October.

The 65k and 14k were for two 1,400m races at Caulfield  --  events notorious for rough results (as are 1400m events at Flemington.)

The 65k rort over 1400m was again effectively a BM 65  race for 3yro fillies -- this race should not have been run.

Melbourne metropolitan racing remains rough because of the inflated fields racing on tracks with problems.

It was pleasing that 7 of the 9 races at Rosehill 10 or less starters -- at Caulfield only 2 of the 9 had 10 or less.

......... the portents heading into a sprung RVL carnival are not good.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-24, 06:24 PM
No rough results on Saturday. Favoured runners dominated.
Punters happy :bop:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-24, 06:32 PM
As to the BM65, here’s s a link to educate yourself
Sadly I jumped in on the early markets and got unders to what she started at :sad:

https://www.racing.com/form/2018-08-25/moonee-valley/race/3


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: pegasyber on 2018-Sep-24, 07:25 PM
  Not too much wrong with Caulfield Race 8  on 22/09/2018 The Sir Rupert Clarke Stakes, over 1400 metres  and a crowded field.  Sure the favourite # 2 was a manufactured incorrect favourite, and that is why one must take full notice of the FORM.

 * VF140817 CF82209F * RACE NAME ID* [ CF82209F  2018. SIR RUPERT CLARKE STAKES,,,,,, 1400 mtrs]. COMPRUN 09-22-2018. AT 08:34:23 RESULT  [    1  10  8  2   ~    4  12    ] F4 $15,832.  # 1 $13.70 win.
 VF140817 CF82209F * SPD ORD TABNO [    4    1    3   12   16   13    9    8   15    5   11   10    2   14    7   ] T5 HI HIT. USE SPD UPTO 1450m
VF140817 CF82209F * SPD RATNG ORD [  999  977  966  962  962  942  924  912  912  910  906  894  890  878  845  ] /1. IN SPEED ORDER
VF140817 CF82209F * AT TRK n DIST SPD [ RW14 AV12 RW12 DB13 RW20 DB20 FL14 MV12 MV12 CF14 CF14 CF14 AV16 CF14 FL16  ] IN SPD ORD*
VF140817 CF82209F * RQOD SPD RORD [  5.4   6.8   8.7   9.5   9.5   15.2   26.2  40.3  40.3  44.6  50.2  78.2  89.8  126.1  321.2  ] $PRICE/1 CALCULATED RQD ODDS IN RATING ORDER *
VF140817 CF82209F * AVAL ODDS FIXD[                                                                                               ] MANUALLY KEY IN FIXED PRICES SPEED RATING ORDER
VF140817 CF82209F * WMSPD ORD TNO [     4     16     12      1      3     13      9     11     15      5     10      8     14      2      7     ]  * ] BMVRS/W [  ]*SPL*
VF140817 CF82209F * WMSPD RTG ORD [  1022   996   992   987   979   972   961   946   945   940   937   935   915   890   875   ] IMPORTANT
VF140817 CF82209F * RQOD WMSPD RO [  5.7   7.9   8.7   9.8   11.6   13.7   18.7   31   32   39.7   46.4   49.3   104.3   221.6   332.8   ] IN WMSPD ORDER. $PRICE/1 CALCULATED RQD ODDS ON WT MODIFIED SPEED RATINGS *
VF140817 CF82209F * FXD ODDS AVAIL[   6  15  23  13  23  13  34  61  9  26  21  5  71  5  31  ]  FIXED ODDS AVAILABLE IN WMSPD ORDER

VF140817 CF82209F * GW$CLASS$ ORD [   3    13    1    16    15    8    9    2    12    5    14    11    4    10    7   ].  2 HOME O 14d  100m -.5k  ---  7y]  [ 8 LAND O 14d  200m -3k  ---  5y]  [ 3 SHOWTI 21d  0m -2k  4y]  [ 13 OREGON 21d  0m -4k  5y.
   
  * No 1  Jungle Cat was the Knowledge Base ( or  Mechanical Method )  Win selection in PP7's competition and available on the Forum well before the race was run.   

VF140817 CF82209F * KEY SPEED NOS [   1   +!. +I/C. +GW!. =*NK*.  .]>1.  4   +!.  5    7   +!.  8   +!.  +TJ!. 9   +I/C. +TJ!. 10   +!.  12   +!. +I/C. +TJ!. 13   +I/C. +GW!. +TJ!. 14   +!.  +TJ!. 16   +I/C. +GW!.] +!. =LRWD ]. *HiWM>GW$C [ < 2 +!. <. < 8 +TJ!.  +!. < ]. *N1/2W<<SP= 3  13  << 1  4  7  8  10  12  14  5  <<=BDUPL. *BP%P*= 4 <: ]. <<] S/WDual IS [ 1  1 kg. ] *

RESULT [   1  10  8  2   ~    4  12  ]    # 4 *!MUST KEEP!*d. # 1 *!MUST KEEP!*d. # 12 *!MUST KEEP!*d. # 2 *!MUST KEEP!*d. # 8 *!MUST KEEP!*d. SPCL TR/JK/COMBOS [  8  9  11 12 13 14 15 16 ] DBL CHK *HI$E=[ # 1 ] JUNGLE CAT]. *SCNDHI$E=[ # 7 ] HELLOVA ST}.  <<GW1+  [ 3 13 1 16 15 ]* LRWDV= [ 4  1  7  12  2  8  . +A= LR7D [ 10 ].  . +A= LR7D [ 14 ].  ] I/CCL=[  16  12  1  3  13  9  DUPGWPAC=[  1  5  8  9  13  14  15  ].* MKUP [  0   @ $ 0 ]** * INSURANCE VAL[  0 0 FXD= $0.  0 FXD= $0.] BET NOW! * VALUNOS [  ]* * T5TTLMVS[ 8 14 5 9 10   A S/A. DBLCHK TJC]. *LR7DS=[  10 6yo  14 6yo  ] *CRUSHD=[  7 2  8  10  15  ] ESP*[ 1  4  7  8  10  12  14  5  ]*]. * SPLRESIDS [ ** [  1  2  4  5  7  8  9  10  12  14  15  ] ** CONSIDER NSW/VIC TAB F4S + *SUPASPL [ 0  0kg ]. *BMVRDPL= 1  4  7  8  10  12  14  5  ***  RUN END NORMALLY  ***. CALC TIME=  2.4 Secs.

   Based on the very basic information not even requiring a computer to derive, just look at the Must Keep  selections:  # 4 comes fifth,  #  1  Wins, # 12 comes sixth,  # 2 comes fourth and # 8  comes  third and one of the two "seven days to last run" horses # 10 comes second.  The computer had rightly removed # 7  being an 8 year old and having one other problematic item of data as well, that made its selection marginal.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-24, 10:14 PM

Having a lend of the punters

One can only pray for what the 'pega' says to be published on Friday with the names of the horses.

One can also only pray that the wily one gets the same newspaper on Sunday that we all get.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-25, 07:15 AM
Did you look at the link?

It was there for all to see many days before the race. In fact the printed form even alerted you to it but many chose to ignore it.
Di$ you do any form on the race peter?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: pegasyber on 2018-Sep-25, 07:43 AM
  Peter, This was the information I was pointing to, and even here under the concept of a "mechanical Method"
 inflexible selection, only got one winner in four.
Quote
Online pegasyber
Group 2
User 909
Posts: 1453


Send PM
« 2018-Sep-22, 07:56 AM Reply #126 »
 Computer "Mechanical System" picks.

SR4  # 6 Sin To Win
SR6  # 3 Dixie Blossoms
SR7  # 6  Santos
MR8 # 1  Jungle Cat
   Still unsure as to whether one can be or remain profitable over the long term from this form of gambling. 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Sep-27, 08:29 PM

Sunday bloody Sunday?

One can only wonder why RVL would allow four races to be run over 1400 m at Caulfield on Saturday.

Race 2, with only 10 acceptors, is rated 'no bet' by PDC -- the others have inflated fields,  14, 16 and 16 acceptors.

What do you think will be the outcome?

Refresh your memory of the 1400m races run on this day last year.

[P.S.    ....... do not forget the valley of tears on 'no moir' stakes night -- the favourites ran well last year.

Tomorrow night, there 6 even money favourites, one at 2/1  and race 6 is more open.]






Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Sep-28, 07:45 AM
What’s wrong with race 2?

Just happens to be a race where one of the bets if the day is taking part :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-01, 10:36 AM
Sunday bloody Sunday?


Race 2, with only 10 acceptors, is rated 'no bet' by PDC -- the others have inflated fields,  14, 16 and 16 acceptors.

What do you think will be the outcome?



What’s wrong with race 2?

Just happens to be a race where one of the bets if the day is taking part :bulb:

Well the outcome was that Mair failed to answer a fair, reasonable & polite question to his thought fart above.

The other outcome is that he got it wrong again and as predicted the bet of the day saluted :no1:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-01, 07:01 PM

........... there is one certain bet every time

I do not think TWOne named the bet of the day in race 2 until today and then only indirectly, claiming it won.

No real complaints about Underwood day but the F4 for the overcrowded 1400 for 3yros paid $16,000.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-01, 07:35 PM
........... there is one certain bet every time

I do not think TWOne named the bet of the day in race 2 until today and then only indirectly, claiming it won.




Why in gods name would I tip it to you but if you have the balls to go and look you will see the following from the TAB tipping Comp thread. You know, thats the thread that you dont even bother contributing the forum on you ferking sponge.
I will await your apology re your bullshit claim that  I didn't tip it :o

MR2 #2 Cliffs Edge :thumbsup:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-01, 09:08 PM


Do not worry about being right even on the odd occasion

                                                                 ........it is an experience I have repeatedly
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-01, 09:12 PM
Not around here old fruit :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-04, 08:14 PM

OKTOBER FEST  -- WHAT AWAITS?

Rain and low-grade racing has put an end to the Sydney spring carnival -- rain or not the prospect of a capacity field in the BM 78 last race at Randwick is an affront to punters.

There is still some banjo-picken hype to come for the mountain races next week but u no.

The focus shifts to Melbourne.

One risk best avoided again this year is wasting form-study time on Friday nights trying to win on sucker-bait at the Valley of tears -- slow-learners will open the MV form guide and get done.

The Flemington program for Saturday has some highlights -- and a couple of low ones.

Race 4 over 1800m for 3ryos has 16 without the four emergencies.

Race 8 over 1600m for 3yro fillies has 16 before scratchings.

Race 9 over 1400 m for mares still has 15 listed to start.

Whether these races warrant 'listed' and 'group' status -- or not -- may be clarified.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-06, 08:58 PM


No complaints

When both MN quadrellas pay no more than $200, the races ran true to form.

MONTY never went beyond his top 3 to get the BSUX paying $1,700.

Even so the 'worst' F4 outcomes  were in the nominated 4th and 9th races ($2.8k and 1.9k)

Sydney was spoiled by a heavy track.

[The outcomes for the Vale-of-tears on Friday were predictably rough -- do not bet on Friday nights, it wastes your time and your money.]
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-26, 02:25 PM


Double header monster events at the Valley

Do not forget last year -- the quaddies on the Friday paid $2,000 and $5,000 respectively  and on Saturday the early quaddie paid $19,000.

Capacity fields again this year on the tight Valley track do not bode well.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-27, 05:58 PM



And so it cam to pass, again

The punters were monstered again, as usual, at the Valley of tears.

Few TAB punters would be pleased with the results of the races at the Valley last night and today.

Running overcrowded races run on a tight track is simply unfair  -- as reflected in the dividends paid for First4 bets averaging some $5,000 today and not a lot less last night.

The next time RVL proclaims 'integrity' just roll your eyes and remember the way inflating fields and turnover harms the most loyal customers and sets the game up for exploitation by corporates and subsidized syndicates.

 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2018-Oct-27, 06:39 PM


And so it cam to pass, again

The punters were monstered again, as usual, at the Valley of tears.

Few TAB punters would be pleased with the results of the races at the Valley last night and today.

Running overcrowded races run on a tight track is simply unfair  -- as reflected in the dividends paid for First4 bets averaging some $5,000 today and not a lot less last night.

The next time RVL proclaims 'integrity' just roll your eyes and remember the way inflating fields and turnover harms the most loyal customers and sets the game up for exploitation by corporates and subsidized syndicates.

Pete - can you please explain your theory here please  :what:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 10:54 AM



exploitation by corporates and subsidized syndicates.....can you please explain your theory here please

A fuller story was in the copy of the DOJ submission posted on 9 August -- these extracts may help.

bookmakers prefer ‘rough results’

The advent of ‘off course’ bookmakers led to TABs offering ‘fixed odds’ betting.

The recent consolidation of bookmaking into fixed-odds TAB options and a couple of local corporates, leaves predators protected.

Corporates (including TABs) writing ‘fixed odds’ tickets have a strong preference for ‘rough results’ – for ‘taking the lot’.

It is no wonder that corporates sponsor ‘inflated field’ racing and advertise prominently, subsidizing racing media.

This is not a good look at all.


crushed totes and plundered pools


Most punters placing small bets are betting into tote pools – also attracted to tote pools are better informed insiders denied access to fixed-odds bets.

With tote pools as a last resort it is common for smart money coming late to crush dividends paid to most punters.

Coupling a big tote pool on the Victorian quadrella – some $5 million nationally – with the prospect of even one rough result, is an attraction for syndicate betting – large bets ‘covering the field’.

Coupling rough results with big-bet rebates is not a good look either.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2018-Oct-28, 12:32 PM
Of course bookmakers prefer rough results but that has nothing to do with some pie in the sky thought of 'exploitation' care to explain how they exploit this?

Bookies prefer rough results as the days of framing a traditional 'book' across the whole field are long gone  :bulb:

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 01:13 PM


.......... you may be missing the main point

The problem is about RVL inflating field sizes to boost turnover at the expense of a fair race and so exploiting most punters.

However the markets are framed, the risk of rough results and (bookie_take-all) increases with the size of the field -- more so on 'tight' tracks and in races where 'barrier positions' can be critical (e.g. 1400m at C and F).

There is a naturel cartel in the interests the administrators, TABs,  fixed-odds bookmakers and  politicians -- but no 'free press' to investigate and expose it.

.......as for rebates to syndicates betting big into tote pools -- that is plainly offensive.

   
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2018-Oct-28, 01:22 PM
Um, no. I'm not missing the point, you are failing to grasp that no one is being exploited due to the random nature of the event.

Exploited - "make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand"

Please tell me how this is unfair or underhanded?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-28, 01:38 PM

.......... you may be missing the main point

The problem is about RVL inflating field sizes to boost turnover at the expense of a fair race and so exploiting most punters.


Punters have no interest in your bleatings about small size fields.
They want bigger fields where better pay outs are realised.

The fact that the 15 horse MV Cup had 460k bet on the win tote compared to the 8 horse cox plate field which was 360k proves this

Small fields are putrid and stink.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Antitab# on 2018-Oct-28, 02:07 PM
Pete

I haven’t found a bookie that won at the Valley yesterday.

Favourites won races 1, 6,7 and 9 with the three other than Winx  all  very well supported. Cliffs edge was 5 into 2.90.

Race 8 Ventura Storm was $16 into $5.50 , so punters won that one.

Races 2,3 & 4 were good for bookies but the winners ranged from $8 to $13 so they weren’t unfindable.

Race 5 could have gone either way.

Bookies got the lot in the last but Three year old rising in trip often throws up big price winners as those that can stay come to the fore.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-28, 02:50 PM
Come on Anti  According to Mair all those well backed runners were due to inside traders and nothing to do with form   :lol:   :lol:

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 04:31 PM

A horse race is a difference of soundly based opinion  -- it is not a chocolate-wheel pick-any-number game.

................you are failing to grasp that no one is being exploited due to the random nature of the event.

how this is unfair or underhanded?


The outcome of a race should not be a random event -- the expectation of the outcome, as expressed in the SP market, is based on the form guide and there are enough uncertainties in that analysis to satisfy most.

The measure of the integrity of the races being run lies in the outcomes being consistent with the market.

Races being run by RVL fail this test when they should be the most likely to pass it -- as history tells.

The game is up when the run of the race is disrupted by horses hoping to run 10th and the cluttering of the field denies the horses there to win a fair go.

This is among the many things that a royal commission would uncover about the misconduct of racing.

The misconduct arises in the coincidence of interests of politicians ,administrators and betting operators and syndicates. This coalition is pitted against the interests of most punters sensibly betting on their opinion but risking an unfair race when fields are inflated with 'troublemakers' hoping to run 10th.

That is what a royal commission would find - that the customers are being exploited by the administrators.



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 04:39 PM



........ and it becomes 'underhanded' when those same administrators are so loudly proclaiming a commitment to 'integrity'  -- something which is not reflected in too many races run on the terms they dictate.

The punters are told one thing and are getting another -- and that deception is underhanded.

The races are not being run fairly -- Cup Week is almost upon us and just wait for that to unfold, as it has in recent years, with rough outcomes .
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 04:59 PM


I do not think so -- rather it illustrates another unfairness

Race 8 Ventura Storm was $16 into $5.50 , so punters won that one.

There was something going on with the Venturra and in Sydney with Gitan -- while not a complete secret both firmed dramatically from the mid-week and morning markets.

Firming from 15/1 to 5/1 is indicative of a bit of a sting  -- the form guides said 'no'.

These are matters the stewards should investigate -- who knew 'what' when and who told them 'what' -- and why was the market generally informed.

Stings like this are considered part of the 'entitlement' of owning and training -- but it becomes something else when the mugs only get the message when the race is about to start and their die is cast.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Antitab# on 2018-Oct-28, 05:16 PM
A horse race is a difference of soundly based opinion  -- it is not a chocolate-wheel pick-any-number game.



Pete

You fail to understand pricing and the market place.

Supply and demand creates the Starting price.

The last winner at MV was 50-1, so ignoring margin the market says that  if you run that race 100 times it will win twice.

Conversely the favourite started 2/1. So it wins that. Race 33 times in every 100.

This isn’t a chocolate wheel, this is a reasonably sophisticated market place that astute punters including syndicates but also including plenty who post here spend 100’s if hours trying to beat.

Plenty succeed.

Until you understand that simple premise I’d suggest the chocolate wheel is where you should spend your disposable income.


At least you will only lose 3 or 4% of your turnover .






Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Wenona on 2018-Oct-28, 05:23 PM
Pete

You fail to understand pricing and the market place.

Supply and demand creates the Starting price.

The last winner at MV was 50-1, so ignoring margin the market says that  if you run that race 100 times it will win twice.

Conversely the favourite started 2/1. So it wins that. Race 33 times in every 100.

This isn’t a chocolate wheel, this is a reasonably sophisticated market place that astute punters including syndicates but also including plenty who post here spend 100’s if hours trying to beat.


Overall I think racehorse betting markets are a thing of beauty - their efficiency on a broad scale never ceases to amaze me.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 05:31 PM

A royal commission will not be re-playing races one-by-one

The decisions will be based on large numbers that will attest to the overall fairness of markets -- but less so in recent years as inflated fields have taken their toll.

........that will be one important finding.

The commission will also look at 'outliers' and the explanations for that -- one outlier that will be addressed is Prince of Penzance -- explained by an inflated field of good horses blocked for a run (a dynamite finding --see above).

...........and some will be found to know too much too often.



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-28, 06:42 PM

I do not think so -- rather it illustrates another unfairness

Race 8 Ventura Storm was $16 into $5.50 , so punters won that one.

There was something going on with the Venturra and in Sydney with Gitan -- while not a complete secret both firmed dramatically from the mid-week and morning markets.

Firming from 15/1 to 5/1 is indicative of a bit of a sting  -- the form guides said 'no'.



The form guides did not say no.

Your lack of doing form said no to your pea brain. In fact the form guide gave you a great push for Ventura Storm.

2 runs back it beaten 1.9  lengths behind a promising horse called WINX :bulb:
In the Caulfield Cup the form comment told you “worked home in 2nd best last 200m split“ :bulb:



Horse being wrongly priced by people incapable of doing form, like yourself, is the reason they firm.
Did you even look at the form for both of those?

What about the great Star Fortune who paid $12 a place on a Friday night. Smart punters cleaned up on it.....did u?

I can talk you through it as well as the other plunge horse Cliffs Edge.
Just ask instead of manufacturing lies :chin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Wenona on 2018-Oct-28, 07:39 PM
Let me apologize first as I know claiming winners after the event is seen as poor form on the forum ... but I have to post my Betfair page for the last in Melbourne for Pete ......
      
Horse Racing > MVal (AUS) 27th Oct : R10 2040m Grp2Showing 1 - 6 of 6 Selections     
Selection OddsStake($)Bid typePlacedProfit/loss($)
10. Stars Of Carrum  50.005.00Back27/10/2018 16:37245.00
10. Stars Of Carrum  120.005.00Back27/10/2018 16:47595.00
10. Stars Of Carrum  120.006.00Back27/10/2018 16:34714.00
2. Outrageous  44.0015.00Back27/10/2018 16:37-15.00
8. Approach Discreet  30.005.00Back27/10/2018 16:47-5.00
8. Approach Discreet  27.0015.00Back27/10/2018 16:35-15.00
*Average odds: On Off    Back subtotal:1,519.00
     Lay subtotal:0
     Market subtotal:1,519.00
     Commission @ 5.4%:82.03
     Net Market Total:1,436.97
      


If I had to give you one piece of advise Pete, it would be stop thinking that you should or have to back the horse you think has the highest chance of winning.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-28, 08:48 PM


Well done W............... at 50/1 ........ very few 'professionals' had the insight and confidence you had
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Wenona on 2018-Oct-28, 09:08 PM
The insight isn't I thought it was very likely to win. I didn't think any of the three I backed were very likely to win. I thought the favourite was the most likely to win, I simply thought the odds offered on the three I backed were out of kilter with the probability they could win. Also your perceived probability of a horses winning chances don't necessarily need to to be founded in it's last couple of runs or the opinion of others.  It can be founded on older form, form around specific variables or even imaginings of future possibilities.

That's why the majority of people on this forum love punting so much. Form analysis opens up a myriad of knowns, unknowns and possibilities. Grappling with those things and forming independent opinions about how they should influence your betting is one of the most enjoyable things I've done in my life. You should try it.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2018-Oct-28, 09:33 PM
Also your perceived probability of a horses winning chances don't necessarily need to to be founded in it's last couple of runs or the opinion of others.  It can be founded on older form, form around specific variables or even imaginings of future possibilities.


I don't make a habit of backing 10 year olds but had something on Who Shot Thebarman yesterday based on the premise of how he's raced at MV in the past and more specifically how he's gone in that race the last 2 years  :bulb:

I know he didn't win but gee it was a great run against the leader bias

On face value of the form guide you wouldn't have looked twice.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2018-Oct-28, 09:51 PM

That's why the majority of people on this forum love punting so much. Form analysis opens up a myriad of knowns, unknowns and possibilities. Grappling with those things and forming independent opinions about how they should influence your betting is one of the most enjoyable things I've done in my life. You should try it.

This.

Peter. Find your positive mojo. Have some fun for chrissake  :yes:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: ratsack on 2018-Oct-28, 10:19 PM
A horse race is a difference of soundly based opinion  -- it is not a chocolate-wheel pick-any-number game.



The outcome of a race should not be a random event -- the expectation of the outcome, as expressed in the SP market, is based on the form guide and there are enough uncertainties in that analysis to satisfy most.

The measure of the integrity of the races being run lies in the outcomes being consistent with the market.




1. correct , if you can 't do the form correctly you lose
2.horses are animals and therefore are the same as humans , they feel off , they may have a headache etc etc etc
another thing to add to the interest of having a punt , in other words bad luck
3.if that was the case all favorites would win and the industry would die

not sure of the figures but I think in 100 years of racing 33% of favs win and I don't think this has varied much in that time frame
at all tracks   
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-29, 06:09 AM
I don't make a habit of backing 10 year olds but had something on Who Shot Thebarman yesterday based on the premise of how he's raced at MV in the past and more specifically how he's gone in that race the last 2 years  :bulb:

I know he didn't win but gee it was a great run against the leader bias

On face value of the form guide you wouldn't have looked twice.


Close to the run of the day imho
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-29, 06:11 AM

Also your perceived probability of a horses winning chances don't necessarily need to to be founded in it's last couple of runs or the opinion of others.  It can be founded on older form, form around specific variables or even imaginings of future possibilities.

That's why the majority of people on this forum love punting so much. Form analysis opens up a myriad of knowns, unknowns and possibilities.

Grappling with those things and forming independent opinions about how they should influence your betting is one of the most enjoyable things I've done in my life. You should try it.


 :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Oct-30, 12:52 PM

Profits before People

The land of a fair go is slowly submerging under the weight of administrators chasing a buck

The banking royal commission has exposed gross breaches of trust once banks put 'profits before people' -- and that theme quickly extended to insurance and superannuation and mortgage broking.

Much the same it seems in 'aged care', power prices and fuel prices.

This morning the 'real state premier' was waxing lyrical on 2GruB about the way administrators had similarly corrupted the iconic examples of ethical conduct -- 'rugby' and 'cricket'.

It is probably too much to expect that he will similarly see the ever more evident outcome of racing administrators inflating race fields with runners that will be pleased to run 10th.

-------------- he is even unlikely to see that the racing media is so beholden to racing money as to precluded any protest. 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Oct-30, 01:16 PM
Quote from: Peter Mair on October 01, 2018, 10:41:04
Humidor a lay

.........first, thanks for the Deano link.

There was a reason for Humidor to be prepared to win first up over an unsuitable distance -- that may well have been its run for the season,  unlikely to be repeated.



You used Humidors first up win to try and justify a belief you had formed.
It hit you on the arse. You were proven wrong.

Well, his first up effort was repeated and you were wrong again

It’s a fact. Twist it how your like but nothing will change. You were wrong.
You’re allowed to be wrong but most of  us, when we are wrong, have the balls to admit it.

Your ego apparently doesn’t
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-01, 06:20 PM


Big week coming up


..........tighten the seat belt and bet up.................inflated field racing will be educational.

.............................. check out what happened on Derby day last year --  it was disgraceful

                   https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2017-11-04/FLEMINGTON/M/R/9/Win

The quadrellas paid $7,500 and $2,800  --  'lowest' F4 was $4,600 and the highest $100,000 --the four 'lowest' F4s averaged $6,000 and the four 'highest' (excluding the 100k) $14,000.

.....those that go for broke are likely to succeed.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-03, 06:04 PM



.....those that go for broke are likely to succeed.


The issue is about 'overcrowded and inflated fields' and the caution was well warranted -- the last four races, each had fields of 16+

The quaddie paid $50,000 and the four F4s paid 90k, 40k, 8k, and 11k.

...........this is a disg-race  --------- RVL  winning at all costs

[Hold on to your hat -- there is another 3 days of this nonsense to go  -- Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.]
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-04, 09:40 AM


Have a go on Tuesday at Flemington -- and just keep going anywhere


It is now odds-on to rain enough to ensure a slow track.

10 races with chocabloc fields including 3 over 1400 with 16 starters and 3 straight-track sprints -- not forgetting the big-one with 24 starters of which most are not really known imports and a few are unknown fly-ins.

Race 6 and the 3 final races challenge the credibility of 'listed' and 'group 3' status.

For most regular punters it is one of the worst days ..........even once-were-sponsors are deserting RVL

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-06, 07:18 PM


Monty is my monitor

On Cup day in MN he was on the money until race 6 -- and then it unraveled.

The F4 dividends for the last 5 races 6 to 10 averaged some $30,000 and the quadrella paid $25,000.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-06, 07:32 PM

Once-were-sponsors

Why are the sponsors taking their bat and ball home?

The choker on the racing media precludes any comment on the reasons why once-were-sponsors have pulled the rug.

Even so we know sponsors are alert to the value of their funding and would be doing market research to keep track of community attitudes to 'racing' and 'once-were-icon' events.

The racing media should be right on to this -- and the alert was there when Lexus 'was not' and then 'was again' the sponsor of the 'Hotham Handicap' on derby day.

........who thinks Lexus paid the same as before to be enticed to allow its name to be 'used' again?

The racing media are not 'encouraged' to ask these questions.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-08, 05:35 PM


Another rough day at the orifice on hoax day -- and another looms for Saturday


Like klok-work the evidence of klok administration inflating fields rolls in.

Six clearly inflated-field races today returned F4 dividends fairly called an 'outrageous reflection on RVL administrtators.

In order, from Race 2 with 15 starters returning a $27,000 F4 -- Race 5 (16) $2,800  -- Race 6 (15) $44,000 -- Race 7 (13) $7,500 -- Race 8 (15)  $90,000 and Race 10 (17) $60,000

................and the quadrella paid $45,000.

Beware of Saturday -- the kloks have got a squirrel grip on the punters with inflated field races -- not least a 1400m with 16 three year olds accepted.

...........the klok work will unfold.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-08, 06:28 PM


RVL plays dirty-pool with the punters

Race 9 on Saturday is a BM 80 down the straight 1100m with 20 accepting and 16 to start.

Why would the klokers do this -- except to take every last buck they can?

This is the assessment of punters.com:

Nice of the VRC to leave the hardest race of the carnival til last! This looks a near-impossible race to 'get out' on and if you're alive in the quaddie, you would want to have some decent coverage. With little to no confidence...........

Nothing would really surprise here.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-09, 03:47 PM


THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR

Notwithstanding that the fields were smaller, about 12 at most, the quadrellas paid $2,500 and $8,000  --   the F4s over 8 races averaged $8,000 -- with much bigger fields, the portents are not good for tomorrow

 .....those that go for broke are likely to succeed.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-10, 06:04 PM

The MONTY monitor says OK

Monty included 7 of the 9 winners -- 4 on top and one each 3rd,  4th and 5th.

Even so the quadrella paid $24,000 and the F4s included dividends of 40k, 40k, 15k, 13k, and 7k.

Once again the 'cup week' has been a shocker for punters.

......... it is reasonable to say that the inflated fields deliver unfair racing -- and it is a short step to hoping RVL will aim to better balance the interests of most punters.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-12, 09:31 PM


Me-too, banking-too, cricket-too and racing-too

Cricketers, bankers need to stop 'winning at all costs', says rowing legend turned banker

............. Australian rowing legend James Tomkins, .... triple Olympic gold medallist ......his clients are financial advisers working for the big banks and financial services giants.

.................. asked by ABC News about how to fix rotten corporate culture, he preferred not to comment on specific companies...............general parallels between where things have gone wrong in business and sport.

    "When you start concentrating on outcomes at any cost that's where problems arise," he observed.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-13, 06:29 AM


    "When you start concentrating on outcomes at any cost that's where problems arise," he observed.[/i]


Oh the irony   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: bascoe on 2018-Nov-15, 10:39 AM

Oh the irony     :lol:  
Yes indeed -who would think punting on horses would involve predicting outcomes?
Suggestion to Magic - how about a PM thread so the non interested can skip the weekly homily ?


Sent from my iPhone using Racehorse Talk (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=90061)
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-15, 02:31 PM
Bascoe
I’ve sent a PM about PM to Magic but got no response. No5 sure he pays much attention to the joint anymore  :chin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-17, 07:33 PM

Another Saturday in Melbourne -- and another debacle for punters

The carnival is over with a big bang on the way out -- RVL has made a mockery of what was once the best racing in Australia.

Those still thinking that 'inflated fields' are good for them or good for racing need counseling.

Race 3 for 3yro fillies with 16 starters had a $50k F4 dividend and Race 4 -- a G3 with 10 starters -- paid $10k for the F4 -- and the early Q paid $5k.

Races 9 and 10 with 14 and 16 starters had F4 payouts of $25k and $75k -- and a $15k quadrella.

These were Listed and Group 3 races -- one can only wonder about the criteria that allows this' very black type' to continue.

......... and the 'stepford' commentators on R.Com keep smiling and assuring us what a great days racing we enjoyed.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: timw on 2018-Nov-17, 08:48 PM
In my opinion the joke is 2YO black type racing before Xmas.  The Merson Cooper (Listed) had 13 starters of which all were maidens and only 4 had ever faced the starter.  I haven't looked at recent winners but a quick flick through the last Miller's Guide (2014 results) suggests there has not been a classy winner since the early 1990s which is over 25 years ago.  I find it strange that we breed for speed but 2YO races have almost disappeared from the pre Xmas racing program.  There was no 2YO race in Sydney or Adelaide today.  Anywhere else?

Cheers
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: sobig on 2018-Nov-17, 09:43 PM
Brisbane and Perth both had a 2yo race today
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-18, 07:30 AM
Yogi. Tri $59 F4 $159
Cool Passion T$790
Fifty Stars T$31 F190
Ringerdingding T$39 F $290
The Taj Mahal T $88 F$395

Punters went home happy with another winning day. If you didn’t you need to give the punt up  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Nov-18, 07:38 AM
and Peter,

At least 3 times the forum has been alerted to the fact that the market had Cool Passion wrong in terms of price  - the winner of the roughest trifecta Wily mentioned............

 which also makes your claims of 'inside knowledge' a laughing stock.

Market waking up now but too late. Insights into 'market errors' and therefore profits probably beyond you.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-18, 07:52 AM
Highlighting Mairs dishonest approach to justifying his warped desire for minute field sizes, here are the approximate rankings for bets.
After a quick appraisal of the NSW pools It shows that punters don’t give a stuff about Mairs brain farts in regards to divvies of quaddies or F4s. They rank lowly in desired investments for punters

1. Win Betting
2. Place
3. Trifecta
4. Quinella
5.F4
6. Doubles
7. Quaddy
8. Exacta
9. Early Quaddy
10. Duet
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-18, 04:23 PM

Most punters betting on these four races yesterday were not happy at all.

Race 3 for 3yro fillies with 16 starters had a $50k F4 dividend and Race 4 -- a G3 with 10 starters -- paid $10k for the F4 -- and the early Q paid $5k. Races 9 and 10 with 14 and 16 starters had F4 payouts of $25k and $75k -- and a $15k quadrella.

These were races with unfairly inflated fields and three winners paying 30/1 +-- it is no answer to the problem in focus to list other races that ran fairly, where the favourites dominated.

......... it is not a one-off problem it is an entrenched problem that goes to the heart of the businesses exploiting the industry
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2018-Nov-18, 05:02 PM
Most punters betting on these four races yesterday were not happy at all.

Race 3 for 3yro fillies with 16 starters had a $50k F4 dividend and Race 4 -- a G3 with 10 starters -- paid $10k for the F4 -- and the early Q paid $5k. Races 9 and 10 with 14 and 16 starters had F4 payouts of $25k and $75k -- and a $15k quadrella.

These were races with unfairly inflated fields and three winners paying 30/1 +-- it is no answer to the problem in focus to list other races that ran fairly, where the favourites dominated.

......... it is not a one-off problem it is an entrenched problem that goes to the heart of the businesses exploiting the industry

Field sizes quoted above are a little out by my reckoning

The following Win totes and field sizes yesterday for Syd and Melb indicate to me that generally punters prefer larger fields.

A larger sample probably needs to be examined.

  Rosehill 17 Nov 2018   NSWTAB   
Race   Starters   
No   No   
1   7   $87,809.65
2   4   $43,267.00
3   11   $141,222.50
4   6   $121,696.80
5   7   $159,714.50
6   10   $184,465.00
7   12   $260,090.30
8   8   $212,432.35
9   12   $257,494.60
      
Sandown 17 Nov 2018   NSWTAB   
Race   Starters   
No   No   
1   11   $98,379.50
2   9   $117,240.20
3   15   $186,587.80
4   9   $163,937.70
5   11   $209,803.80
6   8   $167,574.30
7   12   $247,626.10
8   8   $252,667.40
9   13   $269,006.60
10   15   $281,586.40
   

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: arthur on 2018-Nov-18, 06:31 PM
They didn't teach statistics when I went to reform school, but to me it is intuitive . . if not axiomatic  :chin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-18, 06:43 PM
Thank you JWH -- you make my point well (as Arthur notes).

The whole point of inflating field sizes is about boosting turnover -- the bigger your sample the more the evidence will confirm this. With 'rough racing' punters have to cover much more 'luck in running'.

There are more relevant questions.

One is about about the association of inflated fields with 'rough results' -- as measured by the departure of TAB dividends from the expectations of the pre-post market.

Yesterday was illustrative as have been most days of the 'sprung carnival' -- inflating the fields, paying for 'cluttering appearances' , is a precursor to both 'higher turnover' and 'rough outcomes'. Cup day is notorious.

The beneficiaries of 'rough results' are firstly the 'can't lose' fixed-odds bookmakers, second the (mal)administrators getting more money for racing, third the rural beneficiaries of washing city money through non-viable rural racing interests, -- and the also-rans, including the politicians ensuring no kick-back in racing electorates and breeders and others claiming 'victories' that are effectively fraudulent.

...... if the banking royal commissioner even glanced at this systemic rorting of punters he would ask for a new brief.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2018-Nov-18, 07:03 PM
Peter

You don't  know, or seem willing to ignore, the fact that racehorse punters are, in the main, canny creatures.

Maybe you should turn your interests to alerting pokie players of how they are being duped.

 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-18, 07:50 PM


Again 'thanks' JWH -- for suggesting that racehorse punters are, in the main, canny creatures.

The evidence here is overwhelmingly against you.

The evidence is that 'in the main' , when fields are inflated, the punters bet more but are most likely to lose.

As for yesterday -- who do you think were the main beneficiaries of the 'rough results'  -- obviously not any few 'canny punters' but more likely fixed-odds bookmakers -- more obviously it was the syndicated betting operations that cleaned up on the 'lotto like' F4 and quadrella pools.

....inflated-field racing is a blight on the industry and sensible punters would be avoiding 'inflated field' races and concentrating on fair-fields.

----- the evidence you present more likely suggests exactly the opposite ... punters are not able to bet confidently.

Keep feeding me lines!

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: arthur on 2018-Nov-18, 09:54 PM
sensible punters would be avoiding 'inflated field' races and concentrating on fair-fields.

Some sensible punters do; and some sensible punters don't . . and some sensible punters do both

But the 'canny punters' always get value . . even though they don't always get winners

The lazy punters will always lose, no matter the field size . .  and you can't legislate against laziness or stupidity . . nor should you be able to




Take the last race at the Sunny Coast today . . was it an inflated field?? . . Your opinion is as good as mine

Did the Corps win on it?? Probably

But the 'early market correction' indicates that the 'canny punters' who shopped early got 51.0 about a horse which was returned @ 17.0

BTW . . I wasn't one of them, but I did get 51.0 about a horse that opened @ 17.0 and ran 4th or 5th . . and I think that I got 'value'


PS
The day that 'luck in running' ceases to play a part will see the end of racing as we know it

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Nov-18, 10:15 PM
Peter,

According to you a small field is a fair field so how do you explain how horses win at long odds in your so called fair field?

Remember you claim that rough odds mean its not fair as well so you cant have both contradicting each other surely?

Unless of course your logic is fatally flawed......

eg Karlovasi wins at 20/1 in an 8 horse field at Morphetville on Saturday.

Now Peter I can give you chapter and verse on why the 20/1 was a huge error in pricing but I will just start with something you almost certainly don't know but is available to all... if they would only do a little research.... when Jake Toeroeke jumps on a horse trained by R & C Jolly  the win strike rate AND place strike rate are BOTH higher than their overall career performances.....and both of those are just fine.

Peter did you even notice the fact there was a jockey change? Was it not for a much much much higher strike rate jockey for this trainer?

Once again Peter this is information available to ALL and once again your claims of 'inside knowledge' are a laughing stock.

Laziness..... Peter is the answer you put your head in the sand over.

And Peter this is only 1 point  - I could give you chapter and verse!
 
Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-19, 07:10 AM
Thank you JWH -- you make my point well (as Arthur notes).


I’m not sure if I should applaud or condemn your arrogance. You do it so well

  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-20, 10:48 PM

Sydney rules

The limits of 'relevant racing'

I pay no attention at all to any racing bar Saturday-class racing in Sydney and Melbourne -- and as readers know anything at all to do with Melbourne is about to join the rest of Australia in the bucket that says 'do not bet here'.

The idea that anyone would put a case based on 'racing' in Brisbane or Adelaide is beyond the pale of credibility.

Even in Sydney there are clear 'dont's' attaching to 2yro and 3yro races as well as any 'inflated fields' where horses finishing 10th are 'winners' for their connections.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2018-Nov-21, 12:25 AM
Peter,

The only credibility strained beyond hope is YOURS.

Roughies in small fields winning occurs everywhere.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Nov-21, 06:58 AM
And nobody wants to bet on small fields apart from Mairs professionals with the computer programs.....the people he constantly slags off.

It’s clear Mair doesn’t care about that the small punter, it’s about his own ego being heard :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Nov-30, 09:23 PM

A word about betting tomorrow -- DONT

........ off-season racing with inflated fields across the board means losses for almost every punter.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Dec-01, 09:09 AM
Cracking good racing across the country today.
Ascot and Brissy in particular
Got a few nice bets at the valley but need to see how the goat track is playing before unloading
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-06, 07:48 PM

What to pack for Pakenham -- money and courage

Consider what happened last year:

.........early and main quadrellas paying some $25k and $100k; and

.............overfull F4s including a $10, $15 and $30k and $60k on the Pak Cup.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-07, 09:21 PM

More tears at the Vale

When will RVL bite the bullet -- close the Valley and stop stealing from punters.

Apart from the quadrellas paying $ 6 and 8 k -- there were two F4s paying $13 and 14 k.

.... why does anyone bet on this nonsense?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-09, 08:03 AM

Pakenham......better this year but still not a fair day at the races

The quadrellas this year paid $800 and $3,000........... but  6 of the 9 F4s paid more than $3k --- including a 15k, 30k, 7k and 9k.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-14, 11:40 AM


Betting at Flemington tomorrow......be afraid, be very afraid

“The track is a little bit tender and a little bit new.

“Straight off the renovation, it will race a bit fluffy and a bit new until it beds down and that probably means one (track) rating worse than what you might otherwise expect.”


This word of caution comes on top of RVL scheduling low grade races with inflated fields.

..... what do you think will happen in Race 2 with 13 starters over 1400 m in a benchmark 70 for 3yros?

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Dec-14, 03:42 PM
You tell us what you think will happen.....for once
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-14, 09:28 PM


The TAB dividends will answer the question tomorrow.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: gunbower on 2018-Dec-14, 09:45 PM
Define "Inflated Fields "  How many should be allowed to run  ?  Six , Seven , Eight or even Four ?. When does it not become an inflated field ?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-14, 09:56 PM
Sad Canterbury tales and more tears at the Vale.

......................the race results tonight illustrate the relevance of the question: why would anyone bet on Friday night?

Forum members know enough to know that betting on Friday night is not only a wealth hazard but the exposure of your betting account records could be the basis for having oneself committed to 'care' at her majesty's pleasure.

Look up the 'results'  -- and be chastened by quadrella and F4 dividends of 24k, 5k,5k,  -- and onto F4s of 16k, 5.5k, 4k, 3k, 6k, 10k+, 5k, 9k.

..... wear a mask if you attend any Friday night meeting and only bet in cash.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-14, 09:59 PM


How many should be allowed to run ?


Gunner -- I would be happy to trust your judgment of the numbers for a fair race.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: HarmersHaven on 2018-Dec-15, 09:13 AM

Gunner -- I would be happy to trust your judgment of the numbers for a fair race.

But he asked you.

How many do you think is the number required?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Dec-15, 09:36 AM
The blokes a turd, he wont answer :thumbsup:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-15, 08:10 PM


I respect the ability of other members to understand when an inflated field will probably corrupt the outcome.

Working back from 'lotto like' dividends is a clue to a race that was unfair.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2018-Dec-18, 03:39 PM

Tomorrow at Caulfield

............ a big day for races over 1440 m -- mainly maidens and low benchmarkers.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2018-Dec-18, 07:06 PM
So what.  :o
Do you want a few 6 horse fields of G1standard thrown in for you.
Dont hlbet if you're not up to doing the form
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: bascoe on 2018-Dec-18, 10:17 PM


Working back from 'lotto like' dividends is a clue to a race that was unfair.
If we could ‘work back’ from the dividends wouldn’t we also have a clue about the results? Just shows how out of touch you are...

Try draughts or tic tac toe - punting seems beyond you


Sent from my iPhone using Racehorse Talk (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=90061)
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-05, 08:15 PM

RVL has much to answer for -- not least Caulfield today.

The early quadrella paid $70k.

There were two grossly inflated  F4s -- one paying $83k and another $25k.

The two races over the notoriously unfair 1400m, saw F4 dividends of $4.7k and $4.6k.

............ these outcomes are consistent with determination to take the bucks over delivering a fair product ....... they are especially pleasing to corporate bookmakers.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-17, 06:09 PM

Nothing funny about this farm fiasco

On Wednesday, the average starting price of the winning quadrella runners was 33/1 +.

The quadrella dividend 'should pay' was in the range $600,000 to $1,000,000+  -- some two-thirds of the Quadrella pool was 'jackpotted'.

Perusal of the newspaper tipping polls suggested these 4 winners were 'a complete surprise' to everyone.

No one would have any confidence that RNSW will spend any time reviewing 'what happened' and 'why' -- or if they did that any policy changes would be made.

Imagine the joy at  Tabcorp and other fixed-odds 'booktakers'.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-19, 08:48 PM

A tale of two cities -- a disgraceful tale of one city

.......... as mature observers of what passes for racing gambling in Melbourne ...............you will be able to compare the outcome of Melbourne racing today with  that in Sydney.

The comparison could hardly be more starkly damming of the quality of the racing presented in Melbourne.,

Use your own benchmarks: mine are the 'tips' published in the SMH as 'Monty's Top 5' -- an analyst without peer in the media.

Today , in Sydney, Monty's only 'miss' was the overcrowded 16 starter low-grade 'HWY' for rural runners -- races that have no place on a Saturday metropolitan program.

Otherwise Monty included every winner in his 5 -- in 7 races he had 3 of the first 4 and in 2 races he had the first4.

In Melbourne there was the usual shambles.

.......... 6k and 12k quadrellas - F4 dividends of 50k, 30k, 13k, 7k, 5k and 4k  -- an absolute indictment of the 'rubbish' quality of the racing presented by RVL.

Monty included the winner in his 'top-5' in 5 of the 9 races but otherwise fell well short of a comparable performance with his Sydney selections.

This characteristic outcome is disgraceful --the fixed-odds corporates revel in the absence of any semblance of product quality control in the racing presented by RVL.

...... talk about a field-day .............. the corporates would be overjoyed ..... will probably sponsor more rubbish racing.

The TAB pools on the MN quadrella  ran to some 'went-west' $2 million+ and the corporates would have lapped up more.

The Victorian government should put a full stop to this rorting of TAB punters.



 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: ratsack on 2019-Jan-19, 09:07 PM
Doesn't matter which horse wins the take is the same
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-20, 07:37 PM


au contraire = rats!

              doesn't matter ............ the take is the same

The take is not the same at all -- and is that not just the problem.

The TAB take from the parimutuel pools is 'the same'  -- but these days the action at TAB -- and at the corporates -- is much more about fixed-odds betting.

With fixed-odds betting the 'take' is unlimited -- it Melbourne on many races the 'take', with inflated fields usually meaning an outsider winning, is closer to 100% than 15%.

This spills over into 'exotics' bets placed with corporates 'matching' TAB payouts but not kicking the funding  tin with a 25% takeouts from F4  and B6 pools.

Even TAB 'takes' are eroded by 'rebates' to syndicates plundering exotic pools.

......allowing and faciltating this rorting of TAB punters is a disgraceful reflection on administrators taking their cut and TAB's not standing up for their customers.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: ratsack on 2019-Jan-20, 08:09 PM
A tale of two cities -- a disgraceful tale of one city

.......... as mature observers of what passes for racing gambling in Melbourne ...............you will be able to compare the outcome of Melbourne racing today with  that in Sydney.

The comparison could hardly be more starkly damming of the quality of the racing presented in Melbourne.,

Use your own benchmarks: mine are the 'tips' published in the SMH as 'Monty's Top 5' -- an analyst without peer in the media.

Today , in Sydney, Monty's only 'miss' was the overcrowded 16 starter low-grade 'HWY' for rural runners -- races that have no place on a Saturday metropolitan program.

Otherwise Monty included every winner in his 5 -- in 7 races he had 3 of the first 4 and in 2 races he had the first4.

In Melbourne there was the usual shambles.

.......... 6k and 12k quadrellas - F4 dividends of 50k, 30k, 13k, 7k, 5k and 4k  -- an absolute indictment of the 'rubbish' quality of the racing presented by RVL.

Monty included the winner in his 'top-5' in 5 of the 9 races but otherwise fell well short of a comparable performance with his Sydney selections.

This characteristic outcome is disgraceful --the fixed-odds corporates revel in the absence of any semblance of product quality control in the racing presented by RVL.

...... talk about a field-day .............. the corporates would be overjoyed ..... will probably sponsor more rubbish racing.

The TAB pools on the MN quadrella  ran to some 'went-west' $2 million+ and the corporates would have lapped up more.

The Victorian government should put a full stop to this rorting of TAB punters.

if that's the case , what was the pools on fixed odds
just because a quaddie in the tote pays x doesn't mean the corporates won .
what was their hold , you don't know
stop posting your waffle and lies
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-20, 09:28 PM


..........rats again!

If the corporates pay the same dividends on exotic bets -- but do not pay the same 'take' as TABs -- then rough results mean they 'cop the lot'.

More importantly, with 'fixed odds' betting neither TABs nor corporates pay much in the way of take-out -- and rough results mean they may well be 'copping' close to 100% of the bets placed on losing favoured horses.

Think about it -- everyone else, besides most punters, has a keen commercial interest in 'rough results'.

........in Victoria that seems to be reflected in administrative policies that benefit the 'fixed odds' operators.

This is not a good look -- and the regularity of the bad look begs the questions of why the administrators do not put quality controls in place -- and why TAB do not demand it on  behalf of most customers.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Jan-20, 10:19 PM
Peter,

The idea of a handicap race is to ........

1) leave the best horse winning by 30 lengths  or

2) make for a close finish or at the very least a more evenly matched field to enhance betting activity AND retain interest in the challenge of picking the winner?

Peter.... you more than most should be careful of what you wish for.    If you actually got what you wanted racing would be finished.

Fours

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-21, 09:24 AM


True enough


............ you could have gone on to say that it is unfair to those horses 'there to win' to be cluttered and impeded by runners happy to run 10th with no expectation of winning but sometimes being a 'bradbury'.

The inflated dividends declared on Saturday, and too often on other Saturdays, suggests the RVL policy is deliberately intended to deliver results at odds with the SP market.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Jan-21, 10:47 AM
Peter,

Had a friend text me saying he liked a real roughy Wenner to be in the finish. I said I like the favourite and Amadeus.

Those are 3 of the 4 placings in the 31grand first four - somewhat better than your alleged champion tipster and the very reason why people like such results.

Such results are what is possible once you do your own form and abandon public tipsters.

Note that the favourite won.

Fours

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jan-21, 11:13 AM
I dont know anyone who even read the tipsters selections aside from our donkey minded Mair
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-22, 11:57 AM


I can well understand that -- it fits the profile you present.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jan-22, 08:28 PM
Have you looked at the sales figures for newspapers?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-23, 09:13 PM


Magnificent Monty ----- cleaned them up again today in Sydney

The only media tips not freely available are those of Monty in the SMH -- and punters would be well advised to get them.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Jan-23, 09:27 PM
Peter,

Please work on your maths skills before you make embarrassing comments!

Assuming the 4 picks got all 8 winners a loss is shown ie less than 32 units returned for win bets for the 8 winners.

That's not cleaning up - refer to my mention of a 31g first four if you ant an idea of what is.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jan-24, 06:38 AM

Magnificent Monty ----- cleaned them up again today in Sydney

The only media tips not freely available are those of Monty in the SMH -- and punters would be well advised to get them.

Did he have 5 picks in each race again?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Jan-24, 10:27 AM
Oh dear,

If it was 5 picks than that is a shocking loss.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jan-25, 06:33 AM
Oh dear,

If it was 5 picks than that is a shocking loss.

Fours


Oh yes. He has 5 picks in every race and old disingenuous Mair doesn’t tell us which one of Montys 5 he backs.
He just gets a bit excited when one of the 5 darts manages to hit the board
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-31, 06:10 PM

It is not just me -- that is questioning what is going on at RVL

Scroll through this ' be very wary' preview for Saturday:

https://www.punters.com.au/news/caulfield-preview_176725/

Let your mind run riot on the prospects for race 9 being run fairly -- 15 starters over 1400 does not bode well.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jan-31, 06:27 PM


SPY v. SPY --   almost a mad parody written by Alfred E Neuman

RNSW has embraced the inflated-field nonsense -- paying even more than RVL for barrier-trialers  'running 10th'.

........ even so, there are better prospects in Sydney for race outcomes being consistent with the form-guide

https://www.punters.com.au/news/rosehill-preview_176730/

One can only wonder what is going wrong with racing in Melbourne and where it will end.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Feb-11, 08:44 PM


All-Star stuffup

The following comment posted (by not me) on Racenet is illustrative of the problems of inflating fields with runners that do not belong -- and competing for recovering participation costs or -- in the All Star case -- getting $90,000 for running 14th.

RVL has an inability to learn.

The All Star Mile is a joke and a mockery on serious horse racing. Why have Z rated horses racing against group 1 horses? All they will do is get in the way and no doubt, drop off at the 600 metre mark when the pressure is applied. And dare I say it, they could cause serious interference to the good horses who have a winning chance in a $5 million dollar race. The Melbourne Racing heads have struck a real dumb idea here which is destined to be a huge embarrassment to horse racing. They have great carnivals already following traditional methods. At least in the Everest you have the best horses racing, but this voting idea is simply ridiculous, especially when you have horses like Urban Ruler and Mr Money Bags likely to get a spot.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-02, 06:26 PM

A real BUMper day at Flemington today

The portents could hardy have been worse -- a program with 3 races over the notorious 1400m, three 'up the crooked strait' and two over 1600.

......and the travesty was duly delivered........... quadrellas paying $2k and $3k along with F4 'dividends' of 28k, 14k, 10k, 3k and 2k.

This debacle at the peak of the Melbourne autumn carnival.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-10, 10:02 AM


Another BUMper day at Flemington yesterday

......... on a time-honoured day when the quality of Melbourne carnival racing was once at its best, punters got another shafting.

Quadrellas paying 4k and 60k -- along with F4s of 7k,5k,9k,and 180k -- with another 3 in the 2.5k range.

These outcomes are a disgraceful reflection on the (ir)responsible racing administrators.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-11, 10:35 AM

Insights into RVL thinking -- inflated fields don't matter

The RVL chief-handicapper's assessment of the no-star mile is consistent with the RVL policy of inflating fields with no-hopers --  the legitimacy of the race............. is judged on the first four finishers.

That's not the way TAB punters see the game -- all too often the first four over the line are not the four best runs but the four that survive the clutter and overcome wide barriers.



Asked if he was nervous about some of those in triple-figure odds potentially being beaten out of sight and creating some red races next Saturday, Carpenter replied:

“Not really, as far as the legitimacy of the race, every Group I race in the world is judged on the first four finishers,” he said.

“There is no minimum rating in the Arc De Triomphe, there is no minimum rating in the Breeders Cup races.

“This race shouldn't be viewed through the traditional Group I lens and that's probably what I think some of the discussion has missed the mark.

“This race doesn't have to be a Group I race.

“It's about embracing racing for all and allowing horses that wouldn't normally get into a Group I race the opportunity to compete for rich prizemoney.”
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-17, 09:25 AM

Inflated fields are spoiling the game

Saturday will illustrate the story:  4 dire-strait races -- 2 each of 1400&1600m races with inflated fields of 16 -- and a 2000m race with 16 starters.

Saturday did tell the story -- 20 starters in low-grade BM 80 races make for a mess -- as do dire-strait races for 2yro fillies.

Sydney racing was better -- but 20 starters in a G1 over 1500 m at Rosehill is a plan for a $200,000 F4 dividend.

.......... punters must be getting the message -- week after week in Melbourne!

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Mar-17, 09:29 AM
Peter,

Why aren't you making a killing every week?

You could be laying the shorties in all these fields PLUS

taking the 200g combos only in the first four and quaddies to clean up at very little expense.

Unless of course you don't believe your own spiel.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-18, 09:52 AM


Why aren't you making a killing every week?

.................... same reason as you and most others.

It is not about the winning odds being short or long -- rather it is the irrelevance of the form guide to the outcomes and the opportunities this opens for one 'to be got ready' and smoked in without any qualifying restraints.

.............. the MN carnival has seen some stunts pulled off undercover of 'inflated fields'.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-18, 10:27 AM
The formguide is not irrelevant it's that you don't use it :tin:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-18, 09:01 PM

Modest punters would not be happy


...........even the wily one must be having second thoughts about 'inflated fields' delivering rough results and providing the cover for one smoked in, to run well, in defiance of the form guide.

I can understand me missing clues in the form guide but long-odds winners suggest almost all others missed read it also.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-19, 06:28 AM
I’m sure You won’t be bothered to do it, Peter, but look at these 2 links then come back and tell me the answer to your question

http://racing.racingnsw.com.au/FreeFields/VideoResult.aspx?MeetDate=2019Mar05&VenueCode=NTIzMTQ2&RaceNumber=2&MeetingCategory=Professional&VideoFileType=FullReplay

http://racing.racingnsw.com.au/FreeFields/VideoResult.aspx?MeetDate=2019Mar18&VenueCode=NTIzMTQ2&RaceNumber=2&MeetingCategory=Professional&VideoFileType=FullReplay





Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-19, 08:49 AM


Please remind me of the question?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-19, 12:09 PM

RVL on the slippery slope?

Situations unfold unevenly and in complex ways.

I have a real allergy to the Racing.com broadcast presenters -- simply could not watch a 'get on' become 'get-off'.

The news that David Gately no longer fits in that RVL culture is not surprising -- and I would also be pleased to see NSW welcome back Brent Zerafra.

............ one very welcome exposure would be the 'presenter guidelines' given to R.Com presenters................. there do seem to be tight restrictions on any allusions to tips gone astray and punters expectations being unfairly disappointed.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-19, 12:56 PM

Please remind me of the question?

Watch the 2links and tell me why the winner started at $41
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-Mar-20, 01:02 PM
Peter.

Hawkesbury today...

R1  and a field of 7 runners     $14 winner - 2nd longest in the field
R2 and a field of 7 runners     $36 winner longest price in field

Your inflated field theory is looking worse by the second.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-20, 01:28 PM
4s, he will fall back on his other brain fart about insider trading instead :tin:

I note he hasn’t addressed my previous post as it would result in him agreeing with me, which he doesn’t have a high enough degree of personal integrity to do :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-21, 04:00 PM

Saturdays only  -- and only in Sydney and Melbourne

It is too difficult for most to explain rough results in 'black type' races in Sydney and Melbourne -- and  administrators certainly do not want any competent race watcher 'explaining' how the fair running of a race was compromised by various factors in the control of the administrators.

The idea that people bet on maiden races run on heavy tracks out-of-town is a mystery of the world.

....... explaining why a long-odds runner won the race is a deeper level of mystery.

I would have to rely on the assessments of people like wily and fours.

The lesson to be drawn is 'do not do it' -- Saturday only is the only go.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-21, 07:05 PM


....... explaining why a long-odds runner won the race is a deeper level of mystery.

I would have to rely on the assessments of people like wily and fours.

So you didn’t even have the courage or honesty to even look at the links.
Instead you chose to pedal your lies
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-27, 06:31 PM


BENDY-NO-GO ON SATURDAY

RVLs dereliction of national-obligation to the racing industry can hardly be more clear than with the meeting scheduled for Bendy-no-go on Saturday.

Check out the low-grade, inflated menu being served up at Bendy-no-go on Saturday.

http://www.racingaustralia.horse/FreeFields/Acceptances.aspx?Key=2019Mar30%2CVIC%2CBendigo

This low grade nonsense detracts from the overall opportunity for punters nationally to enjoy the Sydney carnival.

It follows on the farce of the no-star-mile and the standalone stay-away at somewhere last Saturday.

Where is the needed national leadership from the miss-called Racing Australia?





Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-27, 06:50 PM

Have a go at this for RVL tripe at Sandown today:

Early Quaddie 3-2-5-10  $9,425.40

Quaddie 6-10-3-7 $25,106.00

First Four    10-5-8-6  $8,939.50 Jackpot $1,215.51

First Four    3-1-12-11    $20,543.70 Jackpot $8,714.80

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-27, 07:04 PM
Welcome back peter, you weak as piss fool.  :lol:

Of course we didn’t hear from your after punters cleaned up at last weeks stand alone meeting atMornington where the quaddy was a paltry $470.

You’re a dishonest spammer, lacking integrity  :bulb:

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-27, 07:50 PM


Self Sense and common sense are different

Let us see what you have to say on Monday  -- most times the outcomes are against you.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-29, 08:29 AM


Learning from last year

With the exception of a winner at 60/1, the winners last year averaged around 5/1.

This did not preclude some rough F4 outcomes.

https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2018-04-07/BENDIGO/M/R/9/Win

Tomorrow is another day but the fields are over full and some rain is forecast  -- in most races only a couple of runners are under 10/1 and excluding those that do not warrant a start would improve the prospects of fair racing.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-29, 08:07 PM


Why would RVL allow this nonsense to continue?

At Warnambool today:

Early Quaddie    7-6-3-2      $6,991.00

Quaddie      2-10-10-8      $22,235.20
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-29, 08:11 PM
Why don’t they stop idiots from punting?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-30, 07:56 AM


-----------  your freedom is something to be treasured
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Mar-30, 11:13 AM
Like most punters I’m hoping to buy my freedom via a massive quaddy divvy in both states :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-30, 07:27 PM


............. 'hope' is not a strategy -- Bendy-no-go as expected,  a $3k quadrella -- including $70K and 25k F4s on the two feature races run with chock-a-bloc fields .
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2019-Mar-31, 01:32 PM
Well Pete, one of the most respected judges in Dean Lester found that quaddie you are complaining about.

If you won't do the work yourself then you could do far worse than listen to what Dean has to say.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Mar-31, 07:59 PM


No disagreement --Dean Lester and Mark Hunter on 2KSKY at 9 am on Saturdays are the best tipping duo in Melbourne.

.......... when the both put one on top -- get on!.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Apr-01, 06:21 AM
Hunter is a poor tipster.

Lester exceptional
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Apr-04, 03:11 PM
I don't believe this thread is still going,I thought it would have run out a long time ago.........
I would like to add that I love big fields where luck counts.....that is why it is called Gambling.......

lets take a poll.....how many times has Pete or Authorized or any other Punter on this forum backed Winx?

That is the only way to take luck out of the equation.......and even then she is still just flesh and Blood, you can never completely eliminate Luck.....if you did you would also eliminate Bookies and the TAB......if results were easy to pick for lazy morons you could never get a bet on............there needs to be 2 sides to make a contract.......it ain't rocket science, you know what they say.....if you can't stand the heat....get out of the Kitchen!!
Remember the story of King Midas, be careful of what you wish for
P.S. unlike Champs of the past, both Winx and Black Caviar are boooorrrriiiinnnng!........they should be racing for Ribbons cos that is all they are worth, they take away any semblance of competition.....and I appreciate they are magnificent horses and I love them for that.......but to want that kind of thing to run through our racing any more often.....is booorrring!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Apr-04, 03:35 PM
Dave, the point lost on Mair and his brain farts is that the vast majority of races that he claims are affected by big field & interference is a total nonsense.
I’ve asked him to highlight interference in numerous races and he can’t or doesn’t.
The reason is he’s a bald faced liar pushing his own barrow.

Gutless, self centred, twits like him operate on the premise of throw plenty mud, not honesty
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Apr-04, 10:06 PM
Yeah wily but gee you have to admire his tenacity.............he knows he is on his own but sticks to his guns, which is OK I am a lot like that myself but if others disagree with me I don't bang my head on a Brick wall until everyone agrees with me, I know I am right and that is all I care about........but only an idiot would waste their time trying to change what others think to the nth degree like Pete does
I am an Atheist but I would never try to convince the Pope there is no God, I figure he'll find out soon enough and I don't care that much anyway....

But Pete would be banging at the Door of the Vatican every day until the Pope conceded Pete was right.....not sure who would win that one but it would at least Keep Pete busy for a while??
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-16, 03:35 AM


Shocking prospects for Saturday -- it could hardly be worse

Inflated fields all over for Saturday and the contest will be about the venue to show the biggest dividends -- the worst outcome for punters.

............ it is hard to go past Flemington  ................. it is mid year............... it is low grade filler  ......... and 5 of the 9 races are over 1400m.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-16, 07:47 AM
Poor Pete , You’re now lying to your self  :lol:

5 races over 1400m.
Field sizes of 11, 12,13,16 & 12

Under your much blurted brain farts that is on one race where the field is “inflated “ under your much spewed criteria of 14 maximum

You’ve tied your self in knots  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-May-16, 05:11 PM
Pete you poor silly old fool, Good punters love big fields Stupid/Lazy Punters like some I could name may like small fields......but as the saying goes "God helps those who help themselves.....and Christ helps those that can't"......all I can say is Christ help Pete.....cos no one else can!

wily while I admire your tenacity almost as much as I admire Pete's.....but if Christ can't help Pete.....you are pushing the proverbial uphill trying to help him!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-16, 06:05 PM


5 races over 1400m. Field sizes of 11, 12,13,16 & 12


Races over 1400 m at both Flemington and Caulfield are notoriously unfair.

This is especially so for low-rated horses running in restricted low-grade races -- as on Saturday.

Acceptances for these races should be limited to 10 of which 2 would be emergencies -- 8 to start.

.......... in the normal course the no-hoper horses likely to run 10th will go to the front and hog the rails ....... and when they falter and fall back the runners there to win will be impeded.

The best chance for a favoured runner is to draw well and sit very handy to the turn and avoid the clutter.

Watch and see on Saturday!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-16, 09:06 PM

wily while I admire your tenacity almost as much as I admire Pete's.....but if Christ can't help Pete.....you are pushing the proverbial uphill trying to help him!

It’s good sport watching the idiot embarrass himself  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-16, 09:10 PM

5 races over 1400m. Field sizes of 11, 12,13,16 & 12


Races over 1400 m at both Flemington and Caulfield are notoriously unfair.


.......... in the normal course the no-hoper horses likely to run 10th will go to the front and hog the rails ....... and when they falter and fall back the runners there to win will be impeded.

The best chance for a favoured runner is to draw well and sit very handy to the turn and avoid the clutter.

Watch and see on Saturday!

You’ ve provided zero proof of this brain fart on the previous 300 times you’ve been requested to do so.

One day you may get it right  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-17, 12:12 AM



.............Saturday may be another 'one day' ........ the 'fours-wily' duo may like to vote on Friday!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-17, 05:04 AM


Will wily, fours & dave be voting early this weekend?

In an effort to entice these intrepids out of their boxes on Friday, I would suggest an all up lay on these favoured and well-drawn runners:

R4 No 3 & R8 No 9  .......... and probably R2 no 2

Conversely, if 9 does not win the 5th, I would be wanting to see the betting sheets.



 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-17, 07:41 AM
Plenty of pre post tipping here Peter. The proof is there. What about you actually answering a question put to you for once :bulb:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-18, 05:11 AM


Oh-No -- call for the betting sheets!


9. Begood Toya Mother (2)  Entitled to be favourite off the back of three outstanding wins but is he a $1.70 chance? For ours the answer is an emphatic NO! Three runs back he won a Bm64 at Warrnambool then followed it up in the same class at Cranbourne before a midweek Bm70 win at Sandown when he won by 6˝ lengths. However while he was getting the runs on the board in lesser grade he’s up to Bm78 grade now and we know inside barriers at the 1400m can be tricky, and he’s drawn the two.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-18, 07:31 AM
Oh  Peter looking to be spoon fed again , if you don’t like the fave work  around it then aim for one of your big F4s :/

6, 11, 3,4, & 12 are darts to throw at the board or do some form and find your own    :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 08:25 AM
Peter,

Rather than seeing the betting sheets after the race is run you need to look at the markets before they jump.

For instance I almost fell off my chair when 150/1 was offered for O'reilly's Crumpet as it was so wrong - AND WRONG is where your chance of profit lies.

If the price is right you cannot profit - not on win and place bets anyway.

Fours
ps Peter this means that EVERY HORSE IN THE FIELD IS A POTENTIAL TIP.

pps Unfortunately for you Peter properly assessing prices is above your IQ level - at least on what you demonstrate on this forum.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-18, 01:36 PM
3 of the 1400m races are run and Mair yet again looking stupid with his claims   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 03:11 PM
SR7 Black On Gold is overs at $34.00

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 03:24 PM
Peter,

Big field and the fav wins  --- YOU FAIL!

Big field and I tip a >30/1 horse as a value pick and it is in the finish for 4th and a lovely First Four payout. Again YOU FAIL!

Before the race - so again YOU FAIL!

Give it up.

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 03:40 PM
BR8 at $61.00 savvy coupe certainly overs on a good track
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 03:55 PM
SR 8 gresham is value
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 04:17 PM
BR9 Light Up The Room ready now and class NOT an issue so the 70/1 is great value

Fours
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 04:26 PM
Last..... drown your sorrows with Inn Keeper in the Goodwod at 34/1
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-18, 04:58 PM
Now you know why I suggested start with 50c tickets rather than $500 win bets1

Try some Love magic at 150/1 in the last at Morphetville - this a class 75 and has won a class 84 .. and has a 40% win strike rate on a good track.

Fours
won a trial before the first up run and is rarley out of the first 4 places - have a look!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-23, 01:23 AM

Product quality control -- how low can you go?


The prospects for racing on Saturday are, again, simply appalling -- overcrowded fields of low-grade horses.

Brisbane aside, only a couple of runners rate above100 and most average less than 75  --  normal prize-money is still on the table, including lavish lumps for running 10th.

The saddest reflection of all this is the dynamic trio here looking for long-shots to find a bet.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: fours on 2019-May-23, 03:34 AM
You are such an idiot Peter,

I agree that the use of the word idiot is rude and should be discouraged but Peter is different as he really is being an idiot.

Peter finding 1 or 2 long shots enables one to win $18,000 for a $24.00 outlay with the 2 favourites in a boxed first four ticket. Maybe only $6 would be required over at Unitab.

Accordingly what you decry is in fact what smart punters celebrate so you have it precisely wrong - yet don't learn this despite beig repeatedly shown to be wrong - and thus the moniker IDIOT.

Fours

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-May-23, 01:32 PM
Pete you really have no idea how successful punting works do you? in spite of your complete ignorance of punting etiquette you continually bleat false hoods.......you ask when will the racing industry ever learn.........while everyone else asks when will Silly old Pete ever learn?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-23, 04:15 PM
Dave,
Pete will only stop his brain farts when he scores a gig in the industry. That’s what he’s pushing for.

Now the good news for us who love the sport is that the relevant people have been notified about him and they are fully aware of how stupid he is.

  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-23, 05:03 PM


$10,000+ F4 looms at Flemington -- go get it boys.


Race 5 at Flemington on Saturday is a BM 78 for 3yro fillies over 1400 -- with a capacity field of 14 assured.

This race should not be run on the terms propsoed -- half the field do not merit the limit weight.

Punters.com.au is not expecting an easy task for punters:

XXXXXXX  may lead but it's a very tricky race to map. A few of the runners drawn wide have shown early toe in the past but their jockeys might be concerned about being caught without cover.

Pretty happy to shoulder arms to this race - nothing would really shock. For the sake of a tip I'll go with XXXXX  who was completely luckless in a very similar race here last start. She was very good when.........beaten 0.85L, at Sandown Hillside prior.

XXXXXX was impressive winning at Sandown last start but this race boasts far more depth. Barrier one looks somewhat problematic for a horse who generally needs space and time to go through her gears.

VERDICT: XXXXXX on top but happy to give this race a miss.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-23, 05:42 PM
Xxxxx
Pete doesn’t even have the integrity to leave to names in for us poor punters  :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-23, 05:54 PM
By the way, due to me actually doing the form Pete, I’ve got one in my black book for that race.

It’s a tough race as there’s a lot of promising horses in it 8)
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-25, 02:24 PM
Oh well. Mair is wrong again.   :lol:

Go Fabric :clap2:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-25, 06:11 PM

Race 5 payout slashed when 7 scratched

Even the trainers are waking up by scratching runners drawn wide (14,16,18,19,20)

Race run predictably -- well-drawn leader wining, mainly no-hopers crowding the lead impeding others there to win.



[.......... not true, Harry, Larry and Mo:    Pete doesn’t even have the integrity to leave to names in for us poor punters]
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: pegasyber on 2019-May-25, 06:15 PM
  Can't seem to find a source of comparison dvidends over the three tabs and placings down to sixth if not all. I use to get it from Racing and sports, but cannot seem to access that anymore. Any Guidance would be appreciated.

    Not too much wrong with the integrity of Racing at The New Eagle Farm course, especially in Race 8 today.
 
  OOPS  racingandsports does give all placings so must have had the address slightly wrong, but there is no three TAB's dividend comparisons, OOPS again have now found comparisons on racenet.com.au.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-May-25, 11:28 PM
Pete if you tell us where you are being held captive just let us know,  we will call the home for you and they will send their nice young men in their clean white suits to pick you up and take you home.......whoever is holding you captive with a gun at your head must be really bad people....and the torture, it sounds horrible? Holding a gun at your head making you bet in all these races that you don't want to bet in.....a fate worse than death.....I can only think of one thing worse.....that is being us and listening to your prattle on........gimme the Gun and I will put us all out of our misery.....you first!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-26, 08:35 AM
XXXXXX was the bet of the day for the video form students
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-26, 05:36 PM

Prescience defined: the F4 dividends in the quadrella races across the four states

Product quality control -- how low can you go?

The prospects for racing on Saturday are, again, simply appalling -- overcrowded fields of low-grade horses.


........ and then there was this Sunday-hindsight: XXXXXX was the bet of the day for the video form students



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-26, 05:38 PM

........ and then there was this Sunday-hindsight: XXXXXX was the bet of the day for the video form students

Care to expand on that?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-26, 06:36 PM


....... dear harry-hindsight,

The hope of the forum is that you would care to expand on it -- it is no good telling us today that XXXXXX won yesterday.

[I trust you let Larry and Mo know before the race was run ....... honor among thieves and mouseketeers et al]

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-26, 08:07 PM
Peter, are you doubting that I backed xxxxx (as you labelled it)

In your attempt to slag the race why did you not name xxxxx?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-27, 10:44 AM
Peter, are you doubting that I backed xxxxx (as you labelled it)

In your attempt to slag the race why did you not name xxxxx?

Given Peter has been posting its clear he hasn’t the courage or integrity to discuss this   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-27, 11:06 AM


Algreba lesson -- find the value of X

XXXXXX was the bet of the day for the video form students

What did form students find?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-27, 11:14 AM

For the sake of a tip I'll go with XXXXX  who was completely luckless in a very similar race here last start. She was very good when.........beaten 0.85L, at Sandown Hillside prior.

By the way, due to me actually doing the form Pete, I’ve got one in my black book for that race.

It’s a tough race as there’s a lot of promising horses in it 8)


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-29, 07:53 PM
Peter, still waiting for your explanation
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-May-29, 08:01 PM


.. my mistake..... I guess you were tipping the XXXXX winner obscured in my initial post.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-May-29, 08:44 PM
Yes, and a simple study of the form found it.

Sadly all the scratchings came and $10 was no longer available  :sad:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jun-10, 08:49 PM

Kensington track kredibility krushed again?

After decades of trying to establish an inside 'all weather' track at Randwick, it seems RNSW has not succeeded in the quest.

Race outcomes at the 'new' Kensington track are consistent with the predictable consequences of running inflated fields of low grade horses.

Quadrella dividends today, of $7,500 and $5,000, are indicative of a very clear message to punters to stay well clear of betting on this suspect track -- as are F$ dividends circa $5,000 for half the races run.

RNSW has been showing some ability to 'best' RVL but when the Kensington track ranks with Victorian regional programs and outcomes it is well wide of the mark.

............races at the Kensington track should be restricted to no more than 8 starters of well qualified runners there to win!

Otherwise close it or ignore it.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jun-13, 07:17 PM
Kensington track kredibility krushed again?

After decades of trying to establish an inside 'all weather' track at Randwick, it seems RNSW has not succeeded in the quest.

Race outcomes at the 'new' Kensington track are consistent with the predictable consequences of running inflated fields of low grade horses.

Quadrella dividends today, of $7,500 and $5,000, are indicative of a very clear message to punters to stay well clear of betting on this suspect track -- as are F$ dividends circa $5,000 for half the races run.

RNSW has been showing some ability to 'best' RVL but when the Kensington track ranks with Victorian regional programs and outcomes it is well wide of the mark.

............races at the Kensington track should be restricted to no more than 8 starters of well qualified runners there to win!

Otherwise close it or ignore it.


Just caught up with idiots latest brain fart. Does he even watch the races that he spews his nonsense about   :lol:



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jun-13, 08:08 PM


Thanks for endorsing my message wily -- forget quality racing,  just keep kicking the tin at Kensington.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jun-13, 08:22 PM
Wonderful track,  only a fool wouldn’t bet there. Every horse gets their chance as the results prove
If you actually watch the races
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Jun-13, 08:31 PM

-------------- enjoy the races -- watch the dividends!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Jun-13, 08:49 PM
Oh I do Pete, I do.

Pity you don’t
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Aug-01, 09:21 PM


.............. will the lemmings bet on the Valley races on Saturday?

RVL has a problem with the credibility of the Valley of Tears track........... it is seasonally languishing with low-grade stock to run in the races..... yet, what does it do to present a fair go for the cant-help-it punters?

It should run small fields of horses entitled to carry the allocated weight -- instead it has inflated the low-grade fields in a way which will please only the fixed odds bookmakers and the syndicates milking TAB pools.

You tell me --  in forming your opinion, have regard to this 'Valley Preview' presented at punters.com.au

https://www.punters.com.au/news/moonee-valley-preview_182331/

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Aug-02, 08:38 AM
It was laughable when old Pete held up Monty as his go to man. Now he thinks some bloke called James Lamb is a worthwhile reference   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Aug-04, 06:35 PM


And so it came to pass ....... a Lamb foretold the slaughter  ........... yesterday and again today....... and into the future.

It is beyond comprehension that (mainly) Victorian punters put up with the consistent presentation of low-grade racing.

The dividends tell the story -- the bigger the dividends declared the lower the quality of the racing presented.



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Aug-11, 05:42 PM


A State of collective stupidity


Apparently, Victorian punters are beyond commonsense redemption -- unable to remember they were robbed last week, they put more money in easy reach of the robbers again this week -- and they were robbed again.

Week-in and week-out, Victorian punters are putting $2,000,000+ into VICTAB  quadrella pools and it is knocked off by the professional syndicates.

Their parochialism is unbounded  -- they do not realize that the quality of racing in NSW is far superior  -- and the converse that the poor-quality of Victorian racing puts it in the same class as the minor states.

The penny has still to drop that the RVL policy of serving up inflated fields of could-run-10th horses is not good for the punters.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-13, 01:44 PM


Strike a light -- no-go racing at Flemington

Check out the fields for Melbourne tomorrow -- as close to a no-bet day as it gets.

Capacity fields -- 3 over-turning at 1400 -- 2 up the dire strait -- one risky race with an odds-on favourite drawn wide.

Punters.com.au suggest 'no bet' in three of the races  -- that.s damning.

The racing offered in Sydney is not much better with big fields over the sprint races and little to wait for.

The administrators confuse 'spring interest' and 'stupid punters'  -- and take them for a ride.

...... wait for the outcomes..... go wide ......... bet your phone number

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-13, 01:54 PM
Great days racing in both states. Those capable of doing to form will succeed whilst enjoying the great depth of talent on display

Only a fool with no idea, outside from self interest,  could be critical with what’s on offer :no1:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-13, 04:29 PM


Betfair says:

The Track

There has been a mixed history from recent similar meetings on 6/7, 18/5 and 16/2.

Straight races are always somewhat of a lottery, depending on how the track has been prepared specifically for this meeting. My forecast is they’ll race off the fence but inside the middle of the track, but it wouldn’t surprise if they went middle to outside.

In regards to circle races, the key thing to look out for is early signs that runners settling on the fence prior to the 600m are not doing as well as those settling 2W or even 3W.

Beyond that, whether horses 4+ off the straight are more prominent than those closer in? This was the pattern we saw on 18/5.

Any irrigation on Friday may help that pattern, so worth checking on Saturday morning.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-14, 11:48 AM
Thank you Peter
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-14, 06:42 PM


Strike a light -- no-go racing at Flemington

Inflated fields in the 1400m and 1600 m races delivered an insult to punters -- as was predictable.

These F4s paid $250k (a 1400 for 14 3yros -- madness), $8.5k, $40k and $2k -- the quadrella paid $110k.

...... these races are supposed to be group and listed black-type excellence -- they are mockingly not.

RVL should not need to be told that this is a disgrace of their making -- they wont listen -- but tell them anyway  .
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-14, 06:51 PM

Strike a light -- no-go racing at Flemington


No go racing at Flemington if you’re mug but then again, thank go for the mugs like Mair who can’t do the form  :clap2:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-15, 09:35 PM


Hong Kong racing devalued by inflated fields

Any aspirations HK-racing has for shifting betting turnover to the 'island state' will come to naught unless it culls fields of the clutter runners that impede a fair race.

As with RVL, the promise of laying 'land mines' on the course, randomly impeding any and all runners is a turn off -- and that adds to the problem of a couple of leading riders having the pick of the mounts and spoiling the prospects.

........ look at the HK results today ............ clear lanes with land mines =  a mess.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-16, 07:14 AM
Oh Peter why are you so dishonest?

Only recently you were telling us how good the field sizes and racing was in HK.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-19, 10:54 PM


Any early thoughts

Caulfield Race 8 on Saturday -- 16 accepted -- over 1400m -- for 3yro fillies -- a listed race........
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-19, 11:02 PM


................... some 'thought' clues from last year

1400m3F-LR

Trifecta    4-5-10     $5,015.00

First Four    4-5-10-3   $63,699.90  Jackpot $20,867.31








Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-21, 08:16 PM


History repeats -- apparently

A race  that should not have been run: R8 at Caulfield today -- 15 3yro fillies over the notorious 1400m course.

The predictable 'rough' result was an indictment of RVL and the rubbish that parades as 'melbourne-metropolitan-racing'.

The F4 paid $90k and the quadrella $50k -- assisted by another 'rough' result in the first leg -- a $40k F4.

This is disgraceful -- and predictably so -- a defective product presented to punters as a 'fair bet'.

.............. the only unknown is the content of the knee-jerk dismissal of this truth by the RVL disciples.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Antitab# on 2019-Sep-22, 06:53 AM
Congratulations Pete I assume you got the trifecta and the First 4.

You are turning into  a real punter, you identified a pattern, you have an edge and now you can make a profit.

That’s how the big syndicates you are so clearly jealous of operate.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-22, 08:11 AM
Nah Antiab, it’s far easier for Peter to sit n the sidelines and throw crap at people

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-22, 09:50 AM


What do the RVL devil-disciples make of their diminished wallets?

.............. the excrement is being thrown by RVL and punters betting modestly are covered in it.

The devils disciples need to consider their position.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-22, 08:18 PM


The devil's disciples are feeling the heat -- gone dry in the mouth -- hopefully getting the message about administrators corrupting the game.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-26, 10:55 PM


What do the devil's disciples think about their chances getting a fair go on Sunday, at the Heath?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-29, 08:40 PM

CALL THE COPS

....................  another disgraceful display of administrartive bungling today at Caulfield -- 80/1 and 100/1 'winners' , a $50k+ F4 and thew quadrellas paying $20k+ and $55k.

The big sux was not won.

Why would an inflated field of 3yro fillies be acceptedto run over the 1400 course?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-30, 09:09 AM
Peter, I won’t have a chance to do the video form. Can you point me in the direction of a few runners who were inconvenienced by the inflated fields?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Gintara on 2019-Sep-30, 01:43 PM
CALL THE COPS

....................  another disgraceful display of administrartive bungling today at Caulfield -- 80/1 and 100/1 'winners' , a $50k+ F4 and thew quadrellas paying $20k+ and $55k.

Come on Pete, BHB wasn't that hard to find, even @ 100/1

No I didn't back it but I can honestly say I spent more time on that race focused on BHB than any other runner, I had Rawiller's words ringing in my ears 'wait to he gets ground as he felt great today' from the Rupert Clarke (Thanks Racenet)

To the point he was the only horse I went back and watched the replay multiple times. I ended up 'wait till he shows something'  :sad:  :bash: so unfortunately I was wrong, in hindsight it was the last 200 where Rawiller went a bit easy on him and Deprive put a 1/2 length on him.

The info was there - we just have to interrupt it right  :shy:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-30, 07:44 PM

Black-Pete readily relents but does not repent

So true -- a 9yro gelding returning to G1 form is to be applauded -- as  was the Diva winning over 1400 -- just smile.

Luke Nolan is similarly applauded -- he does it hard -- but I am about to stop applauding Linda Meech and Kathy O'Hara.

I do not mind losing in those events -- but I would like to know 'how they get one ready' -- and one can be got ready for a hit-and-run -- BHB will never win again -- should not have won yesterday (2nd was three-wide the whole way).

As for the devil's disciple wondering about evidence of unfairness -- commonsense would suggest restraint after a day when almost all punters were lamenting losses as the dividends screamed 'we wuzz robbed!' by inflated fields raced on unfair courses.

[............... and the bland stewards report on the last race begged for more -- a favourite and winner, drawn the outside in a 1400m at Caulfield, came from near last in a time of 1.26+  -- as if the others were waiting for it to run past them. Tell me more!]


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Sep-30, 07:56 PM

............ the BHB story had a sequel............. he was readied!

Brad Rawiller (Black Heart Bart) pleaded guilty to a charge of careless riding under the provisions of AR131(a), the carelessness being that near the 350 metres, he permitted his mount to shift out when not sufficiently clear of Harlem (D. Dunn), causing that gelding to be steadied to avoid the heels of Black Heart Bart. Brad Rawiller had his licence to ride in races suspended for a period to commence at midnight 5 October 2019 and to expire midnight 12 October, a total of 8 race meetings (2 metropolitan, 6 provincial). In assessing penalty Stewards took into account his guilty plea, good record, the fact it was a Group 1 race and that the carelessness was in the low range.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Sep-30, 07:58 PM
).

As for the devil's disciple wondering about evidence of unfairness -- commonsense would suggest restraint after a day when almost all punters were lamenting losses as the dividends screamed 'we wuzz robbed!' by inflated fields raced on unfair courses.
!]


You’re the only one squealing, wrongly, about field size and as expected you couldn’t find any excuses for the beaten brigade that related to field size

Your dishonesty continues unabated  :clap2:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-05, 07:05 PM

.......... another day wrecked by malevolent administration

What should have been, and was in parts, a good days racing was again spoiled by running crowded fields of inexperienced 3 yro horses -- two $60k F4s and one paying 14k, as well as a 30k quadrella, were the predictable disgrace.

..... .....product quality management is beyond the len of RVL ......... but they sure know how to organize unfair races.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-07, 09:50 AM

Tarnishing the Silver  -- Silver Eagle gets a couple of extra starters


Racing NSW and the Australian Turf Club have worked on a way to increase of Saturday’s Silver Eagle to 14 runners from the 1300m start at Randwick on Saturday.

“We can start another two runners by moving the rail, so we have done that. We will get a full field and we might have to look at ways to get more four-year-olds starts on Saturday.”

The Silver Eagle, to be run for the first time in 2019, is something completely new in Australian racing: a race restricted only to four-year-olds. While Australian racing has many famous races for two and three-year-olds, this will be the first race only for four-year-olds. and run at set weight and penalty conditions.


This story will unfold during the week -- and the post-mortem will be held next Monday.




Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-07, 06:47 PM

Mizzy is a 110 benchmark nomination --  there is a cluster of 5 around BM 86.

.......... with a spread of BM weights around some 12 kg being unlikely in a SWP event, the probabilities are for an uneven race affected by clutter.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-07, 08:32 PM

One over the limit nominated for the Sliver Ealge

The inaugural Silver Eagle (1300m),.. $500,000 for four-year-olds on Saturday .. has ... 15 nominations.

.......................it is hardly a stampede to get a run ..... that suggests connections are expecting a couple of good ones to be dominant and their best outcome will be $5,000 for running 10th.

Spare my days!

This is not a model for a major national business to aspire to present as a wonderful  'considered innovation' ... it smacks of opportunism akin to that RVL nonsense in Autumn where the punters vote for the runners.


 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-08, 04:36 PM

Hi Ho-Ho Silver -- a weighty problem for Pauline to explain

The situation with the Sliver Egale is ever more tantalizing -- consider these allocated 'weights'.

Mizzy with the highest 110 benchmark rating gets 55.5 kg.

Buffalo River with the lowest benchmark 82 gets 56 kg.

Zousain rated at 104 gets the 57.5 kg topweight.

Fasika despite being benchmarked at 99 gets 54 kg, the lowest weight.

.................. it could not be as silly as this looks, could it?

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: sobig on 2019-Oct-08, 05:04 PM
It is a set weights and penalties therefore benchmark rating becomes meaningless.

Basic weight is 56kg entires and geldings and 54kg for mares, penalties group 3 winner 0.5kg, group 2 winner 1.5kg and group 1 winner 2.5kg
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-08, 06:54 PM

Thanks Sobig for the education

.............set weights and penalties ............ benchmark ratings become meaningless

While BM ratings may be ignored in allocating the weights for a SWP event, I am still thinking that they may be relevant to the prospects of horses that would be weighted very differently in a handicap.

I may be a dunce but it seems to me that Mizzy should start favourite while some others nominated should not really be running in the same race.

In terms of sound racing industry policy -- one question is about runners only there to pick up $5,000 for coming 10th ............but cluttering and impeding others before compounding and falling back through the field ....... probably making the race result unfair.

This will play out -- inflating fields with no-hopers, for turnover, corrupts the sport and the gambling.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Oct-08, 07:12 PM
Thanks Sobig for the education

.............set weights and penalties ............ benchmark ratings become meaningless

While BM ratings may be ignored in allocating the weights for a SWP event, I am still thinking that they may be relevant to the prospects of horses that would be weighted very differently in a handicap.

I may be a dunce but it seems to me that Mizzy should start favourite while some others nominated should not really be running in the same race.

In terms of sound racing industry policy -- one question is about runners only there to pick up $5,000 for coming 10th ............but cluttering and impeding others before compounding and falling back through the field ....... probably making the race result unfair.

This will play out -- inflating fields with no-hopers, for turnover, corrupts the sport and the gambling.



Well, you proved it yet again   :lol:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-08, 07:31 PM

Thank you for repeating my assessment of the Sliver Egale,

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Oct-08, 08:57 PM
And, once again thanks for highlighting what a dishonest dunce you are🍻
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-08, 10:04 PM


The Kensington track at Randwick is one to be wary of

........ the prospect of running another midweek meeting with over-full fields on this track does not inspire confidence.

Why would they do it?

-- a suspect track at the best of times is coupled with full-fields of low-grade horses --   a portent saying don't even look at the fields.

So don't.

......... the story will be told before nightfall tomorrow ... no one will wish they had had a bet.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-09, 07:12 PM

........... and, so it came to pass

Across the four legs of a quadrella paying some $11k, the total of the F4 dividends on te quadrella legs was some $25k.

The race outcomes continue to suggest it is beat to avoid running in, and betting on, races run on a track that has never made the grade.

The contributing factors to this damning historical record are complex -- in the end connections with a good horse will not nominate to run on this track and, the converse, those that do nominate are running for luck.

.............. do it without me until field sizes are constrained to ensure  a fair go.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-17, 05:57 AM


A glimmer of hope for a fair go -- limit field numbers

Slotholders cautious on expanding The Everest


A group of The Everest’s slotholders have warned the world’s richest turf race will ‘‘lose its glamour’’ if more horses are added to the event, insisting Sydney’s signature race will reach $20 million in prize money in coming years.

As interest intensifies from overseas and domestic parties wanting a slice of the pie, some of the concept’s initial backers want the field capped rather than expanding to 14 runners.

....................... there’s no sign of them agreeing to another two slotholders joining The Everest, despite Racing NSW being flooded with more than 20 applications for Damion Flower’s forfeited slot earlier this year.

‘‘We repay loyalty back in spades,’’ he said. ‘‘The original slotholders went on a journey with us and we wouldn’t change anything without their agreement. But also 12 is the right number from a wagering point of view.’’



Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-22, 06:31 PM

20 is too many -- Caulfield Cup form suspect

“The first six placegetters officially finished within two lengths of each of other and there was a litany of hard luck stories from the beaten runners.

Some horses should not have been in the race. Some forced to race wide.

Many were variously 'held up' and  impeded -- especially at the 200 / 150 m mark. It was nor a fair race.

Read the stewards report -- and ask if the field was inflated.


Brimham Rocks (GB) Change of tactics: to be ridden more forward. Raced four wide without cover in the early stages.

Mr Quickie Change of tactics: intention to hold a midfield position. As the start was effected became unruly, jumped away awkwardly and lost ground. Settled towards the rear of the field. Held up from the 400m until shifting out approaching the 100m to gain clear running.

Hartnell (GB) Held up from the 400m until gaining clear running approaching the 100m.

Mirage Dancer (GB) Slow to begin. Brushed on the hindquarters near the 200m and became unbalanced.

Constantinople (IRE) Slow to begin. Held up from the 400m and near the 300m had to be checked when disappointed for a run between Sound (GER) and Vow and Declare.

Rostropovich (IRE) Caught wide without cover before rider Dwayne Dunn allowed the gelding to stride outside the leader near the 1400m. Checked to avoid heels near the 150m.

Finche (GB) Raced three wide without cover.

Red Verdon Tightened for room near the 200m.

Gold Mount (GB) Approaching the 300m until near the 150m was held up for clear running.

Vow and Declare Steadied near the 1800m when racing tight between Mr Quickie and Rostropovich (IRE). (D. Dunn) which shifted in slightly. Rider Dwayne Dunn was reprimanded. Near the 200m taken in off its course when tightened in onto Sound (GER).

Angel of Truth Checked to avoid heels near the 150m.

Sound (GER) Had to relinquish its position near the 1800m when tightened for room. Severely checked approaching the 200m when tightened for room.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: napes on 2019-Oct-24, 10:14 AM
Time for time out on this thread!!

Show of hands.  :thumbsup:
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-27, 09:54 AM

The carnival is over in Sydney

......... inflated fields of low-grade horses in three races in Sydney reflected in F4 'dividends' of $90,000, 10,000 and 6, 000


----------  in Melbourne the tragedy of hit-and-run unknowns frustrating punters is just gathering pace.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Oct-30, 08:58 PM


Greed rules -- a big-weekend for the big-field boys!


I know we are addicted .... we will bet ........ but no one would back themselves to win on the day betting across the programs in Sydney or Melbourne.

As between the two, Sydney looks the better bet.

Black-type races should be fair contests to guide ratings and breeding-- they are not -- tears I cry lives on.

Inflated fields for straight races at Flemington confounds concepts of quality racing product.

The declaration that all the races in Melbourne are G1, G2 or G3 makes one wonder about the role of a classification committee that denies the Everest G1 status.

The wrecked legs of the quadrella races in both states are an insult to the 'most punters' that make them so popular.

..... racing, administered by no-mercy monopolists, is one business where the punter-customer is never-right, not even considered for an entitlement to a fair go.

............. go out for the day ........ tape the races ......... come home and enjoy the relief of not losing.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Oct-31, 06:56 AM
Peter, are you married?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Oct-31, 02:35 PM
Wily Pete would lose and complain if he was playing Tiddlywinks.......Why would you wish marriage to Pete and another Human being?
This thread and other similar threads are the reason I don't come here too often,
It would be fair to assume that a Forum on punting and the Thoroughbred would find a lot of like minded lovers of our great sport....even allowing for a difference of opinion and some stimulating conversation........How wrong would you be??????
Arguing and beating the same drum on the same negative crap for years.......is not attractive....at least not to me.......and it always seems to be at the top of the hit parade.....please stop! and lets talk more about what unites us rather than what divides us
(Give it up Pete, if you haven't won by now surely you can see you have reached a stalemate and any continued point making is lost)
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: napes on 2019-Oct-31, 02:55 PM
Hear Hear  :clap2:

Surely the moderators can do something to move the dribbler on!

He is the cancer this forum is dying from!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Oct-31, 02:57 PM
Couldn't agree more folks
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: JWesleyHarding on 2019-Oct-31, 05:07 PM
Leave the bloke alone, fellas.

Obsessive about things at times and gives plenty of cause for differences of opinion.

But doesn't  give reason for what you are asking.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Nov-01, 01:02 AM
I certainly don't want Pete restrained or restricted from having an opinion........about anything.....but who doesn't know what Pete's opinion is on this subject?
I was just hoping Pete would see the light and know it is time to move on to something a little more positive and stimulating.........surely he has more than ONE opinion on more than One subject????
Let's be friends and talk racing, not politics!
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2019-Nov-01, 02:48 AM
Leave the bloke alone, fellas.

Obsessive about things at times and gives plenty of cause for differences of opinion.

But doesn't  give reason for what you are asking.

  emthup
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Nov-01, 10:59 PM
Pete doesn't have many opinions....He is bitter about the politics of racing, especially in Mexico, end of story, he keeps making the same point, it wouldn't even be so bad if he was right or even if he made any sense.....but he is totally wrong and makes no sense!
Every time I come here I feel like Punxsutawney Phil and it's Groundhog day all over again!!
You can't have a difference of Opinion with Pete......he doesn't acknowledge a different opinion.....EVER!!!
he isn't obsessive about "things" it is always the same thing, he has a Grudge and he is trying to drag everyone into his quagmire......but as I said, I don't want any restrictions put on him, what would be nice would be for Pete to see the light and realise that his point has been stated,
No need to reiterate it over and over and over and over and over and over is there??.....did I make my point?? or should I make it over and over and over and over and over and over again, Ad infinitum?? until you give in and agree??? I would rather just go somewhere else, I don't know how wily and others can continue to fight.....not like Pete listens, is it?
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: bascoe on 2019-Nov-01, 11:24 PM
Pete has made his point - lets say noted - and it is his opinion and that is that. That great American runner had a great quote on opinions..seems appropriate here but you can reference that yourselves...

Lets move on from that and my only view is that if if is kept to one thread then fine, no one apart from Pete will keep feeding it.

Admin should only need to intervene if Pete infects other threads?

Bascoe
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-14, 08:14 PM

SOWS EARS AND SILK PURSES -- be very wary of Newcastle racing on Saturday

For terrible and horrible TV coverage of racing, it would be hard to beat the tripe served up on 2KSKY's 528 this evening as a 90 minute prelude to the $1 m race, and supporting program, at Newcastle on Saturday.

This is even worse than the never-watch stuff on the RVL channel.

Stay well clear of this nonsense.

Grossly inflated fields all day  -- the smell of a buck cannot override the commonsense of presenting a fair program as a 'standalone' and building a reputation for a fair go.

....... wait for the post-mortem on Sunday ......... do not do it again!


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-20, 08:49 PM

Stay away from this week's 'standalones' -- unfamiliar  form is not comparable

Most fields are inflated and the clutter makes life hard.

Last year the trifecta and F4 dividends on the Ballarat cup were 3.000 and 66,000 -- not a god look.

The 'gonged' poses a new question but the usual warning signs are there.

One profile race does not make a program -- it does provide a hoax-context for over-hyped  promotion from a compliant, captive media.

.............. do not get hyped ............ have a couple of bets ...... go to the movies .... watch the replays later.
 
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-21, 07:38 PM


Too many nominations 'accepted' to fill fields should not be

.............a quick perusal of the pre-post markets for Saturday clearly indicate that too many no-hopers are listed to run at both the grange and smelleratt........... administrative greed writ large and fair-racing abandoned.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Jeunes on 2019-Nov-21, 08:06 PM
Pete, what is a good number of runners to you.

There were a couple of posters including me commenting on the small fields on Wednesday at Rosehill. It was about 50
In total.

I would be interested in the number of runners for you and your reasons for that particular number.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-22, 07:05 AM


Field sizes -- the number of runners .....and ...... reasons

The weekly parade of 'rough results' in Melbourne is the best evidence of unfair racing -- institutionalized administrative corruption of the races.

I would like most races to be limited to 10 starters from 12 acceptances. Races run from 'unfair starts' would be limited to 8 from 10 acceptances -- e.g. races run over 1400m at Caulfield and Flemington and sprint races at Rosehill as well as all highway-robbery races run in Sydney.

The principal concern is about ensuring 'fair racing' by limiting fields to runners with a credible chance of being placed. Quality control of the racing product presented is being mocked by paying generous appearance money for running 10th.

This is buck chasing.

If ASIC and the ACCC investigated field-size policies the findings would be damming in terms of 'deliberate product detriment' -- comparable to putting poison in boxes on the shelf labeled fit-to-eat.

One corollary is to not accept nominations of runners content to run 10th -- the stewards and administrators should  have a say on denying acceptances of Bradbury-runners with no credible chance.

In general I would not limit field sizes for major handicap races with eligibility and order-of-entry based on performance -- i.e. most G1 handicaps would have any number consistent with safe-racing.

That said the overall quality of the fields for the Caulfield and Melbourne Cups has deteriorated to the point where 'fillers' cluttering up the fields make these races unfair.

Imagine what Frankie Dettori would say if asked about the Cup fields for horses there to win.

Beyond G1 handicaps the view is very clouded -- many black-type races run in Melbourne simply do not warrant that status -- inflated-field cluttering with 10th-place hopefuls wrecks those races.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Nov-22, 11:14 AM
Well, thank god no one listens to you.

8 horse fields will see racing die
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: napes on 2019-Nov-22, 12:52 PM
[If ASIC and the ACCC investigated field-size policies the findings would be damming in terms of 'deliberate product detriment' -- comparable to putting poison in boxes on the shelf labeled fit-to-eat


Libelous ??

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Dave on 2019-Nov-22, 02:40 PM
Pete you keep talking about huge exotic payouts like that is a bad thing....do you have any grasp of human nature at all??
Why do you think punters take exotic bets??........if they wanted to make it easier to win for a start they could just bet the fav to run a place....do you think they just want to make a 10% ROI?
These are people hoping and praying for a rough result.....that is the whole idea of trying to pick 4 winners in a row instead of one.....or the F4 in the correct order......BIG dividends!!
I never bet exotics and I never buy Lotto/Lottery tickets either.....but hey that is just the way I like to bet........
Why can't you just accept that you are greedy, a terrible judge, don't put in the effort and are a bad loser!!......and you can't have it both ways.....you can't take small risks and get large returns.....well most Punters can't.....
Me thinks all your warnings is really subliminal for your own edification.........trying to tell yourself to take your own advice.....and apparently it isn't working!
To quote William Shakespeare "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Nov-22, 08:00 PM
Dave, the only reason Pete bleats about F4s is it’s the only way he can attempt to justify his moronic thoughts about racing.....which we all know are driven by self interest

When fronted with facts about the real dividends on the most popular bets, (win bets) & the lack of interference in race fields, the only comfort he can grasp for is some large, obscure exotic divvy, which you point out, people actually want 💡

The blokes a clown as evidenced by the fact that no one comes to his support on his numerous & repetitive posts
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: PoisonPen7 on 2019-Nov-22, 09:31 PM

Beyond G1 handicaps the view is very clouded -- many black-type races run in Melbourne simply do not warrant that status -- inflated-field cluttering with 10th-place hopefuls wrecks those races.

This is starting to get some attention.

Last weekend at Sandown there were these races:

Group 3 Sandown Cup $160,000
Group 3 Kevin Heffernan Stakes $160,000
Group 2 Sandown Guineas $250,000
Group 3 Summoned Stakes $160,000
Group 3 Eclipse Stakes $160,000

In the upcoming Brisbane Summer Carnival we will have

Listed Nudgee Stakes $200,000
Listed Gold Edition Plate $200,000
Group 3 Grand Prix Stakes $250,000
Group 3 BJ McLachlan Stakes $250,000
Group 3 Vo Rogue Plate $300,000

The Pattern Committee seems to be biased against Queensland and pro Victorian in some of it's decisions.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-23, 09:35 PM

Rotted racing -- corrupted by administrators buck-chasing


Reflect on today.

........... a $50,000 quadrella at the mange........... $25,000 at smellerat, coupled with a F4 'paying' some $200,000+ along with other F4s paying 18k, 27k,and 31k.

Promotional talk about 'standalones' is over-hyped nonsense.

Do not forget it.

.......... those responsible for this tripe today should be held accountable...... asked to explain ... then sacked.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Nov-24, 07:47 AM
1423533754
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Jeunes on 2019-Nov-24, 08:27 AM

Rotted racing -- corrupted by administrators buck-chasing


Reflect on today.

........... a $50,000 quadrella at the mange........... $25,000 at smellerat, coupled with a F4 'paying' some $200,000+ along with other F4s paying 18k, 27k,and 31k.

Promotional talk about 'standalones' is over-hyped nonsense.

Do not forget it.

.......... those responsible for this tripe today should be held accountable...... asked to explain ... then sacked.

When you mean sacked, who are you talking about? The racing bodies in the states concerned or the people at the TAB for encouraging big fields.

Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-24, 10:46 AM



INFLATED FIELDS -- WINNERS AND LOSERS


We know that most -- almost all -- punters are 'losers' even after allowing for them to collectively pay a 15% 'entertainment tax': the effective deduction for most punters is now 100%. Others to lose from this regime are the connections and jockeys denied a fair race. The racing industry as a whole loses its reputation. Top trainers are walking away.

.......... now for the winners

The big winners are the corporates -- including TABs -- betting fixed odds -- rough results skin their customers already 'selected' as unlikely to win. The betting syndicate operators, subsidized with rebates, knock off most of the TABs' exotic pools, especially popular quadrellas almost guaranteed one 'rough leg'. The pre-post fixed-odds offered include an excessive % for the book.

......  the administrators are guilty

RVL and RNSW are responsible for the fair conduct of racing and the idea that they take their riding instructions from 'corporate bookmakers' is abhorrent  -- as is their apparent dedication to pandering to politicians demanding feather-bedding of rural racing not otherwise viable.

..........and ....  consumer protection and competition regulators are as derelict with racing as they are with banking

............ as for the future ....... have a look at the rest of the world where racing is now a relic of once-was.
 


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Jeunes on 2019-Nov-24, 02:38 PM


INFLATED FIELDS -- WINNERS AND LOSERS


We know that most -- almost all -- punters are 'losers' even after allowing for them to collectively pay a 15% 'entertainment tax': the effective deduction for most punters is now 100%. Others to lose from this regime are the connections and jockeys denied a fair race. The racing industry as a whole loses its reputation. Top trainers are walking away.

.......... now for the winners

The big winners are the corporates -- including TABs -- betting fixed odds -- rough results skin their customers already 'selected' as unlikely to win. The betting syndicate operators, subsidized with rebates, knock off most of the TABs' exotic pools, especially popular quadrellas almost guaranteed one 'rough leg'. The pre-post fixed-odds offered include an excessive % for the book.

......  the administrators are guilty

RVL and RNSW are responsible for the fair conduct of racing and the idea that they take their riding instructions from 'corporate bookmakers' is abhorrent  -- as is their apparent dedication to pandering to politicians demanding feather-bedding of rural racing not otherwise viable.

..........and ....  consumer protection and competition regulators are as derelict with racing as they are with banking

............ as for the future ....... have a look at the rest of the world where racing is now a relic of once-was.

Intrigued about your perspective on the role of RVL and Racing NSW in Racing. Please expand
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Nov-25, 09:24 AM



Monopolies are always bad for the customers

Government protected monopolies, especially, are an open invitation to the misuse of administrative 'discretion'.

De-facto an interstate – and international -- cartel among administrators and governments ensures the racing monopoly is, collectively, an ‘un-competitive’ rort.

There is no accountability -- racing that is not commercially viable should be not conducted. Allowing non-viable racing bears on which electorates get 'racing tax money'.

Racing-tax-money is politically special because it is ‘free’ -- outside the state budget process --  and 'washed' through state racing administrations, to which it flows as an 'entitlement' to a share of betting turnover. This is money laundering writ large -- corruption follows as a matter of course.

A 'too-much is not-enough' approach to running races is a waste of money.

The inevitable  next step is administrators and politicians scheming to get more ‘free’ racing-tax-money.

Alas the innovation – corporates betting fixed-odds – once benefiting punters has been turned against them.

When TABs started betting fixed-odds it was a short leap to institutionalize the corruption of the business – turn a 16% limit on the take-out into cop-the-lot, take 100% from most punters. This was done by the payment of substantial prize-money for running 10th and letting any bakers-horse get a run to clutter up any field – almost ensuring rough results.

Nationally, on any Saturday, the pool for the Melbourne quadrella alone runs to some $5 million. Administrators engineering just one rough leg delivers a bonanza for corporates and syndicates (getting rebates) and a wipe-out for loyal punters betting modestly and putting the money in the plunder-pool.

Eventually of course such contrived arrangements self destruct -- RVL in particular now seems determined to have Victoria follow Queensland and South Australia into oblivion so far as its racing industry goes.

RNSW is smarter – stealing the game but risking grave temptation.

The process is insidious as it unfolds to destroy any glimmer of product quality control.

......... others can play with suggestions that some of the corporate ‘bonanza’ is ‘returned’ to the industry in sponsorships and related schemes likely to be welcomed by administrators.

It is too late for me to change my attachment to the punt – others addicted to crosswords enjoy that mental challenge – now I simply bet small, enjoying the chase while knowing the only players still in the business with integrity are the horses and 99.9% of direct-participants.


Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Dec-04, 06:41 PM


History tends  to repeat -- be wary of the Pakenham standalone on Saturday


 Forewarned is forearmed .............the results for last year speak for themselves:

                          https://www.tab.com.au/racing/2018-12-08/PAKENHAM/M/R/9/Win
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: HarmersHaven on 2019-Dec-04, 07:28 PM
Races 1 thru 6 on that day were won by 2x favourites, 2x second favourites, 2x third favourites - at an average price of $4.80.

The last three winners paid 10.50, 7.80 and 8.80 - hardly friendless in betting and impossible to find.


Stop lying.


FRO.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Dec-05, 06:59 AM
Races 1 thru 6 on that day were won by 2x favourites, 2x second favourites, 2x third favourites - at an average price of $4.80.

The last three winners paid 10.50, 7.80 and 8.80 - hardly friendless in betting and impossible to find.


Stop lying.


FRO.


👏👏👏
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Dec-05, 07:16 AM

................... speaking for themselves

............ the average  F4 dividend for the 8 quadrella races was approaching $10,000 and the quadrella paid $3k.

As I was saying, be wary of the Pakenham 'standalone' on Saturday  --- there are 13 acceptors in most races, some 'accepted' to run should not have been.

Runners with long-odds SPs -- some 200/1 -- should be scratched and not left in to clutter the fields.

A major problem with standlones is administrators going for broke -- full fields with too many Bradburys.

This is shortsighted -- they should ensure a fair go for the punters to build a reputation for 'a good day'.

......... be wary.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Dec-06, 02:13 PM


punters.com.au is similarly wary of Pakenham

Racing heads to Pakenham for their stand-alone Cup meeting on Saturday and it shapes as a tough meeting for punters. Worth noting that some of the local trainers have set themselves for a big day with strong representation.


............... they say 'no bet' about three of the races.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: wily ole dog on 2019-Dec-07, 06:51 AM
Well I’ve got 4 in my black book and I like another 3 so I’m confident of a win. Hoping for the quaddy as some I like are big prices

As usual, punters, have a bet when Mair says not to as he’s never been right
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Dec-07, 07:33 PM


Races run -- I got it right

............  some others have the same regard for the 'truth'  that other loudmouth trumpeter.

Some respectful recognition would be appropriate.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: nemisis on 2019-Dec-07, 08:12 PM
Well done to the Kiwi connections of Etah James.......gutsy little staying daughter of Raise The Flag rewarded their perseverance with a big payday.
Always goes around at big odds and plenty seem to have missed her last run.......strange but good.

Was I on?.....no...... I'm off the punt......was on last start of course!.....and the start before that and so on.  :what:

Certainly a "smokie" in the last, Peter........not a local but 20's into 7's, so some leave the course happy.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: Peter Mair on 2019-Dec-07, 08:33 PM


 VAINSTREAM   -- was my only winner at  Pakenham today  -- 5 @ 20/1 returned 105.
Title: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold
Post by: nemisis on 2019-Dec-07, 08:36 PM

 VAINSTREAM   -- was my only winner at  Pakenham today  -- 5 @ 20/1 returned 105.
So it was you who crunched the price.  :lol: