London Trader

On 10/23/2023 at 1:13 PM, PWJ said:

Agreed. No deterrent and the suspension should not be able to be deferred. It also send the message to jockeys that you can flout the whip rule as hard as you want and you won't lose the race. It's also a bad look from an animal welfare point of view as the activists will watch these big races - Melbourne Cup, Caulfield Cup, Cox Plate - eager to see the rules being flouted. I think there should be a rule that if you exceed the allowed hits 3 or more times then you lose the race.

And if every jockey goes over that, who wins the race?

22 hours ago, Turny said:

Hesi, your script differs to mine, very much so.

To float a horse to Timaru and back with all other costs is a 650 outlay, running for 7k winners prize, after 2500 to get them ready, so outgoing 3150 with 3850 return if you win

Down here to remain in red you need 3 wins per racing period, achieved by 4% or less.

Numbers are dreadful, unless you have deep pockets

On any financial assessment, a no go.

You have to race for reasons other than a break even or positive return.

I am lucky, in my ownership days I had 4 going round and 3 wins saved them all. Was achievable too. Not today.

No Mercs or BMWs parked at Riccarton at 6am when I am there. The going is tough, super tough

Why would you go to Riccarton at 6am these days given you've said you dont own any and you don't punt on NZ races?

Google "Lou Gates animal welfare charge"

3 minutes ago, mardigras said:

Surely you know - you seem to know most things. They've been around quite a while - earlier on, they used to get their members that were interested to put money towards an individual one off bet. Surely as a follower, you know this.

That's a punters club in most people's language. 

6 minutes ago, mardigras said:

I'm not sure. They may be ahead, but not all of their betting has been on punters clubs. I'd say they would only be ahead due to the largess of the TAB topping up their losses and offering $50k bonus bets.

Can you tell ne the last time you received a $50k bonus bet? I think BGP made a profit of $100k off their last one. 

If BGP are head, it's a pretty interesting strategy to offer bonus bets to winning punters. Other winners, they restrict. Must be just an anomaly.

Where else are they betting besides punters clubs?

11 hours ago, mardigras said:

Yep, it is a costly day - as you say, why would the industry fund sales restricted races. Stupidity.

BGP has its place - but the issue is that other punters simply can't get the bets on they are allowed to. Now they have been losers overall. But if the last race had come in for them last night, they may have more than squared that ledger. I wonder if the TAB would have looked at restricting them if that had happened. We won't know of course, and the TAB wants to keep the BGP punters themselves going. It would be interesting to know how much additional betting was done by BGP members during that meeting. Certainly, the tote pools were pathetic. BGP bets on some races was as high as the entire commingled win and place tote pools.

Just out of interest, how much are they down across all their punters clubs?

On 1/19/2022 at 3:39 PM, Gospel Of Judas said:

What about all the free benefits use get when first started BGP from Betfair.. Notice never ever disclosed who gets all of those benefits, what puts me off joining BGP. 

What free benefits were those mate?

If all jockeys in the race break the rules who wins?

Do you think horses should get relegated if the jockey breaches the whip rules?

3 hours ago, mardigras said:

Looks like @London Traderlikes to pop up to attempt to have a dig at other posters. And then disappears again, with no contribution to the actual discussion.

Asking a genuine question is now construed as having a dig? Sensitive much.

16 hours ago, mardigras said:

Quite easily - if you could read. Perhaps give it a go. If after trying that, you still can't work it out, let everyone reading this site know. Thanks.

Still can't work it out. Care to point me in the right direction?

On 11/11/2021 at 11:10 AM, mardigras said:

Here is the same table using betfair price data as an indicator of chance. This is using a price just prior to start (not SP, as SP wasn't always available on NZ racing). Less runners due to not having Betfair pricing data on all races.

And also to note, the markets on NZ racing are not anywhere near 100% especially a few years back - and a lot of the excess market % was in the longer priced runners, which inflates the supposed chance of longer priced runners more so than those facing more competitive betting.

This shows a clear shift punting wise towards inner barriers compared to an equal chance on barrier. But the shift does not relate to outcomes.

 

 

 

 

How can there be more starters in barrier 2 than barrier 1?

So who doesn't want to race there?

So people do want to race there now? 

16 hours ago, Hesi said:

It's a lot more straightforward

First NZ Derby run in March

People Are Strange by The Doors

On 1/22/2021 at 7:11 AM, curious said:

Well it doesn't look like great value to me. I also don't get how they can get that bet on anyway when no-one else can.

What price did it pay on the tote?

On 1/11/2021 at 8:21 AM, mardigras said:

Quite agree Hesi. Decision making at the TAB doesn't appear to be a strong point however. Just look at the number of abandoned races on US events due to no investment. There has to be overheads in even offering these events - things like ensuring the event is closed when the race starts etc. Even if the costs are minimal, why offer events where there is going to be no investment?

Where do you get the idea they are abandoned due to there being no investment?

17 minutes ago, ABB said:

Hands. Reading the race both his and the others around him Taking the right options more often than the other do. 

Maybe as a betting proposition he is over backed but from an owner/trainer position and you had a horse you thought was decent he would be most trainers first option.  

Aaron, please remember most trainers have no idea according to mardigras. What they do won't affect the horses performance. If a horse can run it will run regardless of who is training it and who is riding it. 

I guess thats why despite claiming to be a professional punter who wins year on year is still having to work for a living.

18 minutes ago, mardigras said:

 I thought you said he was the best, not just better than Chris Dell.

Is he better than Chris Dell or not? What does your analysis tell you?

Barry, do you think if your trainer came to you and said we have two rider options in a Group 1 race, Opie Bosson or Chris Dell you wouldn't give two tosses who he chose?

28 minutes ago, mardigras said:

Draw a name out of a hat of those trainers that would be likely to race my horse where I am likely to want to see it race. Or choose the trainer in an area where I could visit it. And exclude any trainer that had fees that were markedly higher than the 'norm' for that area.

If the horse was half decent, it wouldn't stay in NZ. I'd then send it to a trainer that operated in the part of the new country that gave it decent access to the types of events I thought the horse could be competitive in. And repeat the process above with those trainers.

I certainly wouldn't get hung up on who was training it. Just as I don't get hung up on who is 

Have you raced any horses in NZ?

But as an owner of an unraced horse how do you decide what trainer you send it to? 

Do you think trainers are important? Or pretty much irrelevant too?

Next we will have Barry telling us Aaron Bidlake is a better trainer than Jamie Richards and Curious telling us Trevor Chambers does the job better than anyone else in the CD.