Ultimate Risk

[King Cugat]

Betfair is still the #1 site to watch & continues to support my claim that the market is the #1 key to punting.

i watched the betfair moves in the last @ Canterbury tonite. Ultimate Risk opened up in the ring around the $1.70 mark. There was early support all around for it through most sites.
15min-20min in a $50k lay bet went up. Now most times you might see a $5k lay then a smaller one go up at the same time. This is usually done on Betfair to push the odds out before they remove the lays, swap over and get on at a slightly inflated price. Otherwise known as Manipulation. Its common in most races. Tonite this unusually large $50k lay bet didnt move. It infact chased higher allowing $5k chunks to be taken out of it. This to me was an instant alert. Not only was it a very high amount for a Thursday night at Canterbury but they were more then happy to lay the entire $50k which is a good sign they know somethings up.

Ultimate Risk went out very slightly in the market upon jump. Betting moves will show closely enough to $1.70 open $1.85 jump. Looking through other sites it wasnt obvious to most that something was up and the horse was supported well enough. All it took was 1 layer up to something very unusual for those that watch closely enough.

When they cornered in the last the voice of Ian Craig was heard " Ultimate Risk is going backwards" then " Ultimate Risk finishes last, there must be something terribly a miss with it"

Well, after seeing this layer chase down anyone that came near to get his $50k unloaded it was hardly surprising. $50k starting near $1.70 and chasing punters all the way up to and over $1.80 on a Thursday night meet & "the horse must have gone terribly a miss"....it was hardly a surprise. I was infact waiting to see how it would get beat.

I wonder whether our stewards will take it further. I watch flucs on betfair everyday and this was very out of the box to say the least. Someone knew exactly what was going on. Even on a Saturday, doing your best to get rid of $50k is worthy of a 2nd look at thats mixed up between big bets. This was 1 lone sole with an awfully big gripe with an odds on horse that just happened to tail right off.

[Chrome Prince]

And the backer that ate up the 50K????

You can't really say someone "knew" something was up or the 50K would have been left swinging in the wind.

It was obvious something went wrong with the horse, neither the layer nor the rider knew, it was a lay on a pretty short horse - see it quite often with big money and they tail off.

Odds on that same 50k will appear on the weekend on Sydney races and the horse will win.

It's not as if the horse led and ran out of puff or fitness, or the jock misplaced the horse - something went very wrong.
In fact a 50k on a short horse signals top odds got somewhere else and it was a no risk trade.
Just my opinion.

P.S. It's not just me that knows about favourites at Canterbury, it's pretty well known around racing circles.
Check out the very next meeting at Canterbury and you'll see what I mean.

[King Cugat]

Chrome

And the backer that ate up the 50K????

You can't really say someone "knew" something was up or the 50K would have been left swinging in the wind.

no backer took him on head to head. its was taken in small chunks all the way through. This $50k was put up much earlier then agencies moving price, so i suggest he didnt get on anywhere else at a better price. I see it more then not that when a horse is getting heavily hit on the lay side and the money is being taken the horse, no matter what its odds will fail to make a placing.
I was making an observation after spending 20min clicking on every site i have up to find a trend to match this layers stash. It wouldnt be at all uncommon for the stable to lay it off. I am aware of such a similiar thing about to happen in the next week for a trainer to retreive lost EI revenue north of the border. Do you have a horse Chrome? Spend time in stables? and have frienDs who do the same? We find this to be a common occurance spanning many years. The rise of Betfair has only made it worse.
The point was before you posted. i made an observation. It was very very unusual to see such a large sum on a Canterbury night meeting want to be layed. They didnt get better odds and tried to lay it off at a profit, as you claim because there was no better odds available anywhere. THey started at $1.70 and drove right up to $1.88 with $25k at that price available. THe horse as it turns out talied well off last. The observation stands & my suspision was correct. You chrome have simply gone against the grain. Perhaps your right but big lay, failed horse is what i am talking about here. Nothing more.

[King Cugat]

It's not as if the horse led and ran out of puff or fitness, or the jock misplaced the horse - something went very wrong.


yes Chrome that was my point. Had the horse been beaten in a photo or something then i guess the layer would have been holding his breath nervously. The fact it got beat by so far was my point. Horses arent like dogs and get weighed before boxing. They can 'fill' a horse very easily. The ways to stop a horse from getting max oxygen levels is very easy to do and is the most obvious way to go about it. The horse was lucky to make it back to the stalls....and was $1.75f. There was no risk.

[partypooper]

King, you're not suggesting that this sport that we all love is FIXED in any way are you?? surely not?

[King Cugat]

gday Party

I know big lays are beaten on a daily basis. This one was very sus. As Chrome says ( even though i explained i am refering to a 1 off race in CANTERBURY where you dont often see a $50k bet let alone someone laying one, AND chasing them all the way out to $1.88, and also understand the favs always get beaten there.) yes there will be plenty like it on SATURDAY that will get beat.
The stewards have ordered a full vet exam. The jockey says the horse was spent at the 500m mark !!!!
i made an observation that resulted 100% correct in my feelings behind how the horse would go.
Not only didnt it just try then perhaps fall away, it was spent 500m out! It won its first 2 starts so it has some ability. To then run like that and after someone went out of their way to let everybody they could on board ........ suggest there was something FIXED....who me??
They didnt even sit at the one price. They started below what they went on course @ $1.70 and chased everyone in sight to finish at $1.88 which was higher then you could get on course when they jumped. Should have posted it under the fisho thread i spose.

[Chrome Prince]

Sorry King, but your post is just cementing the paranoia that opposers use to fight Betfair.
There are many ways to lay a horse without Betfair, in fact lots of ways just using the tote.
I see that you've seen a large amount get eaten up at what appears to be a high price and come to the conclusion it was a sting, only because the horse failed miserably.

Have you noticed the large amounts eaten up at well over the odds and the horse wins???

I have seen much larger than 50k.
Remember the Universal Queen plunge, well that horse was laid early for very large amounts until the jig was up.

So what did all these layers do before Betfair, how would they have laid the horse in question?
Would they just have let it go and thought, wish we could lay it?
No they would find another way, and they've been doing it for years.

I have owned horses and been around stables, although I don't care which friends have horses, because that's irrelevant to the argument.

I have yet to see a trainer anywhere, say this will run last.
If the horse is that bad they won't run it - and something really bad was wrong with the horse, which was only found out in running.

I am aware of such a similiar thing about to happen in the next week for a trainer to retreive lost EI revenue north of the border.

I really think you live in fantasy land.

If that were correct, that trainer could lose his licence, you think he'd risk it -I don't.

There is absolutely no substance to your claim other than the amount laid, and 50k is not a large amount.

A stewards report will probably verify that something like a nail in the hoof or similar happened.

You are forgettingthat all money on Betfair is identified, it is much easier to pull something sinister off in cash.

[King Cugat]

yes Chrome your the ants pants around here we all know.

I am refering to 1 race....you still continue to refer to other races, that again i am not.

Fantasy Land reference

if you think stables dont bet for or against their horses in races then theres no point in continueing. You are 100% wrong. I know for a fact so whats the point. Everyone knows horses are set in racing fro plunges either way.

If you own a horse and your trainer thinks hes been lagging in work why wouldnt you lay it to retreive some payments for bills? DO you honestly think this doeasnt happen? you are kidding.
The owner doesnt do it >> they get outsiders and give a cut so records are not taken.

Well at the end of the day i hope the owners of this site are making a heap from your sales pal because its no wonder most have droppped off from those days of quality posts i find in the archive

Who can be bothered with boffins like you?

To think that stables arent using their horses for extra income in the betting arena.....as i said, theres no point in argueing with someone who is out of touch with something as simple as that.

Last post....... dont bother

[Parlay player]

King,


I wish you well in your future endeavours.

I only became a member on this site a few weeks ago & had been using as a tool for learning, it is amasing the things I have learnt.

I have not offered many opinions because any time anyone seems to offer an opinion which doesn't match that of a few certain folks they are shot down.

To all those sensible forum follower farewell. To any others obviously no point to make a comment which is rude.:)

[peterpan]

This was posted on another forum before that race.
I think it just adds a bit more reality to kings theory.

A little bird told me that the wrong Bob thomsen horse won the other day and that Beau covet in the last tonite will run a big race
<!-- / message --><!-- controls --> http://www.madpunter.com.au/forum/webchat/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.madpunter.com.au/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=16286)

[Makybe Diva]

Ultimate Risk and Baby Belle both cost me last night and funnily enough they were Gai's best tips on her website and they both ran last.

[Chrome Prince]

yes Chrome your the ants pants around here we all know.

I am refering to 1 race....you still continue to refer to other races, that again i am not.

Fantasy Land reference

if you think stables dont bet for or against their horses in races then theres no point in continueing. You are 100% wrong. I know for a fact so whats the point. Everyone knows horses are set in racing fro plunges either way.

If you own a horse and your trainer thinks hes been lagging in work why wouldnt you lay it to retreive some payments for bills? DO you honestly think this doeasnt happen? you are kidding.
The owner doesnt do it >> they get outsiders and give a cut so records are not taken.

Well at the end of the day i hope the owners of this site are making a heap from your sales pal because its no wonder most have droppped off from those days of quality posts i find in the archive

Who can be bothered with boffins like you?

To think that stables arent using their horses for extra income in the betting arena.....as i said, theres no point in argueing with someone who is out of touch with something as simple as that.

Last post....... dont bother

If racing is so fixed why bother then?

Because it isn't.

There are occassions of course and perhaps last night was one, but I don't believe so.

Because I don't agree with scaremongering I'm the ants pants????

The horse raced upside down, even the jockey said so because he could not obtain the correct position,because of being biffeted in the early part of the race, the stewards have asked for a full vet examination.

Yes, horses are plunged on when something is known, you think the stable rush out and lay every short horse???

No they don't, you keep referring to the one incident - ok let's have a reality check.

It was actually backed in from $2.20 on Betfair into $1.65 and then out to $1.88 and higher.

You missed all the action hours earlier, I backed the horse at $2.08.

As to your reference to sales, it's none of your business really and totally irrelevant.

Have a nice one.

Please supply the proof that it was a setup.

[King Cugat]

Thats right Plastic Prince,

Racing is quite the clean skin of industries, go ask McEvoy or the Fine Cotton boys. Theres money theres ********** its not hard to understand. Your also in touch with everything and nobody else has any idea. Remember the easyrun thread. Those that didnt leave the site after chrome let loose on this poor fella can probably search the archives under the easyrun.
Your darkest days Chrome were caused by this industry << self confessed.
Now your the professor. You now sit behind a little data base and give it to anyone that doesnt toe the line. Quite the step up i'd say.
There would have been more then 20 horses racing today that were layed by people on behalf of owners and stables to keep them surviving in the industry. If you think otherwise your no where near to the ground of how racing works. Racing markets start and end with stable opinions. More then 75% of stables are what are refered to as 'betting stables'
Look through any racing book written and you hear stories of this going on. THe latest one of Ken Callender makes reference to a night out at someones house where 2 jocks were there. Both riding the favs in the first. When 1 left he gave ken $1k to back the other jocks horse the next day. He did and it won. tj book speaks about every trainer and owner wanting to back their horse at good odds. That was pre betfair days. you really think they dont lay now aswell?
In twenty years from now they will be telling stories to the same effect with the date 2008 being used
I just cant believe you can sit up there giving it to others who make a thread using their own opinions....of all places a chat site.
I also cant believe that you dont undestand the day to day workings of how this industry runs and survives at the end where theres no group horses in stables to help earn the money.
Why dont you get back behind your data base and wait for the next easy run victim. This black duck made an opinon. That opinion became real in running. Your ridicoulos quote on i missed the action = garbage the turnover early on was mere pocket change which is what you must deal in.
I dont need to prove it....the race has been run and speaks for itself. The question is can you prove otherwise. I made the statement it looked sus. the horse was gone at the 5oom mark, why question it? i sound more right then you do....
Youve made youself look a complete novice in regards to how the industry works away from your data base. Many left in here wont bother giving you some stick about your lack of knowledge but sometimes you can give that opinion yourself.
I will defend my thread to the utmost then retire from this site. You will remian but never quite the intelect most might have had you for.
Battling trainers and owners and even bigger ones will always play the market to either survive or make more. I could name over a dozen that i know alone. You wanna say thats nonsence well ill see you back in fantasy land.

[Chrome Prince]

Opinion is one thing we are all entitled to, we are also entitled to disagree.

Would a steward rule a trainer off the course because 50k was laid on it and it ran last or near to. I don't think so.

A LOT more evidence would need to be supplied and vet reports are pending.

Because 50k was laid and the horse ran poorly is not a foregone conclusion of corrupt behaviour.

But each is entitled.

[Chrome Prince]

You did not say it looked sus, you said it was sus

And that sort of talk will get you into trouble at sometime in the future without hard evidence.

All your little digs make me smile, they are ramblings.

You seem to know it all, so be it.
But don't tar me with the same brush please.

As for the database, it provides an analytical approach based on facts, something which is sadly lacking in this thread, it comprises suspicion, inuendo and gut feeling.

Take that to the bank and see what you get ;)

[Chrome Prince]

I have a feeling I've seen you in the TAB King Cugat.

You're the bloke swearing at the horse, the trainer, the jockey, the stewards, the TAB agent and other punters after each race.

Because they're all out to get you and so am I.

Take a chill pill :D

I never said anything either about betting stables.

[crash]

There is a retired trainer here I know very well. Every now and then he puts me onto a long-shot tip because he knows me well enough to keep it to myself. The tips win about 50% of the time. I put him onto this thread and he laughed his head off. No corruption in horse racing from trainers and jockies? Read the life and insights of Australia's greatest trainer [T.J] in his book. He'd be laughing his head off too Chrome.

[King Cugat]

Would a steward rule a trainer off the course because 50k was laid on it and it ran last or near to. I don't think so. well hang on there pal....an earlier post you said that this trainer nth of the border wouldnt risk his license to lay his horse. now your saying they wouldnt bother?

Again hes a little struggling trainer in QLD who felt the E.I. strains . Your saying that if he layed his horse to win $20k he might lose his license...then turn around and say $50k is ok?

this is getting more stoopid

the bottom line here prince is.
i made an observation that i thought looked very out of the oridinary on 1 particular race. the horse ran and was gone at the 500m mark according to the jockey.
You came on and started telling me about past things and i was wrong.
i said again that sure tomorrow at Sydney there will be many large lays that win. im not refering to them and when the time comes they should be based upon the environment at the time.
Why do i have to make an opinion or observation then told to prove it. An observation / opinion is exactly that. if every post on this site was told they must prove it then what would happen?
Does anyone ask Jimbo why he must prove that he hasnt tipped a horse?
DO we ask Pengo to prove he uses monopoly money to bet with?
Do we ask Mr Qauddie if he really does put $500 on everything he says he does?
if i didnt hear of what goes on i sstables in wouldnt have posted it. I too wiish it dodnt happen, i am also realistic enough to know that those blokes in the bush who dont get given chances with top class horses need to bet aswell.
There was a reason we didnt want betfair...you think that everyones kept their promise?
the first line on my thread was i still think its the #1 site for betting. I said that for more then 1 reason.....it helps more then desperate punters.

[Chrome Prince]

Crash, I didn't say there wasn't corruption in racing, of course there is.
I said that not every instance of a horse running poorly was a "FIX" which is what the Cugat would have us all believe.

Perhaps addressing what I said and not what I didn't say might make it easier to follow.

[King Cugat]

I said that not every instance of a horse running poorly was a "FIX" which is what the Cugat would have us all believe.
there you go again......multiply it a bit more. my thread refered to 1 race.
i also refer to 20 trainers / owners today betting against their horse to survive. i am speaking of surviving not 'corruption'
This brings me back to "i became alerted" when i saw this particular bet. i didnt say it was corrupted. i simply refered to the fact i ws going to take it then decided not to because it didnt look right/ looked sus/was sus..its all the same... i was right...why question it?

[Chrome Prince]

well hang on there pal....an earlier post you said that this trainer nth of the border wouldnt risk his license to lay his horse. now your saying they wouldnt bother?

Again hes a little struggling trainer in QLD who felt the E.I. strains . Your saying that if he layed his horse to win $20k he might lose his license...then turn around and say $50k is ok?

this is getting more stoopid

the bottom line here prince is.
i made an observation that i thought looked very out of the oridinary on 1 particular race. the horse ran and was gone at the 500m mark according to the jockey.
You came on and started telling me about past things and i was wrong.
i said again that sure tomorrow at Sydney there will be many large lays that win. im not refering to them and when the time comes they should be based upon the environment at the time.
Why do i have to make an opinion or observation then told to prove it. An observation / opinion is exactly that. if every post on this site was told they must prove it then what would happen?
Does anyone ask Jimbo why he must prove that he hasnt tipped a horse?
DO we ask Pengo to prove he uses monopoly money to bet with?
Do we ask Mr Qauddie if he really does put $500 on everything he says he does?
if i didnt hear of what goes on i sstables in wouldnt have posted it. I too wiish it dodnt happen, i am also realistic enough to know that those blokes in the bush who dont get given chances with top class horses need to bet aswell.
There was a reason we didnt want betfair...you think that everyones kept their promise?
the first line on my thread was i still think its the #1 site for betting. I said that for more then 1 reason.....it helps more then desperate punters.

I said you are entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree with it.

But you said initially...

Someone knew exactly what was going on. This was 1 lone sole with an awfully big gripe with an odds on horse that just happened to tail right off.

And I disagree.

There are plenty of punters that know how Canterbury treats it's favourites.
and 50,000 is not a lot of money or liability when talking about $1.70 to $1.88.
And the hot Waterhouse favourite was beaten in a previous race.

You happened to see some money and a poorly performing horse.
Your conclusion is hype driven, but you're allowed to have it.

The reason of proof is because you are casting aspertions on the trainer and the jockey when it might be an innocent fumble.
It's unfair no matter who it is.

[crash]

Yep, agree with all that Chrome, but in my opinion and those of others I know close to the ground [the retired trainer here]and including my sister in QLD who runs the largest employment agency up there re- horse racing jobs - regularly admonishes me for punting because she 'knows' there is massive corruption in the industry.

One incident [re- kings complaint] doesn't prove anything. Maybe it was a rort, maybe not.

[King Cugat]

You happened to see some money and a poorly performing horse.

thats what i said in post #1
when was the last time you saw $50k being layed (not bet) at Canterbury?
I saw 1x $10k bet last night in another race...the punter took out a few numbers to get it too.
I havent made 1 reference to the trainer. i have made a reference to the person laying the bet. He could be an acquantance of an owner and have nothing to do with the trainer.
Your really getting away from your 2nd post there,

If racing is so fixed why bother then?

Because it isn't.
wow that looks sillier then before :) call it fixed, corrupt, or surviving, it happens more then a dozen times a day. But you claim it doesnt...your not in touch. Look at the posts by people other then me...they understand...is it that hard?

[Chrome Prince]

Then should we all give up?

No, we shouldn't because with all the corruption going on still 30% of favourites win.

Horses backed in win more than horses not backed.
Horses not backed still provide a nice profit.

It's all part and parcel of the game.

[Chrome Prince]

I meant in the scheme of things, stings and cats will always pop up from time to time, but the statistics stay the same because overall racing isn't fixed, but a small portion of them are.

I don't think you can pick which one's are without knowing all the facts.

We have a choice, we can think we were dudded everytime a horse loses or recognise that sometimes we may have been dudded, but overall the horse just didn't fire.

I don't believe I've been dudded more than most and I don't believe that money equals a fix,especiallywhen it was the get out stakes last race, favourites have a terrible habit of being overbet atCanterbury and some bookies opened the favourite at $2.00 and may well have layed off the early money and there was plenty of money for the eventual winner.

[King Cugat]

Yep, agree with all that Chrome, but in my opinion and those of others I know close to the ground [the retired trainer here]and including my sister in QLD who runs the largest employment agency up there re- horse racing jobs - regularly admonishes me for punting because she 'knows' there is massive corruption in the industry.

One incident [re- kings complaint] doesn't prove anything. Maybe it was a rort, maybe not.pretty much sums it up. coming from an x trainer too. It will continue to happen for as long as theirs money on the table.

[Chrome Prince]

One incident [re- kings complaint] doesn't prove anything. Maybe it was a rort, maybe not.

And that's the crux of my argument.

Plenty of horses will go down the gurgler because they are animals, not because someone knew something.
Some will because it is a setup, but I think you'll find that the most lucrative setups are the horses that win.
Betfair will have reported that 50k, there's no doubt with their reporting contract.
How do you think the owner of the account will justify himself if it was a setup, he'll put everyone in the proverbial.

There are far easier ways to lay a hot favourite and no trace would show (effectively).

[King Cugat]

saying it was sus and saying it was a rort are worlds apart. i didnt think i went there. I said i noticed something was sus and i stayed away from the bet i would have normally taken. I still believe the layer knew something because of his chase and size of lay for that particular meet. Rort....perhaps some inside knowledge...can we settle on that then?

[Chrome Prince]

No, actually I think the owner of the account "liked" something else ;)

But it's all conjecture.

If I see an easing hot favourite and money and talk coming for another horse, it's easier to get rid of money laying the easing horse than ruining the price of the horse you want on a small liquidity market.

Stewards final report will spell it out - if we ever see it ;)

[Chrome Prince]

King Cugat,

Apologies for getting heated mate.
It's no excuse, but I haven't been feeling well lately and my medication doesn't help.

Hope you have a lucrative weekend.

All the best.

[King Cugat]

ditto, done, gawn :)