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.

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.

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.

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.

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 ;)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?