Talking through my pocket - last Saturday at Belmont, Rose Of Thunder a noted speedster settled last in a 7 horse field over 1000m and made up good ground to run fourth between 3 lengths. Reading the stewards report it was noted that prior to betting commencing, the trainer advised stewards that the horse would be ridden in a rearward position. Furthermore there was no mention as to how the horse will be ridden in future.
The words "rearward position" interest me - why not just say that we are not trying to win today. Noticeably the horse was a drifter in the betting and if you were one of the priveleged few that were on course that was fine. To the rest of us, tough luck.
Interested to hear other peoples views - do we as punters have to continualy be treated as 2nd rate citizens.

Know how you feel. Trainers and jockey earnings should come from race winnings. Only then will the rot stop.

I was once told by an apprentice country Jockey, that in 70 odd rides he had pulled about 45 of them.

Win at this game? Ho, Ho, Ho.

When men, money and horses are involved, the only thing honest is the horse.

Cheers.

not sure if one should put a toe in the water here.

The great pittsburgh phil once said the odds of picking a winner in an 8 horse race are 7/1.
probably the most profound racing comment i've heard. considering it was said by the world's greatest punter it reminded me of my own experiences.
i went through the time systems and and weights of rem plante don scott etc. and the inconsistencies indicated that at the end of the day i couldnt discount co-incidence. this brings in phil's 7/1 factor.
was i lucky enough to be on a horse that won or was it because all the criteria matched up and things fell into place and the horse won. if that was the case why doesnt it happen more often.
the odds of backing a winner in an 8 horse race are 7/1

i too backed it on the thought that it would go forward and control the race. i thought it was a terrible ride but obviously sansom was riding to instructions. it was a 1000 metre race. surely a 1200 m race would have been a better race to see if the horse could settle.

Hi all,
this is another example of how we are getting done,without even the consideration of a bit of vaseline!Hopefully one day we'll see some of these jockeys treated as severly as in other countries,but then again I am almost surely dreaming.zzzzzzzzz

__________________
2 bet or not 2 bet that is the ?

Eggsperth and crash,

The commentators and officials put these "anomalies" down to the "great uncertainty of racing." Yeah......right!
There was a prime example recently in Sydney when the connections of a very well fancied runner, ridden by a leading rider, approached the stewards and advised that the runner would be allowed to drop out and settle then hopefully run home.
Well, guess what?......it jumped well and settled up near the lead and went on to win.
An official was interviewed on radio and suggested the rider was a "victim of circumstances" and had no choice but to ride the horse up in the lead because he was "going so well."
Remember, this style of racing had not suited this animal previously, so the answer is a "pineapple" ....as they say.
Also, a certain media commentator is on the record as saying that the betting public has no right to have access to intended riding tactics as the owners pay the bills and deserve the "inside knowledge."
That is what you are up against.
I would like to hear from "Que?" as one of his previous posts shed some light on these type of happenings.

Just another thing....
What I would suggest to combat perceived "reversals of form" is to consider dutch book betting or backing several runners in a race. I would suggest to certainly back your favoured runner but it is probably advisable to "have a saver" on late shorteners as it is common for bookies who are over-committed, to "lay-off" on the tote. Obviously, it is not entirely fool-proof but it is a good bit of insurance to offset some of the these unexpected "form reversals."

Cheers.

G'day topsy99 and umrum,

Topsy, you have outlined an intersting concept but you must remember that the final bookies prices are a market of supply and demand. By that, I mean that if a punter had a bet of $10,000 on your fancy late in betting, I can assure you that it would not start at 7/1.
Umrum, I also noted the ride in that race....what do you think?...is she a "strong" rider?

Cheers.

i think in this case she was told to 'get back'. like most average jockeys i think she lacks imagination and initiative rather than riding skills. she missed the kick but never got warm on her. As to sansom being a good jock, i think she is a reasonable jock, she is strong enough but i don't think she has the will to win like she once did. Having said that she doesnt ride many shockers but perhaps doesnt win as often as she should. i wouldn't 'not' back a horse cause she's on it. she's ok. glenn smith, tim stubberfield, paul harvey, daniel staeck, paul king all good. king and staeck chop a few up troy turner can ride but is a bit dodgy at times.

cheers

was only trying to be funny. i think i have mentioned before about some of the rides in wa being a little worrying but as you will tell me it is happening fairly often in other places.
having said that i thought p king's ride on our selection was very good. had given up hope of our selection winning a race but second to shes captivating recently and that horse a good winner at the meeting on saturday should have been an indication. didnt back it though.