[close]

One of the many facilities Racing And Sports provides for all users is the ability to access "audio" content. Because of our significant domestic and international presence at the race track and of it, not only are we delivering extensive racing information and technology along with form content, you can avail yourself of a substantial amount of interviews conducted by the Racing And Sports team.

They include discussions with Jockeys, Trainers and Owners through the week, Post-Race interviews, Press conferences at major meetings and also Race Day Previews from our racing staff. All these emanate from racing right around the world.

Forum - There is Your Proof.

There is Your Proof.

Order by Date Ascending

 Racing and Sports -- Site comments or suggestions
Page 4 of 4

Go to Page: 4321.  Next >>


Original Blog Post:

Whilst I have always acknowledged that Winx is a good horse and better than anything else she has beaten, I have always maintained that the standard of middle distance weight for age racing in Australia is at its lowest in history.

The QE yesterday was a total and utter embarrassment. The Japanese horse came to Australia to race our no hopers in the Doncaster and was to return to Japan, but apparently Tommy Berry convinced connections to stay for this race. Now this Japanese horse is a real third rater. He has not won for over three years and is Group Three at best. Yesterday he towelled the opposition that Winx usually flogs and ran her to just over a length.

Winx was set for this race. It has been her swan song for months. This bloke, it was an afterthought and he flogged the remainder of the field. Aren't they supposed to be our best wfa horses?

Unfortunately, Winx is a very good horse that has had a career of beating rubbish. Now she has been retired you can all sit back and just watch this rubbish run for millions of dollars unless a few shrewd Japanese owners choose our races over the knackery for any of their non performing no hopers.

 
Author: gladys
Subject: There is Your Proof.

Time: 14/4/2019 1:11:34 PM
 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 27/4/2019 3:29:23 AM

Blog Reply:

K Dill

what would it matter?

What would it matter to lay a horse against horse you say are 'nothing' 'camels' etc.

You dont see the 'matter' in that?

No wonder that tipping of site yours went bust in 2 minutes K Dill.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: theking
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 26/4/2019 11:01:23 AM

Blog Reply:

Gladys,
We all know why you don't answer.

Simply (operative word) because you don't have an answer.

You have been checkmated once again by the superior intellect of YOUR KING, end of story.

This is why all you can give us as a retort is a childish, like a kid in the playground:- No I'm not stup!d, you are all stup!d and I don't have to answer your stup!d questions because I am really smart & you are all stup!d heads.

YOU DONT HAVE AN ANSWER BECUSE YOU DONT HAVE AN ANSWER.

AND

YOU DONT HAVE AN ANSWE BECUSE YOU HAVE BEEN OUTSMARTED!

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Khaptingly
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 26/4/2019 9:43:49 AM

Blog Reply:

Rex your lack of worthwhile contributions and value know no limits.

What would it matter if anyone Layed Winx in its last 10 or 15 starts. Really is that the best you can come up with?

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 25/4/2019 5:32:08 PM

Blog Reply:

Bop Bag

Well at least that explains where you have gone wrong. You dont know how to spot a good horse, let alone a champion.

Maybe if you paid attention to the ratings and the variables you wouldn't continue to lay a horse who wins 33 straight.

Punting block head

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 25/4/2019 2:57:54 PM

Blog Reply:

Please read the first sentence of my post to you on 24th April 2019, Theklown.

I think that will explain to you why I won't answer your dopey assertions and conclusions.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: theking
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 25/4/2019 1:23:52 PM

Blog Reply:

Gladys,

You said: "With the total no hopers she raced against, unless she fell over, she was always going to finish no further back than second."

If you were so confident about this then it sounds like a good strategy to me to throw the lot on a quinella. Why bother with laying?

You also said: "If I was not laying her but backing her, I imagine the best way to go would be an exacta. I didn't back her however."

Gladys you really are a DOPE. You have contradicted yourself once again in the space of a couple of lines.

Hey dopey you said: "she was always going to finish no further back than second."

Come on dopey which is it? "finish no further back than second." OR "the best way to go would be an exacta." Presumably you are talking now of Winx to win in the exacta. And don't now start saying that you were thaking the exacta both ways ie. with Winx to win and or for it to run second; as you did say an exacta. And "an exacta" (singular can only mean one exacta).

Oh what a contradictory fool you are. The last time I looked to get the exacta you had to have the winner selected but what would be the point of selecting Winx as you thought that she "could finish no further back than second.".

If she finishes 2nd, you don't get the exacta dopey!

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 25/4/2019 8:31:51 AM

Blog Reply:

On the contrary, Parrot. I don't pay any attention to ratings as they are just someone else's opinion based on nothing but speculation.

It has always been my view that Winx, whilst being an above average horse, only ever beat no hopers, so whenever any reasonable overseas horse, albeit a second rater, arrived to race I would give them a reasonable chance of success. Humidor nearly got her, Benbatyl came within two lengths and Kluger came within one and a half lengths. All second raters, but absolutely towelled her usual no hoping opponents. That is where I place her, marginally better than those three mentioned,

With the strategy I adopted in laying, there was virtually no risk and an opportunity to profit should she lose.

The method I used and yourself and Mantank all have the one common denominator. All extremely simple!

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 25/4/2019 12:35:12 AM

Blog Reply:

Benbatl is a 123 horse, and he considers it a B grader- go figure.

But none the less he goes and lays a 132 horse (with a bullet) and a mares allowance against a horse he considers to be a B grader in a race she has won 3 times in record time.

Now where is the logic in that?

No wonder youre a troll Bop Bag, youre never going to make it as a punter, pundit or anything else to do with racing.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Mantank
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 24/4/2019 9:33:12 PM

Blog Reply:

Alternatively Rex... Gladys did not consider Benbatyl a C-Grader, but rather an A-grader (as he clearly is). However, this doesn't suit the trolling against Winx/Australian Racing/Anything argument. Either way, she is demonstrating what a total tool she is.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 24/4/2019 7:12:05 PM

Blog Reply:

So you laid her against Benbatl???

A horse you consider to be a B grader!!

Thats your logic- lay a undefeated horse with 3 Cox Plates and her record against a 'B' Grader?

You might even be a worse punter than Khappo- and that takes some doing.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 24/4/2019 3:31:39 PM

Blog Reply:

I usually prefer not to reply to your dopey questions, Theklown, because I consider you to be a total blockhead. However, as I feel sorry for you and your lack of intellect I will this time.

The question was about laying, not about backing. One adopts that method as a way of laying to cover the liability and allow an opportunity to profit if the short priced horse is beaten.

With the total no hopers she raced against, unless she fell over, she was always going to finish no further back than second.

If I was not laying her but backing her, I imagine the best way to go would be an exacta. I didn't back her however.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: theking
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 24/4/2019 11:32:46 AM

Blog Reply:

Gladys,

You said: "This is the standard approach whenever you lay a short priced horse who has only one possible challenger."

"a short priced horse who has only one possible challenger."?

If you were so sure assured of getting the quinella then why bother with the dopey laying.

Why not simply throw the lot on the quinella?

Derrrrrrrrrrrrrr!


 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 24/4/2019 10:53:15 AM

Blog Reply:

Thank you for the question Parrot.

I layed her against Humidor, Benbatyl and Kluger.

I then backed her back out of the stake for a place using 50% of the stake money and then used the remaining stake in a quinella.

This is the standard approach whenever you lay a short priced horse who has only one possible challenger.

Now that will get Gary gushing. Especially when he sees the name Humidor.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 23/4/2019 9:25:34 PM

Blog Reply:

Bop Bag

what imports did you lay her against?

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: theking
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 23/4/2019 8:53:50 PM

Blog Reply:

Gary,
You wrote:

"I didnt lay her every start, just when the odds were right"

"What? When were the odds NOT right?!"

Fair call but I think that a more relevant question to ask Gladys would be to ask her:

WHEN WERE THE ODDS RIGHT?



 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 23/4/2019 8:58:43 AM

Blog Reply:

When the competitors had absolute zero chance of competing, Gary, which was about 90% of the time given the duds she faced.

There were about five occasions, either when first up or the inclusion of an import that I layed her.

Given that the SP was about 1/3, it is not a huge risk.

Now get yourself into a complete lather over- analysing that and race back here with some hysterical reply to further ingratiate yourself to your dunderheaded disciples.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Rex
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 23/4/2019 1:35:08 AM

Blog Reply:

Bop Bag

prefer to talk to him myself. Far more accurate gauge.

Oh, you want to place a bet on that too?

Muppet

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: maccamax
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 22/4/2019 11:33:06 PM

Blog Reply:

For those who have been wrong more than 33 times..

Get used to the fact that WINX will still be an admired subject in 100 Years.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: Gary Still
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 22/4/2019 9:38:04 PM

Blog Reply:

"I didnt lay her every start, just when the odds were right"

What? When were the odds NOT right?!

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.



Author: gladys
Subject: Re: There is Your Proof.

Time: 22/4/2019 2:04:24 PM

Blog Reply:

Because I lay multiple horses in the one race to a common take out you dunderhead.

I didnt lay her every start, just when the odds were right. Pointless trying to explain that to you however.

 
Post a replyPost a reply to this message.


Page 4 of 4

Go to Page: 4321.  Next >>

Racing and Sports now moderates the Talkback forum to ensure posting guidelines are adhered to.
The views expressed on Talkback are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Racing and Sports. You must be a registered user to write postings or send messages to other users. Click here to register.