curious

It's only one part of the problem but if NZ Racing seriously wants to increase stakes by increasing revenue by increasing punter losses on NZ Racing, then they need to fix the integrity issues which are now massive and this sort of crap is only part of that part. Yet the totally disabled NZTR board and management keep saying things like Jackson in the annual report. Jackson : “Over recent years it has been difficult to make firm plans for the immediate future” Well of course it f'n is if you don't do anything about it.

Quite a few different ways actually.

Would they have finished that fast in a genuinely run race though?

Old mate tells it like it is. Let's sort it and not just blame the tracks and the trainers. http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/podcast/tdn-writers-room-for-nov-6-2019-with-todd-pletcher/

I suppose I could tell you to not be such a lazy mustelid and look them up and read them yourself but anyway here's the link. Let me know what you conclude. https://www.racing.com/form/2019-11-05/flemington/race/7

Thanks Thommo. That's a very good piece from Mary.

Inn is probably the correct explanation for that.

What comma?

Me too especially if I can have some decent champers (i.e. not Mumm) while I'm not listening to them.

Absolutely. It's ridiculous. Who is paying who for what? Makes me sick. No chance to get a second opinion days out from the race. Wtf?

what would he know?

Is that because of the blinkers or because the trainer applies them when the horse is ready and placed in the right race to win?

Exactly. We want them losing slowly and staying interested. This type of misinformation is fraudulent as you say when offered as gospel. Should be in the RITA strategic plan to develop a way of burying it. I accidentally heard a couple of dog races yesterday. The presenter was not only listing his value bets for the day but giving out the prices he made them. Might be a genetic thing which is possibly Thommo's problem and covers the lack of intellect required to think you can price a field by pricing 4 horses. How do you do that Thommo? Set all the rest to 1000/1?

Of course I understand the concept of blinkers improving a horse. It's the same as renaming them with a name beginning with 'L'. Next time some will go faster and some will go slower but on average they will perform the same. Even if on average they went faster, it's useless information unless we know which ones and by how much they will improve. You seem to be able to predict that AFTER the race and explain the improvement with blinkers because their addition is correlated to the improved performance. There's so many things wrong with that it's ridiculous.

I think you've well proven to everyone that it's exactly like tipping everything beginning with 'L'. You and ATA may be the only ones that can't see that.

It's definitely a world record for you to tip out even a hot fave BEFORE the race. Well done. Try putting up some of your blinkers on ones before the race so we can work out which ones to back. Don't think there was much wrong with the SRs. TAS never looked like winning despite the perfect trip although in hindsight probably should have been 100/1, not 33s.

I think you forgot to add the 20% for BO and 30% for course stats?

I see since your last fail at posting them before the race you've reverted to posting your successful value bets after the race.

Are you ok Thommo? You are offering selections BEFORE the race?

This of course is completely useless information and the writer obviously failed research methods 101 and more probably like you is still tring to get through primary school maths. It's laughable that some people believe this garbage.

I think you'll have to ask Hesi.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good quiz ATA.

I also don't think betting turnover equates to sales. Sales are the gross punter losses.

No. I am not confusing them. If my bread shop sells a loaf of bread for $2, then my gross income from that sale is $2 isn't it? If for my VIP customers I sell the loaf for $2 but give them a $1 rebate, then is my gross income $2 or $1? I would consider that the gross income of the TAB is the sum that they take in after the running of each event which for a standard race might be around 20% of betting turnover. The betting turnover maybe $2 billion but the gross income is $400,000 as Centaur says and I think it's verging on fraudulent to promote the TAB as a 2 billion dollar business.

Really? Sales is the same as gross income?