mardigras

One minute you're praising barry for his skill in selecting Veladero. Then you call his behaviour fraudulent. I haven't told punters what to do outside suggesting they consider the well known view that in order to succeed at punting long term, you have to bet to value. I haven't told punters how to identify a horse is value. They have to do that themselves. Explain how you think that is fraudulent. I feel like another laugh. The difference between you and others on this site is that the others don't try and tell everyone what specific ideas they have that will make the readers money and lead them to punting success. They offer their opinion on things without adding absurd claims. But you tell readers that what you have are the keys to punting success and that they will make money following your stupid blueprint. You don't just offer opinion on what you do, you add that it will make other people money. That's fraudulent. Your opinion is your opinion. It's worthless. But when you add that following your opinion is the secret to punting wealth, that's fraudulent. It's like me telling people to back horses starting with the letter M and then saying it is the secret to punting success and is the best legal go fast. And if you follow that formula, you will make money. That would be fraudulent. Even though it is as much use as the blueprint.

No, the fact remains you are thick and you are a fraud. You've got nothing worth posting for punters. Stick to your whip based topics and the poor RIU. Leave punting ideas to people with more than 1 brain cell. That counts you out. Next time, don't waste my time with your fairytales. Like your post race bullshit. Everyone on this site should know you're a fraud. The last few posts of yours simply reinforce it.

I don't need to query you again. You've just proven how little you know and how wrong you are. Fool. Try looking at its head next time and not up your arse where your blue print is plucked from.

It didn't have blinkers on First time, again or anything. It's last thirty starts in Oz were with blinkers before coming to NZ. Here is the last race it had in Oz. Ran last. It is the horse that is last in this photo. Not only are you a fraud, you're completely thick as well. Go away and stop being a total fuckwit.

You can't even get your story right. Veladero had been racing with Blinkers On in Oz. Shame you had to put the extra 20% on when he started racing in NZ purely because you're ignorant - eh Mr Fraud.

I and others, particularly enjoyed Magic Incanto yesterday. Go the 'M' horses!

I have no idea, but you wrote (in this thread) about what you claimed I did at Te Aroha. So I clarified exactly what I did and what I didn't do. So you brought it up even though it had nothing to do with the thread, and I responded - and then you are so stupid, you then ask what it has to do with the topic. Don't write crap next time and I won't have to fill in the blanks. the rest of your post was dealt with on Saturday and Sunday on a different channel. Very enlightening it has been too. Thanks. BP 101 is going well. I prefer the letter M.

I expect she would have won with the Tongue Tie on and the Blinkers Off. We'll never know.

I'd say she likes the Tongue Tie myself. It makes her run faster. From 12 Group one starts with the Tongue Tie on. 9 wins From 3 Group one starts without the Tongue Tie on (and with Blinkers on). 1 win. Some people read what they want to.

If you're suggesting these selections below at Te Aroha recently, were actually yours, then I'm not surprised you claim that after the event. That's how you work. You're laughing stock. R1 #7 Iskander (TAB $31) R2 #12 One Way Street (TAB $26) R3 #5 Gus The Maverick (TAB $31) R4 #6 Ruiz (TAB $9.50) R6 #10 Miss Valencia (TAB $10) R7 #1 Conquering Kelly (TAB $7) But in fairness to those selections above, I'd certainly call that more in line with masterclass. Not one item in your flawed method was used to determine those runners. I don't do stupidity, I leave that to you. Your BP can select nearly every runner, but when they get put up, you get all uptight claiming, you don't back them all. Problem for the readers is, they only get to know which ones to back after they've won. Not before as in the selections above. Try it next time.

Nope. I quantify those things as being unimportant in assessing the ability of a horse. I don't need to know readings of the state of a track. I just need to watch the preceding races to form my own opinion. If the readings were so important, all the jockeys would be heading for the same piece of ground. That's if they all interpret the info the same. As a punter, you have no idea how the jockey is going to interpret the info, so no greater idea as to whether the horse will be better suited than otherwise. And with the information, things like speed maps and positions will go out the door because jockeys will want to do things to suit the 'readings' - like Williams did according to you in the Cup. Love to see the punters speed map of Vow And Declare leading.

Back to your boring repetitive best. What Baz and I do is called winning. What you do is called losing. You just had a different way of saying the same thing.

Of course it can be allowed. For what it will be worth to the industry. In NZ, nothing. Elsewhere - next to nothing. Half an hour after these things are used, the information (which likely had no benefit anyway) is wrong.

I'm not a bachelor - but as usual, you're easily sidetracked. I take professional advice often. And I have often given professional advice on punting. i.e paid for advice. I certainly wouldn't listen to trainers or jockeys opinions on the state of the track. And why would they share it. I expect they want to use it themselves because they believe it will help them in their profession. And why would a jockey want to share information pre race about what their opinions are? You're too stupid to use your eyes to see what is going on. You need all this extra information because you can't work out why you're such a loser.

Your suggestion, and then agreeing with what I wrote, confirms you're a retard.

Willo doesn't use a penetrometer or a going stick. He has the readings but prefers his foot and even an umbrella. Can you get them to start providing the umbrella readings around the track also.

And you believed him. I guess that's why every race down the straight, not a single horse headed towards the rail. And after the first, they couldn't wait to get wide. The inside was no doubt Ok. But it wasn't faster. I doubt Williams wanted to ride the winner 3 wide given he wanted to control the pace at that point. Therefore for him, the place to be was the rail. For someone that thought the place to be was the rail, he rode a strange race on Creedence. You're gullible. Try using your eyes instead of listening to the likes of Williams after he has won the race.

Nope - as that was why I backed Akari in the last. Drawn wide, ran wide. No problem. He walks the track pre races every year. I expect he thought it best to get to the rail to have a nice run. Slow them down and sprint best. Seemed to work.

I concluded what I expect is well known. Based on the overall time and the race being run so slow, the horses were able to finish the last 600m in quick time for a 3200m race. I also concluded that the higher weighted horses such as Cross Counter, Mer De Glace and Mirage Dancer were able to sprint the last 600m as well as the rest of the field - even after carrying the higher weight around for 2600m. I wasn't able to conclude anything about what may or may not happen should the same 24 horses meet over 3200m next week, under all the same race conditions as Tuesday.

Pretty poorly. I rated 7 of the 9 in the top 3. But I'd assessed them on a good track and lost confidence when it bucketed down. And top rated then still won. That's racing. I usually don't change bet, just amount. Cup day is forecast to be dryer. Happy about that.

The average fan may have gone off it. For me, the race is better than ever before. I've attended 20 cups and the Europeans make the race a better event for me. The supporting races may be lower grade than derby day etc, but the fields are generally very large making for difficult betting with no standouts usually. Irrespective of whether Il Paradiso/Constantinople wins or not, the idea that the NH 3yos are well weighted is pure knee jerk reaction and 100% unfounded. Those that win, are simply better than the rest at the time. Both of the last two winners simply had better credentials than the rest. The better 3yos will come, the better older horses won't. Straight away that will likely put the 3yos to the fore of those horses that come from off-shore.

I totally agree Mooncoin. What I can't tolerate is someone coming on here and stating that if you follow their ideas, you'll win. One person states that. And it's simply unacceptable. He can think what he likes but to have the nerve to tell others he has it right and they can learn from him, is simply fraudulent.

Like two or three years back when the Karaka Million was being priced. He didn't price the winner because he said why price horses that have no chance.

As repetitive and boring this thread is, it's important from the point that the racing industry needs as many punters as possible to keep on betting with them. Not be drawn in to punting, read some supposedly informed comment on here and quickly realise they are losing all their money rapidly - and walk away. Idiots suggesting the ways for others to make money which is all based on being a fraud and a loser - is something the industry can ill afford to condone. If he just said, this is what I do but others shouldn't necessarily do similar. Then I'd leave him alone. But he keeps on and on with the usual post race crap as if people should listen to what he says. It's one of the issues with giving idiots free reign on the internet.

Good for you Fred. I could look up the last 1000 runners to have blinkers applied first time. Get around 80 winners. I'm not sure how that helps a punter know whether the application of blinkers first time to a runner is going to help or not. But I do like to hear about some success stories.