mardigras

I'd say it is simply a reflection of the interest in NZ racing from Australia. And with a race from Flemington scheduled 5 minutes after, that's the way it will be.

The Bart Cummings has highlighted the dearth of staying talent bred in NZ/Australia. The first two were simply superior. What I would be wary of is anyone backing the horse Yogi to win the cup at the ridiculous odds on offer. He's probably 50-1 to make the field and to do so, will almost definitely have to win an exempt race like the Lexus. A weight penalty from something else would likely leave him out. The TABs have him at $26. Plain stupid odds. Not saying he couldn't win, although I seriously doubt he could. IMO, those odds are crazy.

She was as always, brilliant at the end. I liked the run of Ventura Storm from a Cup perspective. Raced like a stayer with still a turn of foot and on the cusp of making the field.

The major thing which is evident in betting day to day, is that Thomass thinks the way many do. Many punters can't determine the actual performance of the horse, but they have the class of the race to work from. The end result being those that have under-performed for that level of race, end up being massively under-value. Those results I put up demonstrate that clearly. They are largely starting at short odds no doubt because of the 'Thomass' factor. But they shouldn't be - which provides the opportunities for the punters that understand actual performance. As I said in another thread. He simply doesn't have the intelligence to understand most things. And punting is clearly one of those things.

The ankle monitor might mean he doesn't actually get around!

I know how much you love stats. So here are some more. For horses since 1/01/2016 racing in NZ. These stats are horses to have raced in Black Type in the 12 months prior to the maiden run, having finished within 3 lengths of the winner in the black type event. And now racing in a maiden. The top set is those that have the black type performance that is in line with the benchmark for a black type race. The second set is those that didn't measure up to that. Pretty simple stuff really. Runners Winners Win Div % Win ROI 37 14 $51.50 37.84% $1.392 Runners to have run to a benchmark of a Black Type event 55 11 $35.30 20.00% $0.642 The ones that didn't People like me, are making money due to people like you being so absolutely stupid. It is and always has been - about performance, not class of race.

You come to a discussion and you bring nothing. You simply aren't intelligent enough for most things.

You stated they were the best legal go fast and Add 30%.

I didn't bring blinkers into this, you did. Keep up.

Have you found that G1 winner from 2011 to mid 2017 yet that Hayes had blinkers on first time? Let me know who it is?

I didn't say he doesn't know what he's doing. I've stated your idea of blinkers on first time is flawed. As are all your stupid ideas. Since you just trust the trainer. And with Hayes, the results are far worse. You'd be better off just looking at runners he doesn't put blinkers on since you have said you don't know which specific horses they are going to possibly help address their behavioural issue.

And you clearly couldn't even work out the inanity of that remark. Maybe you can give us some examples of G1 winners prior to the last season with Blinkers on first time for Hayes - say since Eagle Falls won a G1 with Blinkers on first time, back in 2011 (Note he ran 3 more times with blinkers put on again, for an 18th of 18, a 16th of 22 and an 11th of 12). He'd already won a G2 and ran second in the Newmarket prior to that win. Maybe he needs to rework his book of tricks.

Well, definitely twitter should be tweetless. You got that right. It's a stupid idea. Is it yours? On one hand you go on about 'only for those listening in'.... and then you mention twitter.

Well you have nothing that supports the idea. And not all information is going to be useful. To make money, the idea has to cause punter(s) to still lose what they would have or more, or gain new punters that lose - of course offset by those punters that stop betting because of the new information. And since there will always be a cost somewhere for the information, it should be done on the basis that it will make a difference to punters and potential punters. Otherwise there is no point - as is the case with so many of your ill thought out ideas. Did you help Messara with his report?

What is extremely funny is that Hayes results with blinkers on first time is well below his results of every horse that doesn't have blinkers first time.

He's delusional as well. Masterclass - he is easily pleased with himself putting up savers and thinking they are worth something.

It's simple for sure. You were successful one day after nine months of having nothing. Those are the facts. You are a fraud. What you write is the thoughts of a person that doesn't understand punting. I can't be more straightforward than that. Which is why even your supposed masterclass was just another losing day according to the initial post. Funny eh? And still no answer as to why you're still working Mr Fraud.

If your methods are so good, why are you working? And to end your broken record, if we take your fairytale as being what you intended, it still has no meaning in regards the topic of your flawed approach. It doesn't validate down in grade. If you still think it does, I can put up ALL the ones that are down in grade again that are at least as much so, as the ones in your selections. Ok. That's evidence. Your methods are flawed and you don't even know why. Which is the funny part.

It just gets better and better. So all the punters are going to go to utube and watch these jumpouts. Woohoo. Like all those punters on twitter wanting updates from the RIU I suppose. You're lightweight. Thinking of a punter here or there and incapable of thinking about something that will work. No wonder we are in the state we are in. All your previous ideas they've adopted and getting no money for.

What do you mean 'no costs'. Where are these videos going to be accessed from? Loveracing? Because if they are, that is a cost. Management, maintenance, config, storage etc etc. You live in a dream world.

Sure do. But this idea wouldn't change that. And everything comes at a cost. Perhaps when there is a few hundred million spare, they can enhance the offering to punters by way of trivial things like these.

It's irrelevant because your idea is that they all do it. You're mentally challenged.

How sad is it that the idiot that posts more than anyone these days, posts stupid ideas and doesn't like his stupidity being highlighted. Diddums.

You're like a broken record. You keep repeating the same shit as if it changes anything. The nope is, you are just making up what your post indicated because it suits. But you simply can't get past saying 'savers' even though you subsequently stated, you don't do savers. Move on. Your tips were very average. Your savers went alright. End of story. If you want to put some selections up and then remove the need to write fairytales, you would need to remove fluff and words like savers and back ups. Give it another try. Or are you scared to?

Nope. The backup/ savers aren't in the multi. They are after the event because they won. Adding a $3 runner into a multi with two other horses in the same race is mental at the same units. And you went to great lengths to tell us the odds from your premium selection. Which didn't come in. After the results, you now want them all in and at same units. Because you are a fraud. Next time, write what you are going to claim afterwards. I awarded you the place/win multi. But when you take 2/3 and 3/4, there are many multis across your 4 horses. And they add up to more than that.