mardigras

Backed two of those Kakama. Both lost. Still, do you expect to get many winners from horses paying $10 plus. Do trackside tipsters show a profit from all their selections - might have to apply if that is the case.

Thought it would be more important to know if the trainer has been starting horses that are known to have a virus - if that was the case. Are you suggesting the trainer actually started horses known to have a virus?

Some I will be looking at today. Morphettville R2 #6 Burn Off Doomben R5 #4 I Am Impinge Donald R7 #12 Lindsay Alfred Quirindi R5 #12 Sammi Jain Beaudesert R5 #4 Ace Stryker Randwick R9 #13 Timing Doomben R9 #2 Bassett Toowoomba R7 #5 The Irons And some in NZ in different races to barryb Riccartion R7 #13 Lin Tauranga R2 #3 Kitaya Tauranga R6 #9 Its A Kinda Magic

So you seem intent on having a go at me - yet I didn't come on this thread and try and introduce something unrelated. A few posts back, I mentioned taking this thread back to the topic. Hopefully that happens.

I think I've already stated why I left. Certainly no tail between my legs.

I think I've already put some horses up - as per the thread when it started.

Stretch what truth? I hardly think so. What I stated was and still is 100% factual. There is no doubt. Others on this site know that is the case.

Was that a change of tactics? I don't know the horse but punters love to hear about tactic changes I understand.

I was thinking of suggesting Canberra R8 #5 Alpine King then I saw that it is wearing blinkers. So not now.

Thomass could go on with all his tripe forever. And he usually does. He has a great record of altering thread topics as well. So getting back to the thread topic. It was about selecting horses paying $10+. Now I realise Thomass has done that and put them up. And by golly, they even won. But if I was to take a stab in the dark, I am thinking that when wally started the thread he was expecting people to perhaps put those selections up before the races. Who knew? Maybe Thomass should stick to the thread topic and give that a try. Be easy for someone so coversed in the nuances of NZ racing. Look forward to seeing them.

I think you are adding a factor not attributable to our follower of 'blinkers'. You stated your opinion that you at least suspect blinkers may help this particular horse. Whilst that is clearly a subjective opinion, it is at least your thoughts on the potential impact of blinkers for that runner. As opposed to the 'after race niche' about blinkers on add 30% when they win approach. So I'd say well done if you can identify such cases as opposed to taking the carte blanche view that blinkers help when I like the horse already.

Great stuff indeed.

Interesting stuff TC. Thomass might want to add an extra 5% given that - even though he won't know which one the 'blinkers' placebo has been given to.

And you think blinkers are a 'nuance' in NZ racing that can be applied the way you do. I don't need to know about blinkers, ear muffs or anything else. Since I haven't worked out a way to know what impact they are going to have to a horse - before the race. We can all select them after they have won like you do. And I don't use stats. You do. Eagle Farm was perfectly fine. I wasnt commenting on the track upgrade. I was commenting on the surface they raced on. It was merely wetter than expected meaning some didn't handle it and some did. You couldn't work out which ones could. Maybe you should use your eyes rather than relying on penetrometer readings. Or are you blind as well?

What a stupid comment. I've got as much right as you to comment.

A simple courtesy - to what a maximum potential audience of 550 people? More like that would be a dis-courtesy to the general people betting on NZ racing that couldn't give a toss about twitter. All the people that NZRB go on about with active betting accounts. All those that don't bet through accounts. And you think 550 people are going to make a difference. And those up to 550 people who get some additional info is going to bring about a change in thoroughbred punters no longer being a dying breed. I think you'd need to get the wonder info out to a far greater number than that. It's not even a good start. It's just pointless.

I don't think they get that many at the cup. It was the middle of winter. The stands were packed. I went in there to get a beer and had to take it outside as there was no where to sit or any table to stand at.

Yep. If there was a fast lane, I had trouble getting that info out to the one I backed! Any wearing blinkers were only doing so to protect their eyes from the intense sun.

Oh, didn't know that. I just returned from a trip to South America. Here are also a couple of photos from Buenos Aires races.

Thomass, did you miss me telling you, I don't use stats. They are your area of stupidity. For which I am continually thankfully. Without people like you, punting would be a lot more difficult. As for costs, time is money and someone will have to pay. I guess the owners will be happy to.

More information may well result in punters generally being able to find more winners. That won't likely translate into more punters winning overall. So I'm not against more and more information. But information comes at a cost. And in NZ, questions have to be asked as whether the costs would be justified - especially against any perceived benefit to the industry.

thomass will love that. He especially likes mares that have been served. Maybe your runner was trying to do that. If that happens during the race or shortly thereafter, does it have to be notified? Although too late to help you with that winner.

Sadly we don't all have your sources. thomass should pay good money for that. All you need now is some telepathy to get the information about the fast lane to your horse before some other horse gets there first.

Which just makes the desire for all these penetrometer reading across the track equally futile. Who will actually get there first and all the other punters will be coming up with their own guesses.

No doubt an important factor. But like so many, how do we actually get the info. Do we get the trainer to do a daily report? How will they actually know? A bit like feed regimes, beach training. Do we require all sorts of info to make decisions. For some, no matter how much info is given out, it won't make any difference. Yet there is a cost in providing a lot of it. And things like sleep is a measure that is likely going to be subjective as we can't really ask the horse. My view on getting an edge often relates more to determining what other punters think is important for a horse that you don't think is as important - or vice versa. If punters think the same thing about some aspect of form, it is hardly likely to lead to them having an edge.