FAIRVIEW FRIDAY 21 OCTOBER 2022

durbs wrote:

Listen to the comments by Gavin Venter.
Been very disappointing,we trying the cheek pieces,we trying anything with him.Not really any confidence is there.
So something obviously improved him at home as seen by the betting support yet the trainer couldn't help the punters out and tell us that.
But wait,they obviously wanted the 25-1 for themselves.

The only time it ran on the Polytrack it ran third. They are a punting stable. Was it suppose to go out to high as 25/1, in my opinion no. It was 12s ands 10s for quite awhile to get on after they supposedly backed and my opinion lots of shrewdie punters go on.

In the next race the winner, For All We Know, went out to 25/1. A horse with form and well bred at that price. It was never a 25/1 shot.

naresh wrote:

durbs wrote:

Listen to the comments by Gavin Venter.
Been very disappointing,we trying the cheek pieces,we trying anything with him.Not really any confidence is there.
So something obviously improved him at home as seen by the betting support yet the trainer couldn't help the punters out and tell us that.
But wait,they obviously wanted the 25-1 for themselves.

The only time it ran on the Polytrack it ran third. They are a punting stable. Was it suppose to go out to high as 25/1, in my opinion no. It was 12s ands 10s for quite awhile to get on after they supposedly backed and my opinion lots of shrewdie punters go on.

In the next race the winner, For All We Know, went out to 25/1. A horse with form and well bred at that price. It was never a 25/1 shot.

Everything that you say is correct Naresh. In fact, I had the horse in my P6 (I only put 3 in that leg). The horse had The class to win the race and 25/1 was stupid. Agreed.

What leaves a sour taste in the mouth is how the punters are deliberately mislead time and time again.

What’s the expression? Taken for mugs…

naresh wrote:

durbs wrote:

Listen to the comments by Gavin Venter.
Been very disappointing,we trying the cheek pieces,we trying anything with him.Not really any confidence is there.
So something obviously improved him at home as seen by the betting support yet the trainer couldn't help the punters out and tell us that.
But wait,they obviously wanted the 25-1 for themselves.

The only time it ran on the Polytrack it ran third. They are a punting stable. Was it suppose to go out to high as 25/1, in my opinion no. It was 12s ands 10s for quite awhile to get on after they supposedly backed and my opinion lots of shrewdie punters go on.

In the next race the winner, For All We Know, went out to 25/1. A horse with form and well bred at that price. It was never a 25/1 shot.

If you follow the money and not the form.
The trainer when interviewed could have been honest and say that whatever equipment they where using improved the horse at home,but he chose not to.
How many races do you go back and then say it shouldn't have been that price after it wins?
You can probably go back every horses form and find a race where if he runs like that could go close.But this horses last 6 runs where not good at all.
It ran on the 19th August on poly too and ran 6th....no show was the comment.

@ Durbs. She was training for Jooste at the time or it was Crabbia horses. They made it clear they will not divulge Information....

naresh wrote:

durbs wrote:

Listen to the comments by Gavin Venter.


In the next race the winner, For All We Know, went out to 25/1. A horse with form and well bred at that price. It was never a 25/1 shot.

can NOT understand how this horse FOR ALL WE KNOW - driiiiifted out to 25/ 1 ....... should never have been.

good luck to those who got on...... not me.

money for GREENLIGHTTOHEAVEN....... I can't have that draw of 10 over 1600m

naresh wrote:

@ Durbs. She was training for Jooste at the time or it was Crabbia horses. They made it clear they will not divulge Information....

Back in the day she trained for Jooste on consignment … I.e. got the horses but he never paid training fees. The stable had to get by on stakes and gambles landed.

Hence, to this day, they are a punting stable that don’t divulge information.

I understand that.

But for how long can the punter be deliberately mislead and taken for a mug?

Durbs and Sammy’s points are that the stable deliberately mislead the public. It’s as clear as daylight and well done to the stable on the betting coup.

Still doesn’t sit well with Joe Public being taken for a fool.

Not sure he deliberately misled the public but he knew more than what he divulged,let's put it that way.

Amazingly 14 of the 17 runners still have %s running in the pick six