Is what Barney Curley has allegedly done...

Thanks for the answer E,

But you are saying that each punter must believe that he has the ability to win every race. What did Curley do to take away that right? all he did was take away the best price, thats all. The punter is free to back his horse or go against him because he knows where the value lies.

At the end of the day the punters are able to choose what they want to bet on, that can never change, unless owners or trainers take that ability away from them, which I'm not entirely sure can happen.

I'm all for sharing info of first timers after the owners have gotten on but a horse who has exposed form, well that is another thing. Punters should make up their minds.

If the horses had no form for their entire racing lives and then all of a sudden, after 700 days off came back and won in a canter while being backed.......that is suspicious. Otherwise well done to them. Wish I was there to collect as well

English, it has always happened with Curleys horses

when the man stepped in a ring years ago the bookies scrubbed their boards,it`s just a shame the punters have to guess the same as the bookies

Tommy have you read the form of those races?

And yes, I have said on this forum plenty times, take the early price and don't be greedy and on that point I (somewhat reluctantly because it lessens my overall argument - big lol) have to agree with you, from what I understand they did hit these horses early and I say fair play to that aspect of it. But, it probably took a while for people to realise that there were 4 horses involved, all in some way linked to the same "ring". There is a big difference in that Tommy, they did not all have trained B Curley written against their name. A one-off horse being hit is little different to a claimed horse in SA.

Bob, I know he has been doing it for years, that is how I know many many punters will now "follow" no hopers because I know I did last time and I know plenty others who did the same.

Bottom line is... I say it is bad for the game in so many ways, you of course have the right to (wrongly ) disagree... generous of me I know

But... the main point/question still remains, because I struggle to see any real difference... " if you love this type of coup then to me you can't scream foul every time a Greeff, Smith, Visser outsider of their 4 runners (let alone the whole blardy field lol) in a race wins by 3 lengths going away. Is there a huge difference I am missing?"

Every day we see odds on favourites run badly,but it's put down to "Racing,horses aren't machines"
There are no inquiries into their pitiful efforts.WHY? The next day the favs in the first 6 races all got turned over,I'm sure that cost punters not in the know more than The Curley Coup.
But as soon as a wily old Irishman orchestrates a touch,the bookmaking fraternity are up in arms and the runners are investigated.
Engles,every one of those runners had previous form to win their races.The bookies priced them according to their layoffs.
As a punter Engles,I applaud the man.Would have been lovely to have been in the know I agree but that ain't happening.
Also,what about the plots that go astray,bookies say nowt and don't refund if your unlucky:D

Guys... not going to go over it all time and time again. This punter sees all the bad sides of what was done and the negativity, uncertainties, suspicions, costs to the punter, benefits for the bookies and the encouragement to others to do the same day in, day out, all of which I see as being bad bad bad for the punter and for the game in the big picture. If you see it as good for the game and the punter that is your choice. Let us choose to disagree.

I agree

Hey make up your minds...is it agree or disagree....:P

Eye of the tiger beat 2 rivals in 6 runs when trained by Curley

Indus Valley was beaten 96L in his last 3 runs finishing 13/13, 10/11 ,10/11

The 4 horses had been dropped 115lb

Eye Of The Tiger,ran in a group 3 race.Well beat,but must have shown ability to be entered.

Englander

But if a smith horse opens up 25/1 and shortens into 7/4

PUNTERS have a inkling to stick it in exotics, what happens now is they open 25/1 and return 33/1. Slightly different...

I have also seen plenty curley horse beaten after shortening dramatically

And he also ONLY gets paid after they win, shortening them from 10/1 to 4/6 does not mean they win....and it inflates the odds of the other horses. One of these days it will be the double coup....

Keep an eye our for a barney horse
Enter your horse
They back theirs 1st
Yours drifts
You back yours

Then either needs to win

Easy. Agreed. Slightly different. And I have my suspicions that it is often only "slightly" but yes, I do acknowledge that (tu)

The Barney ones that shorten... could well be the tidal wave of suspicious punters I have referred to, there was a time that any BC horse that moved in the market would just drop n drop n drop as punters wrongly believed he was pulling one again... the bookies laughed all the way to the bank, as you say, "plenty" times. the money punted on those misperceptions no doubt would make 2 mil look like a poor man's wage!!