Derek brugman wanted to have a punt

So mj byleveld did not want to give too much away when vicky interviewed him in the week

His own words after the race,if a jock cnt tell the whole truth ie in this case that they expect the horse to win rather refuse the interview

My 2 cents

You been listening to fairy stories ?

No,after the 2nd race vicky said to mj
that she interviewed him in the week and
he did not give too much away,
Mj replied that Derek wanted to have a bet

Ah , cheers

Derek certainly enjoyed a punt in his bookmaking days and I doubt he has lost the taste!!

I really don't care if markus joostes staff want to
have a bet,the point is that if they
want to have a bet don't ask the
jocks to give less confidence to
the public,this is what makes and is in fact a corrupt
practice in racing and causes public distrust and our pussified
Nhra will do nothing about it

I cant agree more with Soodum....its a bloody joke how these and no doubt countless others like them get away with this kind of BS.

Its nothing but self enrichment at the expense of the masses under the guise of hogwash like "we invest a lot " and racing for prestige etc.

How different is this lot from the "corrupt politicians" that everyone goes on about.

Its precisely this kind of "sophisticated" hoodwinking/robbery that a large part of RSA population specialize in , while the masses dont even realize that they are getting screwed.

Hence the likes of Malema and co....

i don't see the point of most of the post race interviews to be honest. i think its a waste of time.
Far more useful is pre race interviews and a post race analysis.

i would scrap the post race interviews with trainers and jockeys. Just keep the owners for the pleasantries.

Sylvester wrote: i don't see the point of most of the post race interviews to be honest. i think its a waste of time.
Far more useful is pre race interviews and a post race analysis.

i would scrap the post race interviews with trainers and jockeys. Just keep the owners for the pleasantries.

You obviously havent read the thread properly or fail to understand that the point being made is that these D***S are intentionally withholding or misleading punters with the aim of punting and enriching themselves...

Sylvester wrote: i don't see the point of most of the post race interviews to be honest. i think its a waste of time.
Far more useful is pre race interviews and a post race analysis.

i would scrap the post race interviews with trainers and jockeys. Just keep the owners for the pleasantries.

No sly ,in a pre race interview mj byleveld held back from revealing to the public that the horse was fancied to win,after
the win he said that he did not reveal too much cos Derek and "them" wanted to have a bet

i don't think anyone can be forced to offer up info. MJ may just need to learn when to be quiet about privileged discussions.

a better way to handle this would be an agreed protocol between Interviewer and interviewee. What to ask/what not to ask ie. off limits.

This is another thread that shows a fair amount of bias and naivety.
1)Who are you to demand info ? Can't you read ? Can't you see when a horse shortens ?
2)You guys who came into racing yesterDAY have a lot to learn. The shrewdies of yesterYEAR never had TV, cellphones or computers. Yet they were putting more on a horse 40 years ago than you do today. Do the maths. They simply watched the betting.
3)All of a sudden, MR Beyleveld's opinion is akin to that of deity.
4)The fundamental difference between Owners and Punters is that Owners HAVE TO pay their keep and Punters DONT HAVE TO punt.
5)When anyone backs a horse, he/she doesn't think of or care about the next person. Punters don't stop and think " hey, shouldn't I wait for the Owner to get on?" But now we want the Owner to say , " I can't back my horse yet, because I haven't told the punters" or, as per this thread, " I had better let the Punters know that I intend backing my horse"
5)Watch the betting, ffs and don't worry about jockeys, who are not the best judges most of the time.