Trainers

A question for all the punters: Do you think that trainers deliberately try to mislead you (in various ways), in order that they can get better prices on their horses?

It has happened. I wouldn't say it's an everyday occurence, though.

Ruby I have a question......

Is saying nothing also being "misleading"?

I believe it does happen but I don't think it happens nearly as much as people think it does.

Guess you have to look at things like which stables like to have a punt, which ones normally claim horses from 50/1 down to evens and they win?

Loads of factors here, but I do believe it does happen.

So Tommy, my question now, is this: Is it not the stable's right to preserve the price as best they can, in order that they make a decent living? They all wake up at 3am, and work 24/7, surely they should get the best pickings? Aside from a handful of the top trainers, most of the others are battlers, driving around in 8yo+ cars, just trying to make enough money to pay their bond...

At best.... I feel that gambling on horses is just that, a gamble. Or if you want to kid yourself, an "educated guess"...

There will be cases - well wherever there is money and gambling involved - where there are deliberate manipulations of the result, from one or two bad apples, and that includes riders too, or even other people involved, but I feel that is the EXCEPTION, not the rule...

Thought i was the only one that felt that way , just from looking at majority of the trainers and jocks one can tell a lot ....refinement is not one of the stand out qualities though!!!

Rusty - you and I are on opposite sides of this discussion I'm afraid...

Ruby, there are a million opportunities for a stable to back a horse. From the time the betting opens until the time the horses jump out the gates. A winner is a winner, whether the price is evens or 10/1. If a stable feels the horse WILL WIN (according to them) they will take any price as any price out there represents a profit.

What I do have a slight issue with is when stables say the horse will "need it" or "looking for further" or whatever and then goes out to back the horse. Do you think this is fair practice?
We have had too many examples to mention where we were told our horses are doing well but will need the experience first time out. The horse then gets backed from 7/1 down to 14/10........................

I can go on and on.

I feel sorry for trainers as they are in an industry that is just as hard as any other right now, perhaps even harder, but they do get stabling fees, the do get 7% of what they win AND they can still gamble if they choose to.

If a punter does his money down a horse that a trainer tells him "will need the experience" and it shits in then the punter doesn't fall back on the 7% (or whatever the figure) or the stabling fees or anything, he goes home, kicks the cat and raids the change jar................

magiclips Wrote:

---

> It has happened. I wouldn't say it's an everyday
> occurence, though.


You not a laywer by any chance.

Does the fact that it does happen, although it is not the norm, make it acceptable

The 1900 tonight is an interesting case......Mollie reported that Shaheen had been assured that Bold Silvano would win,and it shortened during the day....MdK was not keen,and horse drifted accordingly.......maybe stables even b'$hit the boss sometimes???

Depends what you mean by misleading. Lying is not acceptable. No, I gave up any pretensions of being a lawyer decades ago. Thank fark.

I would think that in between all his travels MDK would have seen the horse work with his own eyes, and not only once.

Exactly,so it shows that these anomolies are not always attempts to deceive,but merely different opinions.As he said,it didn't reproduce what he had seen,and I would have loved to hear his "off-air" post race comments.