Belmont Preview, 3rd Jul

H-BOMBER · July 2013

Totes amazed?

H-BOMBER · July 2013

A few people may have got their money back from High Limit in the last...looks like Right Honorable was hit pretty good

Tesseract · July 2013

SLIPPERGOLDEN said:
An outsider but I'm looking for Not An Act to be running on strongly into the finish.

great pick there slippergolden but i have to ask, how did you expect it be running on strongly in the finish ? was this just based off her trial run at larkhill or a tipoff ??

obrienrb · July 2013

I backed right honourable...$13.10 90 seconds before the race into $7.20 past the post!!!..oh well a winner a winner.

SLIPPERGOLDEN · July 2013

Tesseract said:

SLIPPERGOLDEN said:
An outsider but I'm looking for Not An Act to be running on strongly into the finish.
great pick there slippergolden but i have to ask, how did you expect it be running on strongly in the finish ? was this just based off her trial run at larkhill or a tipoff ??

I remembered it making up a lot of ground for fourth one day and it was unlucky at another run whilst still learning (in my opinion). Presuming the pace would be on today I felt it would be running on strongly fresh. Fortunately I was correct.

CaptainDunnster · July 2013

Well done today with the tips Matt R I raised the stakes a bit and multiplied your stakes by 10, ended up over $3k in front 52% on my outlay better than bank rates .

I will be following you again !!!!!!!

TheFunkster · July 2013

Jordan said:
Funkster will be very happy with his blokes run :)>-

I'd be a lot happier if the jock didn't have to stand up in his irons from the 250m to 150m....

Finally draw a barrier and still find trouble. Still a lightweight, he should be a decent horse next prep

TheFunkster · July 2013

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)

Huh? In race 7? I doubt it considering 2nd horse should have won if it got out earlier....and was going away from the 3rd horse on the line!

RIO · July 2013

CaptainDunnster said:
Well done today with the tips Matt R I raised the stakes a bit and multiplied your stakes by 10, ended up over $3k in front 52% on my outlay better than bank rates .
I will be following you again !!!!!!!

wow you have a great system for interpreting his tips...
:-?

Forelock · July 2013

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)

What did he do wrong?

Tesseract · July 2013

SLIPPERGOLDEN said:

Tesseract said:

SLIPPERGOLDEN said:
An outsider but I'm looking for Not An Act to be running on strongly into the finish.
great pick there slippergolden but i have to ask, how did you expect it be running on strongly in the finish ? was this just based off her trial run at larkhill or a tipoff ??
I remembered it making up a lot of ground for fourth one day and it was unlucky at another run whilst still learning (in my opinion). Presuming the pace would be on today I felt it would be running on strongly fresh. Fortunately I was correct.

nice work..

Raff_2000 · July 2013

Interesting to see something I haven't seen before in the stewards report today. In the late report section some trainers are now stating that a particular horse won't be starting for 'A number' of weeks due to a bruised heel or viral infection etc...Generally it will say 'At least 2 weeks' or something like that. I am neither for or against the method but I'd have thought Stewards would require more specification than this considering they do when it comes to a change of riding tactics amongst other things. 'A number' of weeks could mean anything from 2 upwards and although its easier for trainers to report it this way, it may well cause more confusion than is worthwhile in the process :-/

Piston_Broke · July 2013

The Funkster said:

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)
Huh? In race 7? I doubt it considering 2nd horse should have won if it got out earlier....and was going away from the 3rd horse on the line!

after he got knocked down by the 2nd horse he was a length behind it after being level with it, got beat a neck. Don't know where i was going away

Piston_Broke · July 2013

Forelock said:

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)
What did he do wrong?

Ponty straightened up 5 to 6 horses off the fence, pulled the stick and shifted in, 3 horses were tightened including the fav, and never stopped riding once.

On Inquiry it was established that approaching the 300m HIGH LIMIT (P. Carbery) when held up

attempted to secure clear running to the outside of ISLAND SCANDAL (G. Smith) and was tightened

for room when that gelding shifted outwards slightly under pressure and at the same stage MIAMI

HORROR (M. Pateman) was carried inwards slightly by PRINCESS CARABOO (P. Harvey). After

considering all the evidence, Stewards were satisfied that no rider had ridden in a careless manner in

this incident and therefore no further action was taken.

Piston_Broke · July 2013

The Funkster said:

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)
Huh? In race 7? I doubt it considering 2nd horse should have won if it got out earlier....and was going away from the 3rd horse on the line!

Stewards intend to inquire into the reason for GONDIGGIN (J. Brown) being tightened for room and

restrained near the 200m at a date and time to be fixed.

Be interesting if anyone gets suspended and yet no protest

Piston_Broke · July 2013

CaptainDunnster said:
Well done today with the tips Matt R I raised the stakes a bit and multiplied your stakes by 10, ended up over $3k in front 52% on my outlay better than bank rates .
I will be following you again !!!!!!!

I obviously don't know how to read Matts tips

TheFunkster · July 2013

Piston_Broke said:

The Funkster said:

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)
Huh? In race 7? I doubt it considering 2nd horse should have won if it got out earlier....and was going away from the 3rd horse on the line!

Stewards intend to inquire into the reason for GONDIGGIN (J. Brown) being tightened for room and
restrained near the 200m at a date and time to be fixed.

Be interesting if anyone gets suspended and yet no protest

They looked at the film and decided not to protest so can only assume they didn't read as much in to it as you.

Didn't lose a length, got to within a head 50m out and margin was 1/4 length. 2nd horse def pulling away on the line.

Piston_Broke · July 2013

even if it lost 3/4 of a length it only got beat 1/4. I understand it as they decided not to protest as they knew they wouldn't get it because of lack of knowledge by Stewards ), also the fact the outside horse hung in a fraction

If that is the case J Noske won have a case to answer at the inquiry, nor should W White, it will be a "general crowding"

still surprised they didn't protest, nothing ventured nothing gained, there is no way they could be fined for a frivolous

Piston_Broke · July 2013

The Funkster said:

Piston_Broke said:

The Funkster said:

Piston_Broke said:
3rd against 2nd. It was a rough old race up the straight, Fav got polaxed, Ponty should only get a warning :)
Huh? In race 7? I doubt it considering 2nd horse should have won if it got out earlier....and was going away from the 3rd horse on the line!

Stewards intend to inquire into the reason for GONDIGGIN (J. Brown) being tightened for room and
restrained near the 200m at a date and time to be fixed.

Be interesting if anyone gets suspended and yet no protest
They looked at the film and decided not to protest so can only assume they didn't read as much in to it as you.
Didn't lose a length, got to within a head 50m out and margin was 1/4 length. 2nd horse def pulling away on the line.

no that it matters Funk, but look at Gondigins nose compared to Noskes right leg, over the last 75 m just where was the 2nd horse pulling away, Gondigins nose was well past Noskes leg at the line

TheDiva · July 2013

Piston_Broke said:

CaptainDunnster said:
Well done today with the tips Matt R I raised the stakes a bit and multiplied your stakes by 10, ended up over $3k in front 52% on my outlay better than bank rates .
I will be following you again !!!!!!!

I obviously don't know how to read Matts tips

So You Think Tipster #10 - Matt R's Bets for the Meeting

R	No	Runner	W	P	Result	Return
1	1	THATELDO	$100		3rd	$0.00
2	7	DAWN'S FLYER	$50	$50	Won	$540.00
3	3	BELLAXENA	$10		X	$0.00
4	12	CREDO	$30		Won	$216.00
7	9	SLICK SHIFTER	$50		X	$0.00
8	8	LUWIAN	$100		3rd	$0.00
		$390 Total Bets	$340	$50		$756.00
		Profit/Loss				$366.00

TheDiva · July 2013

Just explaining. Under the preview tab, Chris uses the tipster's suggested bet and stake to get a running total.

Matt Raison (not me), had $390 worth of bets for a $756 return, or $366 profit.

http://www.perthturftalk.com.au/preview/r8-westspeed-nominations-close-on-26-july-handicap--030713/

RIO · July 2013

The Diva said:

Piston_Broke said:

CaptainDunnster said:
Well done today with the tips Matt R I raised the stakes a bit and multiplied your stakes by 10, ended up over $3k in front 52% on my outlay better than bank rates .
I will be following you again !!!!!!!

I obviously don't know how to read Matts tips

So You Think Tipster #10 - Matt R's Bets for the Meeting
R No Runner W P Result Return
1 1 THATELDO $100 3rd $0.00
2 7 DAWN'S FLYER $50 $50 Won $540.00
3 3 BELLAXENA $10 X $0.00
4 12 CREDO $30 Won $216.00
7 9 SLICK SHIFTER $50 X $0.00
8 8 LUWIAN $100 3rd $0.00
$390 Total Bets $340 $50 $756.00
Profit/Loss $366.00

Where we those bets nominated???

All i could see was the following

Race 3 Ballexena $10

Race 7 Slick Shifter $50

Race 8 Luwian $100

Investment $160, return NIL..didn't look too good from what i could see!?!?!?!?

H-BOMBER · July 2013

These bets were nominated at the bottom of the previews section :-h

RIO · July 2013

whoever goes to that tab???

think it's time we stopped intelligent and educated individuals posting on this site...

RIO · July 2013

RIO said:
whoever goes to that tab???
think it's time we stopped intelligent and educated individuals posting on this site...

:\"> :\"> :-\" X_X

Forelock · July 2013

Raff_2000 said:
Interesting to see something I haven't seen before in the stewards report today. In the late report section some trainers are now stating that a particular horse won't be starting for 'A number' of weeks due to a bruised heel or viral infection etc...Generally it will say 'At least 2 weeks' or something like that. I am neither for or against the method but I'd have thought Stewards would require more specification than this considering they do when it comes to a change of riding tactics amongst other things. 'A number' of weeks could mean anything from 2 upwards and although its easier for trainers to report it this way, it may well cause more confusion than is worthwhile in the process :-/

Isnt it easier for trainers to state something like that instead of saying 2 weeks and it be 3 or 3 weeks and it be 2? Basically they are saying it wont race for two weeks or more which to me is pretty straight forward. The more you think about it the more you confuse the situation.

JustanL · July 2013

A

Forelock said:

Raff_2000 said:
Interesting to see something I haven't seen before in the stewards report today. In the late report section some trainers are now stating that a particular horse won't be starting for 'A number' of weeks due to a bruised heel or viral infection etc...Generally it will say 'At least 2 weeks' or something like that. I am neither for or against the method but I'd have thought Stewards would require more specification than this considering they do when it comes to a change of riding tactics amongst other things. 'A number' of weeks could mean anything from 2 upwards and although its easier for trainers to report it this way, it may well cause more confusion than is worthwhile in the process :-/
Isnt it easier for trainers to state something like that instead of saying 2 weeks and it be 3 or 3 weeks and it be 2? Basically they are saying it wont race for two weeks or more which to me is pretty straight forward. The more you think about it the more you confuse the situation.

Agree

G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

Belmont Preview, 3rd Jul

Comments

So You Think Tipster #10 - Matt R's Bets for the Meeting

So You Think Tipster #10 - Matt R's Bets for the Meeting