Dave the point here is that Sharon Kotzen made a fool of us with her comments not the horse.
From educational run to being 100% wound up for it's first start in one week?
She well knew it was good just see the betting moves.
0 Peach Daiquiri 8.33 7.14 6.25 5.56 3.57 3.33 2.86 2.50 2.27 2.50 2.86 2.50 2.27 2.50
It looks like it was backed in 9 times.
We really don't need this type of skullduggery in our already battling industry.
The confidence from the punter just continues to go downhill when they get deceived and remember if it wasn't for the punter they would need to find another job.
DAVE - TO BE FAIR - To Be Fair. To be fair, the horse went from having an educational run a week ago, to waking up the morning of the race and deciding education is done, now we are ready to win. To be fair.
DAVE - TO BE FAIR - To Be Fair. To be fair, the horse went from having an educational run a week ago, to waking up the morning of the race and deciding education is done, now we are ready to win. To be fair.
the idea of an Educational run is against the rules - its a well used phrase just like my fav a Prep run - The rules say every horse should be trying to win
Is horse-racing the only industry in which some are allowed to benefit from something akin to insider trading?
Because those that do benefit from these unpoliced activities are not taking their money off the middleman bookies but other punters who do not have some of the information privy to only a few...who have chosen / are allowed to not reveal it to get a better price for themselves...
Keep taking money from the punter and there will be no pools as those who make hay are not going to put all that they unscrupulously won back into the pools...and with dwindling take-outs, they will all be out of jobs...
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction...take heed...
Race 2 Stipes c)Trainer SB Kotzen was questioned regarding the comments made by her that were published in the Race card, Computaform as well as the respective betting movements relating to PEACH DAIQUIRI in this race. Mrs Kotzen told the Stewards that the betting movements were not linked to stable support and that she had been open and frank with the On Course Presenter regarding the chances of PEACH DAIQUIRI. She added that her comments that were published in the Computaform were made before she had the opportunity to measure the strength of the field and the relative chances of PEACH DAIQUIRI in the race. She further stated that the performance and the ease of the win of the filly had taken her by somewhat of a surprise. The Board have adjourned to consider the statements made by Trainer SB Kotzen and to enquire into the betting patterns relating to PEACH DAIQUIRI which will include local and international betting exchange platforms.
Brilliant stuff stipes.
That is exactly what we want to see.
Now regarding her comments....
The horse was on an educational run which to me means she was just showing her the race course and doesn't expect much first time out,so what does the strength of the opposition matter?
And it wasn't stable money.
So who backed the horse 10 times?
The grooms?
Some arb person who just felt like backing a first timer heavily?
Someone who saw it work at the training track?
If other people except the trainer knew how good the horse was how good a judge of her own horses that she trains everyday is she?
And a huge opportunity for the connections to get a few years of training fees missed if they actually had nothing to do with the betting coup.
The horse won like a machine heavily backed and the trainer tells us she was surprised.
Let's see what the betting patterns tell us and hopefully they will find if the winning punters had anything to do with the stable,friends or family of any of the connections of the horse.
