Today's Horse Racing

[Dallas]

Pretty much a write-off today for racing

[Diggy1884]

How often, if at all, do UK/Ire race courses adjust the distance between the final obstacle and the finish line?

I think they did this at Musselburgh recently as each verdict mentioned something along the lines of 'add x to the distance'. I didn't pay too much attention to the details at the time but it did stand out as peculiar (my 1st couple of months on jumps though so no veteran). Can't say I've seen it often or at all before, perhaps others have though?

I'm guessing it is to do with weather/conditions or an incident on the track? Safety/fairness? It's likely they post the alterations somewhere like they do with delays.

Everything is laid out in the British Horse Racing General Instructions (BHAGI rules).

I only have ever seen hurdles moved on vary rare occasions (I do not mean just omitting them) in my 40 odd years of watching racing, and this would need approval from the BHA. Obviously, most courses could not move their chase fences, only tracks with mobile fences would have the ability, but I suspect these fit in set places in the running rail.

The distance changes, Diggy, you are referring to are normally when they move the running rail off the existing rail, to try and keep the ground fresh. The racecourse has to notify the BHA, and the BHA produces a sheet of all changes to distances of racing which is then distributed.

If you are really interested you should be able to find these on line somewhere, but they are boring.

Edit

Here's one I just quickly looked up, but there are more BHAGI sections than this.

https://media.britishhorseracing.com/bh ... anning.pdf

Awesome, nice and comprehensive! Cheers
Not of direct interest to myself but felt rude post posting my ramblings after another user posted a real question so attempted to answer it haha

Always good to learn more about the details.
Thanks Conduirez

[Euler]

Newbury back five today

[jamesedwards]

Thanks both.

[arbitrage16]

Pretty much a write-off today for racing

Made 140% of stake so I’d kindly disagree. Smaller cards with no gaps and lots of money focused can be a dream to trade

[jamesedwards]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.

Picture38.PNG

[Fugazi]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.


Picture38.PNG

Probably just killed a few peoples three year stats of their ''guaranteed profit system"

[Bobajob]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.


Picture38.PNG

If your strategy is backing 999/1 shots then sooner or later one of them is going to win

[conduirez]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.


Picture38.PNG

If your strategy is backing 999/1 shots then sooner or later one of them is going to win

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

[Fugazi]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.


Picture38.PNG

If your strategy is backing 999/1 shots then sooner or later one of them is going to win

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

Yeah guarantee someone somewhere has been thinking theyve cracked a system for easy profits

[Bobajob]

812/1 BSP wins at Exeter.

A whopping £453 traded at the max 999/1.


Picture38.PNG

If your strategy is backing 999/1 shots then sooner or later one of them is going to win

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

If your strategy is to 'lay' 999/1 shots, sooner or later you are going to get 'shafted'

[jamesedwards]

If your strategy is to 'lay' 999/1 shots, sooner or later you are going to get 'shafted'

[Bobajob]

If your strategy is backing 999/1 shots then sooner or later one of them is going to win

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

I would have thought that in this case the strategy was the opposite way around, with traders laying at 999/1 to try and collect all the money placed on BACK bets for horse, as they were certain the horse could not win.

If your strategy is to 'lay' 999/1 shots, sooner or later you are going to get 'shafted'

Especially if you have already 'layed' a 999/1 shot that you thought was certain to 'lose'

[LinusP]

What is wrong with laying at 1000? I have pushed for them to up it further but it would involve ‘major changes’

[jamesedwards]

What is wrong with laying at 1000? I have pushed for them to up it further but it would involve ‘major changes’

Nothing. Loads of value at the extremes if you do it right, because you can't offer higher than 1000 or lower than 1.01 even if the true probability sits outside of them.

But people fall foul of thinking they have an edge when they're 500 from 500 laying at 1000. Then it all comes crashing down.