Triumph Hurdle 2021

[Outlaw]

OK i didn't bother checking the form book before posting as to the proper rpr and relied on my notes at the time. I still feel that his rating is undervalued and he will attain this figure. And yes I'm all in and won't be looking elsewhere for the winner.

Fair enough, i like him but nothing as positive as more than low 130s to date imo but he's not had a race yet so to speak.

[Kevloaf]

OK i didn't bother checking the form book before posting as to the proper rpr and relied on my notes at the time. I still feel that his rating is undervalued and he will attain this figure. And yes I'm all in and won't be looking elsewhere for the winner.

There are so many reasons not to like this.



1. Please 'bother' to check if you're going to post as if you're using facts.
2. If you're all in, why have you decided that horse is worth risking your entire festival bank on?
3. Post your bets in a diary or don't tell us what you're on or it's meaningless. (That's to everyone not just you)
4. You genuinely believe there is no point even looking for another horse in the race? That's just plain ignorant isn't it? ....especially in a race that has literally had winners first run in Feb of the same year.



The good points were that you feel the rating is undervalued.... and the reason why above (about the second being rated 77 rpr) is good stuff...... reading your posts though I can see you're going to cause me problems

[nortonscoin200]

There are so many reasons not to like this.



1. Please 'bother' to check if you're going to post as if you're using facts.
2. If you're all in, why have you decided that horse is worth risking your entire festival bank on?
3. Post your bets in a diary or don't tell us what you're on or it's meaningless. (That's to everyone not just you)
4. You genuinely believe there is no point even looking for another horse in the race? That's just plain ignorant isn't it? ....especially in a race that has literally had winners first run in Feb of the same year.



The good points were that you feel the rating is undervalued.... and the reason why above (about the second being rated 77 rpr) is good stuff...... reading your posts though I can see you're going to cause me problems

Kev, I take issue with your "plain ignorant" assertion in point four.

Surely Bigfish is simply saying:"I love Nassalam to bits and I'm not going to back anything else to oppose him."

In my book that's fair enough - it's not "plain ignorant", it's just a strategic decision.

Obviously very different from your strategy but equally valid.

He likes the horse, has nailed his colours to the mast and will sink or swim with Nassalam.

That doesn't necessarily mean he is unable to see the merits of likely rivals - just that he's sticking with this one.

Call me "plain ignorant" but I operate in a broadly similar fashion.

[Quevega]

Kev, I take issue with your "plain ignorant" assertion in point four.

Surely Bigfish is simply saying:"I love Nassalam to bits and I'm not going to back anything else to oppose him."

In my book that's fair enough - it's not "plain ignorant", it's just a strategic decision.

Obviously very different from your strategy but equally valid.

He likes the horse, has nailed his colours to the mast and will sink or swim with Nassalam.

That doesn't necessarily mean he is unable to see the merits of likely rivals - just that he's sticking with this one.

Call me "plain ignorant" but I operate in a broadly similar fashion.

Would it be ignorant if Nassalam gets beat 20 lengths next time up ?

[nortonscoin200]

Would it be ignorant if Nassalam gets beat 20 lengths next time up ?

If it were me, I'd be thinking I've done my money on Nassalam and it's time to reassess - or leave the race alone.

I've been in a similar position with Lisnagar Oscar in the Stayers.

I was impressed by his win in March and backed him accordingly. But after two below par runs I'm lumbered with some some pretty poor price bets and feel I've missed the boat on others I might be interested in. Because I don't want to throw good money after bad I've even spurned PP's 50-1 on LO which is a cracking price. And I've made a decision to stick with him even though I now concede he's far from the most likely winner of the race.

And Nassalam has yet to be beaten by 20 lengths in all fairness.

[Quevega]

The rpr 130 figure given to Nassalam is a complete joke. The horse that finished 2nd was rated OR 112 yet only judged to have run to a mark of 77 rpr. I believe that a more accurate figure of 157 would be appropriate .

You talk a lot about lengths beaten or won by.
Is this your ratings system, as 157 seems suspiciously like it's that simple for you.

There is a guy on internet - Matt Mitter, who runs a a site called Value rater racing club.
He seems to be doing quite well, and good on him.

When he first came onto the scene he had his own rating system that was so basic I could not believe he got any sort of credibility whatsoever.
He essentially rated horses by how many lengths they beat another one by etc etc, and took virtually nothing else into account.

Now he may have advanced his system since, but I wouldn't know cos I've not seen anything he's involved in.
But when he was trying to make a name for himself and I caught him on the odd youtube thing, he was quite literally full of shit. IMO

[Quevega]

If it were me, I'd be thinking I've done my money on Nassalam and it's time to reassess - or leave the race alone.

I've been in a similar position with Lisnagar Oscar in the Stayers.

I was impressed by his win in March and backed him accordingly. But after two below par runs I'm lumbered with some some pretty poor price bets and feel I've missed the boat on others I might be interested in. Because I don't want to throw good money after bad I've even spurned PP's 50-1 on LO which is a cracking price. And I've made a decision to stick with him even though I now concede he's far from the most likely winner of the race.

And Nassalam has yet to be beaten by 20 lengths in all fairness.

That's understandable.

But I think all Kev was saying was that it is ignorant to call the winner (or think you've nailed the winner) of such a race and go all in on such a race, so early, based on that evidence and random rating.

I've backed Zanahyir @56-1 back in October.

Do I think he's going to win ? No. but he might.
Has he a decent chance ? probably. based on the what we've seen so far.
Will I ignore other runners ? maybe, maybe not. depends what else I see.
Do I rate him as having achieved an RPR of mid 160's by beating Druids Altar who has a best RPR of 120 by 48 lengths ? No fucking way.

[ComplyOrDie]

I've backed Zanahyir @56-1 back in October.

I thought it was you that had the 50/1 (obviously boosted), well played on that Q, and think your post was the only reason I even looked into him

[Kevloaf]

Kev, I take issue with your "plain ignorant" assertion in point four.

Surely Bigfish is simply saying:"I love Nassalam to bits and I'm not going to back anything else to oppose him."

In my book that's fair enough - it's not "plain ignorant", it's just a strategic decision.

Obviously very different from your strategy but equally valid.

He likes the horse, has nailed his colours to the mast and will sink or swim with Nassalam.

That doesn't necessarily mean he is unable to see the merits of likely rivals - just that he's sticking with this one.

Call me "plain ignorant" but I operate in a broadly similar fashion.

The difference is that you have your diary/strategy/thoughts written out so I know the context.

In my opinion, by definition (lacking knowledge), it is ignorant to say you won't even consider another horse, that's an ignorant way to approach it. As you are deliberately ignoring future knowledge.

Not saying it won't work, but it is ignorant and would require so much luck to just assume NO MATTER WHAT other horses won't win.

If Bigfish goes on to say that he only backs one in a race, fair enough, it adds context and despite me thinking that approach would be ignorant, it justifies it...



It's all about the context, and there is none from the original post.

[nortonscoin200]

That's understandable.

But I think all Kev was saying was that it is ignorant to call the winner (or think you've nailed the winner) of such a race and go all in on such a race, so early, based on that evidence and random rating.

I've backed Zanahyir @56-1 back in October.

Do I think he's going to win ? No. but he might.
Has he a decent chance ? probably. based on the what we've seen so far.
Will I ignore other runners ? maybe, maybe not. depends what else I see.
Do I rate him as having achieved an RPR of mid 160's by beating Druids Altar who has a best RPR of 120 by 48 lengths ? No fucking way.

It's use of the words "plain ignorant" I take issue with - it's a pretty emotive phrase and I don't feel it's justified in this context.

[Bigfish]

The system I use has been developed by me and before that my Dad over 40 years of study and its very detailed and complicated but user friendly.
Its basically a graph and slide rule.Where the winners come from and using historical examples as future form. I never ignore the obvious. I take everything into consideration particularly rpr errors. Adding or subtracting for ease of win, blunders , going, L/R handed preference, fitness etc. A performance can be marked up or down.
I am successful enough to make a profit for my effort and time but don't really have to swing my dick about it.
I've done multiple exotic bets and multis including Zanahiyr , Quixilios and other fancied Triumph runners.
However , its Nassalam for me .

[Kevloaf]

It's use of the words "plain ignorant" I take issue with - it's a pretty emotive phrase and I don't feel it's justified in this context.

The below post just highlights my point NC200.

I questioned him, as essentially we have no evidence for any of this so they're just brash sweeping statements with no context (in particular the one I questioned)..... in the very next post (below at the bottom) he's now saying he's also backed other horses.

Essentially, he has already admitted to not doing what he's said ....how can we validate the posts? My issue was with this quote....

OK i didn't bother checking the form book before posting as to the proper rpr and relied on my notes at the time. I still feel that his rating is undervalued and he will attain this figure. And yes I'm all in and won't be looking elsewhere for the winner.

.... which I feel is worth picking up on.



This is the second time you've taken offense on someone else's behalf... I'll try to make sure I never call you ignorant (even if you are being) but I'll continue to question people and I feel my use of the word has been proven right with the below... it makes the original post that I picked up on, inaccurate, and provoked a response/explanation. People can now make their own minds up can't they.

The system I use has been developed by me and before that my Dad over 40 years of study and its very detailed and complicated but user friendly.
Its basically a graph and slide rule.Where the winners come from and using historical examples as future form. I never ignore the obvious. I take everything into consideration particularly rpr errors. Adding or subtracting for ease of win, blunders , going, L/R handed preference, fitness etc. A performance can be marked up or down.
I am successful enough to make a profit for my effort and time but don't really have to swing my dick about it.
I've done multiple exotic bets and multis including Zanahiyr , Quixilios and other fancied Triumph runners.
However , its Nassalam for me .

[Bigfish]

I take offence Kevloaf .

[Kevloaf]

I take offence Kevloaf .

What have you taken offense to?

[Bigfish]

I've better things to do. But I challenge you to a duel to resolve your issue with me. Such fun. A head to head tipping contest over Christmas. Your rules boss man.