However, there was lots of interest in betting, even though very little expertise is available from respondents. So I thought I might sign off with a scoreboard.

Me

Advice not to back TT in the Sydney Cup - CORRECT
Advice that Boom Down was the value runner in the Association Cup - WON
Advice that Whiskey Riot was all the go in the Melbourne Cup WON
Advice that Boom Down was as good as anything else in Bold Trease SECOND

Score: So thats 3 Wins and a 2nd for me.

Others

Nil no entries. Lots of misquotes and incorrect statements but no attempt to pick a winner. One respondent told us he backed TT in the Bold Trease but that advice came after the race was run so the entry in ineligible.

So thats a score of 0 from 0.

Training is for trainers and betting is for genuine punters, retired or not.

In true style, Tornado.
If you ran last in a camel race across the Sahara you would still claim victory based on having two humps.

You tipped the 1 to WIN!...INCORRECT. You forgot you spun the 6 in the BT as the best each way value...4th...INCORRECT.
You had two bites at the cherry and LOST both.
You also hailed TT as a lost cause with leprosy...INCORRECT.

THREE bites at the cherry and did your ass cold.

Not so impressive when you look at the facts in black and white, now is it?

Try being transparent for once in your life, after all, it's what you continually demand of others.

Nitey nite Tornado...put your nightie on and tell the mirror 50 times you're the best and kiss yourself to sleep.

xxxx

u have zero credibility and the more u talk the more pompous and ridiculous you prove yourself to be, lol.

A genuinely broke punter

When we start listening to punters to decide policy on how many starts a greyhound should have in so many days, you may as well close up the sport

BAGS racing in the UK has not really been successful for the sport because they let bookmakers run it

Punters are just the other side of the betting ledger

....Your a Mug Punter Bruce ....nothing more nothing less ....

The accuracy of online information may not be up to scratch but that doesnt worry many in the market. Indeed, not everyone is in hot pursuit of the truth; what many people want is everyday validation of their version of the truth. And where better to get that than in the cosily curated world of social media, where you need hear only admiring voices?

EXTERNAL LINK

Tweeking the truth just comes naturally.... thats hilarious.

Last night at Geelong over 680m Tornado Tears ($1.70) was donkey licked by Blazing Cartier ($3.70), reversing the situation in the Bold Trease seven days earlier. TT had every opportunity to make up ground but just plodded. Six dogs started after two runners and both reserves were scratched(?).

Overall, Blazing Cartier's recent form was far superior to TT's recent poor efforts and really warranted it being favourite. It ran 39.20 (record 38.72), TT 39.54.

Whether a longer break between runs would help smooth out the form is always arguable. However, these experiences serve to tell us not to bother betting on such distance races, which is not good for the industry. But TT's once fine reputation is suffering as we go on. Sadly, it seems only me and the NSW stewards recognise a problem exists.

Separately, just before TT's race, a dog having its first attempt at the 700s was backed in to $1.70 at Wenty but failed to run a place and could not break 43sec. Very dumb practice. Still, good old Ebby Ripper added another 3 grand to the kitty.

The winner of the other 720m also failed to break 43 sec.

It all bears a serious look before you "close up the sport". But be quick about it.

Bruce, you don't know what you are talking about in this area

Mark has caught you out, both the winner and TT were on 7 day back ups

Your arguments are of no consequence, they wouldn't even help the punters, all you would do is confuse them, because based on your assumptions they wouldn't have backed Blazing Carter either, therefore missing out on the winner

Maybe you should stick to a more sedate hobby like Stamp Collecting

In the straight and after getting some room to move, TT went passed one - pretty much going 2 to its 1, gaining on the winner, but the winner was just too good on the night.

EXTERNAL LINK

I must say I am amazed at your detailed knowledge of my history, experience, abilities and punting success. You guys must have psychic capabilities.

In any event, your comments would improve no end if you actually read what I posted.

both the winner and TT were on 7 day back ups. That is precisely what I said.

they wouldn't have backed Blazing Carter either. Again, my specific point was that it has become impossible to back anything in these races due to the uncertainties. Thats not good for the industry.

Nor is it my job to help the punters. But I do try to make points or ask questions which might lead to a better industry in the future.

You guys have chosen not to make responses to the main theme here (uncertain distance racing and leading then to the questionable stamina of the breed), preferring instead to throw rocks at me personally. How does that help the industry? Why do you bother?

But keep going and tell the fans why it is stupid to take odds-on about a favourite with poor/erratic form. Or advise them never to back a dog having its first distance start (they win less than one in five despite possible good 600m form). Or insist on better odds for one-turn dogs moving up to circle tracks. And always be wary about dogs that have just had two or three poor runs in succession. And never back anything in a low quality distance race you might as well chuck an arrow at the dartboard.

All backed up by serious long term research and analysis.

Incidentally, the idea with a formguide is to actually study them carefully, not to just glance at who is training what and stick it in your back pocket. And never listen to tips, especially not on SKY.

Yes, MD, a clear case of denial...

Funny how both have a similar falling style toooo...