Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Official 2016 Grand National Thread

1356719

Comments

  • bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
  • Gotta feel for golden cheifden had the race in the bag.
  • bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
    I'm sure we can do a deal, Peanuts.
  • bobmunro said:

    bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
    I'm sure we can do a deal, Peanuts.
    Having boosted bet365's accounts the last few months any chance I can get one too!!!!
  • smiffyboy said:

    bobmunro said:

    bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
    I'm sure we can do a deal, Peanuts.
    Having boosted bet365's accounts the last few months any chance I can get one too!!!!
    Sorry, Marc - that's already locked away in my bonus!!
  • Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.
  • Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    Poor bookies are as rare as rocking horse shit mate...
  • Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    In a word "yes". One of the restrictions they will use. The next one might be to allow SP only. And then the amount allowed will be limited - all the way down to 10p if you haven't taken the hint already and stopped using them.

    All these restrictions allow the bookies' PR men to claim "we never close accounts".
  • edited March 2016
    bobmunro said:

    bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
    I'm sure we can do a deal, Peanuts.
    My stripped back model (now considering the stats of only winners and <5L from 1991~2012 but whole fields 2013~2015) indicates:

    With the notable but unsurprising exception of MANY CLOUDS, no runner with 11.00+ has the stats to win this GN.
  • edited March 2016

    Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    I'll say the following not in an attempt to convince everybody to like bookmakers (I know that's futile) but to give some explanation.

    Bookmakers, like any other commercial operation, are in it to make profit. They will restrict customers where they believe, following an analysis of their business, that they are unlikely to make a profit in the long run. Whether a customer is winning or losing is of secondary importance - it is the nature of their business that will determine the bookmaker's stance. If a customer gives a good mix of business then winning or losing is irrelevant as the bookmaker knows that in the long run the customer is likely to lose (or at least the bookmaker will get some of those losses back) - and if they win then good luck to them. However if a customer is highly selective e.g. they only ever bet on maiden 2-y-o races in Ireland, then whether or not they are winning right now will not determine how quickly they will be restricted.
  • Sponsored links:


  • bobmunro said:

    Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    I'll say the following not in an attempt to convince everybody to like bookmakers (I know that's futile) but to give some explanation.

    Bookmakers, like any other commercial operation, are in it to make profit. They will restrict customers where they believe, following an analysis of their business, that they are unlikely to make a profit in the long run. Whether a customer is winning or losing is of secondary importance - it is the nature of their business that will determine the bookmaker's stance. If a customer gives a good mix of business then winning or losing is irrelevant as the bookmaker knows that in the long run the customer is likely to lose (or at least the bookmaker will get some of those losses back) - and if they win then good luck to them. However if a customer is highly selective e.g. they only ever bet on maiden 2-y-o races in Ireland, then whether or not they are winning right now will not determine how quickly they will be restricted.

    bobmunro said:

    bobmunro said:

    Bet365 (paying 5 places) are now NRNB.

    Quality bookmakers - the best of course ;-)

    (although bet365 is lower case 'b' - we are very touchy about that!!)
    You wouldn't give me 6 places if I tell you which one my model says "LAY" would you bob?

    PS It's a vicious lie it said Lay Ballabriggs in 2011 :wink:
    I'm sure we can do a deal, Peanuts.
    My stripped back model (now considering the stats of only winners and
    That's very interesting, Peanuts. However the National is not like any other race on the calendar (as I know you know). The book is primarily made up of once a year punters who will go with names, the betting, national tipsters, colours, favourite jockets etc... - they don't study form! We, on CL, are different because we are very lucky to have you.

    With very competitive pricing, enhanced place terms and promotions it is usual for bookmakers to lose on the National, and they expect and accept this as it is a very good customer recruitment tool. A loss leader is every sense.
  • bobmunro said:

    Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    I'll say the following not in an attempt to convince everybody to like bookmakers (I know that's futile) but to give some explanation.

    Bookmakers, like any other commercial operation, are in it to make profit. They will restrict customers where they believe, following an analysis of their business, that they are unlikely to make a profit in the long run. Whether a customer is winning or losing is of secondary importance - it is the nature of their business that will determine the bookmaker's stance. If a customer gives a good mix of business then winning or losing is irrelevant as the bookmaker knows that in the long run the customer is likely to lose (or at least the bookmaker will get some of those losses back) - and if they win then good luck to them. However if a customer is highly selective e.g. they only ever bet on maiden 2-y-o races in Ireland, then whether or not they are winning right now will not determine how quickly they will be restricted & filthy
    and arbers too?
  • bobmunro said:

    Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    I'll say the following not in an attempt to convince everybody to like bookmakers (I know that's futile) but to give some explanation.

    Bookmakers, like any other commercial operation, are in it to make profit. They will restrict customers where they believe, following an analysis of their business, that they are unlikely to make a profit in the long run. Whether a customer is winning or losing is of secondary importance - it is the nature of their business that will determine the bookmaker's stance. If a customer gives a good mix of business then winning or losing is irrelevant as the bookmaker knows that in the long run the customer is likely to lose (or at least the bookmaker will get some of those losses back) - and if they win then good luck to them. However if a customer is highly selective e.g. they only ever bet on maiden 2-y-o races in Ireland, then whether or not they are winning right now will not determine how quickly they will be restricted & filthy
    and arbers too?
    filth!
  • bobmunro said:

    bobmunro said:

    Bob mate of mine had a very good week, bets with bet victor who offer best odds guaranteed, after taking them for 11k, this week, they have withdrawn best odds guaranteed, is this a usual thing for bookies if someone starts winning a lot.

    I'll say the following not in an attempt to convince everybody to like bookmakers (I know that's futile) but to give some explanation.

    Bookmakers, like any other commercial operation, are in it to make profit. They will restrict customers where they believe, following an analysis of their business, that they are unlikely to make a profit in the long run. Whether a customer is winning or losing is of secondary importance - it is the nature of their business that will determine the bookmaker's stance. If a customer gives a good mix of business then winning or losing is irrelevant as the bookmaker knows that in the long run the customer is likely to lose (or at least the bookmaker will get some of those losses back) - and if they win then good luck to them. However if a customer is highly selective e.g. they only ever bet on maiden 2-y-o races in Ireland, then whether or not they are winning right now will not determine how quickly they will be restricted & filthy
    and arbers too?
    filth!
    Although I have never been an arber I am not surprised by the rather typical bookmaker's response if I might say. When a bookie hedges their position it's called business. When a punter does the same it's tantamount to being illegal.

    For example, the big firms send money to the track allegedly to reflect their positions and the SP is reflected accordingly. Except the same firms have frequently been caught with their trousers down for creating SPs of 150% - for 8 runner races on the all weather! We're used to that sort of margin (and more) for the Grand National but not on a Tuesday night at Wolverhampton. And yet if a punter tried to manipulate a market in the same way bookmakers would cry like babies!
  • Peanuts: what's the likelihood of Mountainous starting now?
  • edited March 2016
    meldrew66 said:

    Peanuts: what's the likelihood of Mountainous starting now?

    Next forfeit stage tomorrow Chief so we'll know more then.
    Mountainous is one of 7 allotted 10.01 and priority among them will be determined initially by their Official Ratings prevailing at Declarations on 7 April.
    With virtually all preps completed, there's been mixed developments for Mountainous.
    The good news is that, despite a poor run in the GN Trial, Mountainous' OR is unchanged at 142 but 2 others with 10.01 (Benbens and Bally Beaufort) have seen their ORs dropped, so they will rank below him.
    However, though it won't be confirmed until tomorrow, Cause of Causes will certainly be raised after his strong win in the Kim Muir. We'll have to see whether Midnight Prayer maintains his OR after an OK run in the same race. If he does, like Mountainous, he'll be one of 4 allotted 10.01 and with an OR of 142.
    For those with the same allotted weights and same ORs at Decs, there will be a ballot.
    Worst case is that he'd need 30 of the currently-standing top 70 entries to come out (Long Run retired yesterday so that's one gone!). Ordinarily that would seem unlikely but there are quite a number also entered for the Irish National on 28 Mar - unlikely many, if any, will run in both. We might have to wait until Confirmation stage on 4 Apr to get a serious idea.
    It could all be moot, of course, if Kerry Lee is looking for soft ground.
  • edited March 2016
    Official Ratings (post Cheltenham) published today.

    Horses that are "well-in" in terms of prevailing OR vs. OR for GN:

    Many Clouds - 1lb
    Silviniaco Conti - 6lbs
    Holywell - 4lbs
    The Last Samuri - 12lbs
    Cause of Causes - 10lbs

    Cause of Causes goes to the top of those with 10-01 and needs 26 among those with more weight to come out to get a run. He will certainly be on my betting slip if he does.
  • Really am thinking the same as regards Cause Of Causes Peanuts
  • Sponsored links:


  • Cause of causes extreme hold up tactics will be an issue didn't he stay on from out with the washing last year but was still a fence down?
  • edited March 2016
    oldbloke said:

    Cause of causes extreme hold up tactics will be an issue didn't he stay on from out with the washing last year but was still a fence down?

    Will do a write up on CoC if it looks like he'll make the cut.
    I agree that he is vulnerable to traffic problems but his run last year (27L 8th), with 8lbs more than he'll carry this time, was very respectable for a 7y-o.
    That win last week with 11.09 in the Kim Muir was a significant boost to his stat profile.

    Saint Are and Shutthefrontdoor both have strong place potential but, among returning runners, CoC has the best chance (according to my model) of denying Many Clouds. But still not the best chance of all.........come on EMMA, give him a run :smiley:
  • edited March 2016
    oldbloke said:

    Cause of causes extreme hold up tactics will be an issue didn't he stay on from out with the washing last year but was still a fence down?

    Actually, you could have said the same about Saint Are after he was a never nearer 49L 9th in 2013 ["In rear, some headway 25th (2nd Valentines), never a factor"] also, significantly, as a 7y-o.
    Missed the race in 2014 but was unlucky not to win it last year.
  • edited March 2016
    17 horses scratched today:

    Don Poli
    Valseur Lido
    Foxrock
    Sam Winner
    Lord Windermere
    Long Run
    Bears Affair
    Mendip Express
    Mon Parrain
    Shotgun Paddy (.....silly cow)
    Benbens
    Our Father
    Broadway Buffalo
    Gray Hession
    Operating
    Competitive Edge
    Rathlin



    CoC needs another 16 to come out to get a run.
    Mountainous, Midnight Prayer and Royale Knight will need between 17 and 20 to come out to get in.

    Notable that 12 of those above CoC in the weights are also entered for the Irish National on 28 March.
  • edited March 2016
    Blimey, looking at the lowest on the card after this 2nd forfeit stage to make the cut in the last 6 GNs (47~52), there's little chance of any with 10-01 getting a run.

    In fact, all of those with 10.02 could easily miss out.

    They include:

    2014 GN winner - Pineau De Re
    2015 GN 4th - Alvarado
    2015 Becher Chase winner - Highland Lodge

    Royale Knight (last year's 6th) and Double Seven (2014 3rd), aswell as double Welsh National winner Mountainous (with a 10lb hike on OR), all on 10-01 - forget about it.

    Bloody ridiculous.
  • edited March 2016
    I imagine that being #56 on the list and with no further forfeit stage until after the Irish National, it has to be a possibility that Gordon Elliott thinks about Fairyhouse for Cause Of Causes if he's come out of Cheltenham well - probably a bit soon.

    We shall see how it all pans out with so many with Irish & Aintree National entries but if a winner of 2 years ago, who (just 4 months ago) was good enough to beat a 12 year drought of GN winners winning another race, isn't able to make the cut, something is very wrong with the way the race is being managed.
  • edited March 2016
    Always very interesting to see other trend-followers' analysis and selections.

    Micko70 on OLBG, whose approach I have a lot of respect for, sees it as follows (taking only those with 10-01+):

    Goonyella (NAP)
    Holywell, Gallant Oscar
    Many Clouds, The Druids Nephew, Mountainous

    There you go - 2 dyed-in-the-wool trend followers studying the same race and same contenders. What do they say? Lies, damned lies and statistics :smiley:
  • edited March 2016
    Hmm, not great news for those on 10.01~02, looking for 10~22 further defections.
    Five day stage for the Irish National next Monday saw all but 2 of the 14 with GN & Irish National entries scratched from the Fairyhouse marathon.
    Not all of them will be aimed at the GN (Turban likely to go for the Topham) but it's notable that Cause Of Causes was kept in the Irish National - Elliott perhaps figuring that he's unlikely to make the cut for Aintree. That would mean Midnight Prayer and Mountainous, among others, also missing out.
    Those on 10.02 (incl Pineau De Re, Highland Lodge, Alvarado and Perfect Candidate) are now really sweating on a run, with only 1 above them holding an Irish National entry (Living Next Door).
    Since PdR (+6lbs), Highland Lodge (+6lbs) and Alvarado (+8lbs) all had their ORs increased for the GN, they will (presumably) rank below at least 2 of the other 3 with 10.02 and will need at least 12~16 to come out - but 12 is the most that has defected from the top of the card after this stage in the last 6 years.
  • http://www.grand-national2016.co.uk/runners-odds/

    good little guide there.

    i will be backing goonyella and probably just pick a couple of randoms on the day

    shame it looks like cause of causes wont get in.
  • edited March 2016
    I know I sound like a broken record but compare:

    2012: Sunnyhillboy wins the Kim Muir by 4.5L with 11.11 (OR142). The Racing Post give his win a rating of 153. He is 10lbs "well-in" for the GN, carries 10.05 and is number #26 on the racecard. He is beaten by a nose.

    2016: Cause Of Causes wins the Kim Muir by 12L with 11.09 (OR142). His win gets a RP Rating of 156. He is 10lbs "well-in" for the GN (based on Irish rating, 13lbs well-in based on what Phil Smith would raise him) due to carry 10.01 and will be lucky to be a Reserve.

    The character of the GN is being profoundly altered and not, IMO, for the better.

    Let's take just one of the silly entries by higher-rated horses - fine racehorses in their time and under their preferred conditions but not suited to this marathon.
    One of Mullins' 5 entries is On His Own. He has more weight to carry than in either of his 2 previous GNs (the last 3 years ago), in which he Fell both times - the second when palpably out of gas 6 fences from home.
    He has NEVER won beyond 25f in 9 attempts and his record in 5 attempts at 3.5m+ chases reads: PFF7U.
    His owner has a more fancied runner in the shape of Boston Bob. So WHY IS ON HIS OWN RUNNING?
    Well the owner seems to regard it as a swansong before retirement - let's hope he gets the chance. How about Mullins' reasoning? Could it by any chance have anything to do with his attempt to become Champion British Trainer? Surely only a cynic could imagine that, even if he thought that On His Own is an improbable winner, at least he'd rule out one lighter-weighted rival for his other runners......................So, just call me a cynic.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!