Sunday 25 November

Auroras_encore

Gigginstown will kill Irish racing

ON ZEE BRIDLE

ON ZEE BRIDLE wrote: »

I think Out Sam still has a decent chance in the Troytown even though he is up 8lbs for Cork National win lto.Ive also backed Tout Est Permis Ew from the in form Noel Meade yard. Dinons has won five wins on the bounce but they did not look the strongest of races and he also has to concede weight today, happy to take him on with First Approach 7/2 who looked impressive winning at Down Royal last month.

Yipee me had the Tryotown winner , glad is wasnt Elliot either!

BumperD

No cash for Air Supremacy in next but he got a form boost after the for auction grade 3 earlier if he’s actually trying today

ON ZEE BRIDLE

Cant get away from the name escapes me in the next esp with Meade in such good form, 3/1 win bet

ON ZEE BRIDLE

Lets try to end the day with a winner, going to take the mullins jolly on with Barrington Court 11/2

STB.

ON ZEE BRIDLE wrote: »

Lets try to end the day with a winner, going to take the mullins jolly on with Barrington Court 11/2

Good call. Easy.


Jessica could have had 4 today.

ON ZEE BRIDLE

Cheers mate,always great when they win like that!

STB.

I see Princess Anne must be having a right go at the bookies in the 340 at Uttoxeter. Chequered View.

Leslie Purkiss

Nice one Zee. It was a tricky puzzle.

Disappointed with Ballydunblaze. She may well need a sounder surface. Aw shucks.

STB.

This pipe horse in the last has drifted like a barge. But has semi decent form.

Motivator

irishgoat wrote: »

I'm not backing at all as I said, but if anyone is backing Monbeg Gold in the next at exeter, I was told a few days a go it won't win today. Its around 9/4 I think.

You talk an awful lot of rubbish on here, every single day. Other posters get lambasted for talking rubbish but you seem to get away lightly. I can only assume it’s because most people ignore your posts completely. Something I will now start doing. Hopefully a few people actually backed the horse after reading your nonsense.

slimshady007

Motivator wrote: »

You talk an awful lot of rubbish on here, every single day. Other posters get lambasted for talking rubbish but you seem to get away lightly. I can only assume it’s because most people ignore your posts completely. Something I will now start doing. Hopefully a few people actually backed the horse after reading your nonsense.

That's harsh. Sure he's very active on this forum over the past few weeks but it's fair to say it would be eerily quiet on a daily basis without his input. I don't back or lay any of his bets so don't know whether he's up or down overall but he was more right than wrong on the few I checked. At least he puts up some reasoning or logic for his bets (even if it is sometimes flawed) instead of just a time and a name like others. How many times have people genuinely got word something was or wasn't fancied and it turned out to be completely wrong - it happens. A lot would have said no way BDM wins yesterday against a Gold Cup first and second on good ground but he did - readily. He didn't say have a max lay on it, he simply passed on some info which turned out to be completely wrong.

lemush

slimshady007 wrote: »

That's harsh. Sure he's very active on this forum over the past few weeks but it's fair to say it would be eerily quiet on a daily basis without his input. I don't back or lay any of his bets so don't know whether he's up or down overall but he was more right than wrong on the few I checked. At least he puts up some reasoning or logic for his bets (even if it is sometimes flawed) instead of just a time and a name like others. How many times have people genuinely got word something was or wasn't fancied and it turned out to be completely wrong - it happens. A lot would have said no way BDM wins yesterday against a Gold Cup first and second on good ground but he did - readily. He didn't say have a max lay on it, he simply passed on some info which turned out to be completely wrong.

To call his logic “flawed” is the understatement of the year.

Motivator

slimshady007 wrote: »

That's harsh. Sure he's very active on this forum over the past few weeks but it's fair to say it would be eerily quiet on a daily basis without his input. I don't back or lay any of his bets so don't know whether he's up or down overall but he was more right than wrong on the few I checked. At least he puts up some reasoning or logic for his bets (even if it is sometimes flawed) instead of just a time and a name like others. How many times have people genuinely got word something was or wasn't fancied and it turned out to be completely wrong - it happens. A lot would have said no way BDM wins yesterday against a Gold Cup first and second on good ground but he did - readily. He didn't say have a max lay on it, he simply passed on some info which turned out to be completely wrong.

The forum has been dead for about two years. No longer any of the decent debates or knowledable posts from the likes of Rossom. I used to be a fairly regular poster down through the years but there’s nothing interesting happening on a day to day basis. Reading his tripe certainly wouldn’t entice me to get stuck in to any debates on a thread anyway.

Mostly Harmless

slimshady007 wrote: »

That's harsh. Sure he's very active on this forum over the past few weeks but it's fair to say it would be eerily quiet on a daily basis without his input. I don't back or lay any of his bets so don't know whether he's up or down overall but he was more right than wrong on the few I checked. At least he puts up some reasoning or logic for his bets (even if it is sometimes flawed) instead of just a time and a name like others. How many times have people genuinely got word something was or wasn't fancied and it turned out to be completely wrong - it happens. A lot would have said no way BDM wins yesterday against a Gold Cup first and second on good ground but he did - readily. He didn't say have a max lay on it, he simply passed on some info which turned out to be completely wrong.

He's constantly putting up odds on lays/bets with highly questionable reasoning and saying it is a massive play, I have no real issue with this as anyone with half a grain of sense will be able to see through it. I do have a problem with people putting up reasoning that is at best factually incorrect and at worst totally made up, I am aware not all information is correct but provided it is posted in good faith fair enough but given past experiences I would tend to believe that the info in this case has been flat out invented.

FatRat

Motivator wrote: »

The forum has been dead for about two years. No longer any of the decent debates or knowledable posts from the likes of Rossom. I used to be a fairly regular poster down through the years but there’s nothing interesting happening on a day to day basis. Reading his tripe certainly wouldn’t entice me to get stuck in to any debates on a thread anyway.

Forum is dead but you seem to have read all of Goat's posts. Let him do him and ignore if you have to but at least someone is putting something up. You talk of decent debates but I'm gonna guess and say you've never sparked a debate with him by challenging his opinions/selection. That's generally how debates start, not childish "Your posts are tripe" - because believe me when I say that also contributes nothing to this forum. If it's tripe then readers should recognise it, others may agree with him, who are you to decide other people's opinions and views.

I'd say you were a gem to this forum back when you posted. All the right characteristic. For what it's worth I disagree with most of what Goat has put up but at least he does it. Too bad nobody calls him out with reasonable arguments that lead to debates - one-sided or not. This forum is actually toxic the majority of the time, it's such a shame.

Mostly Harmless

FatRat wrote: »

Forum is dead but you seem to have read all of Goat's posts. Let him do him and ignore if you have to but at least someone is putting something up. You talk of decent debates but I'm gonna guess and say you've never sparked a debate with him by challenging his opinions/selection. That's generally how debates start, not childish "Your posts are tripe" - because believe me when I say that also contributes nothing to this forum. If it's tripe then readers should recognise it, others may agree with him, who are you to decide other people's opinions and views.

I'd say you were a gem to this forum back when you posted. All the right characteristic. For what it's worth I disagree with most of what Goat has put up but at least he does it. Too bad nobody calls him out with reasonable arguments that lead to debates - one-sided or not. This forum is actually toxic the majority of the time, it's such a shame.

I have tried calling him out with reasonable arguments on a few occasions, his posts are total tripe and it's not really a subjective matter.

kiers47

Mostly Harmless wrote: »

I have tried calling him out with reasonable arguments on a few occasions, his posts are total tripe and it's not really a subjective matter.

I'd agree with this. I've also been trying to have a reasoned debate with him. But he is never wrong in his own mind which is a flawed way of thinking. There are intelligent people on here(im probably not one of them but I have a lot of views. Some right some very wrong). When you are unwilling to accept other people's views then really you are hardly in the right place to have a debate. At which point you are just a preacher trying to preach the gospel word of your own flawed way of thinking.

There are quite a number of warning signs that in actual fact goat is a man with either a severe gambling problem or else just someone who talks rubbish online to wind people up or perhaps a bit of both. A few weeks ago he had a Max bet on some American claimer at 1/2 if that's not sending out the warning signs I don't know what is.
He then tried to tell us a horses chase mark went up 20lbs for winning a hurdle race the time before. And when questioned by me said he knew that he just made a mistake reading the form. It's ok to be wrong and not know these things. Just stop with the bull****. But the above is basic stuff and he is trying to claim to be some professional. Lol. I'm done with it at this stage tbh. But others can entertain away.

ustari

Would agree with the two previous posters, have the poster on ignore personally.

FatRat

kiers47 wrote: »

I'd agree with this. I've also been trying to have a reasoned debate with him. But he is never wrong in his own mind which is a flawed way of thinking. There are intelligent people on here(im probably not one of them but I have a lot of views. Some right some very wrong). When you are unwilling to accept other people's views then really you are hardly in the right place to have a debate. At which point you are just a preacher trying to preach the gospel word of your own flawed way of thinking.

There are quite a number of warning signs that in actual fact goat is a man with either a severe gambling problem or else just someone who talks rubbish online to wind people up or perhaps a bit of both. A few weeks ago he had a Max bet on some American claimer at 1/2 if that's not sending out the warning signs I don't know what is.
He then tried to tell us a horses chase mark went up 20lbs for winning a hurdle race the time before. And when questioned by me said he knew that he just made a mistake reading the form. It's ok to be wrong and not know these things. Just stop with the bull****. But the above is basic stuff and he is trying to claim to be some professional. Lol. I'm done with it at this stage tbh. But others can entertain away.

This is fair enough. I've read everything he has put up over the past few months and I couldn't get my head around how he was laying 9/4 favourites in class 6 races (or similar) on the reg. That's the main thing I couldn't get my head around. The American race you refer to was a telling factor in fairness, I remember seeing that and wondering what he was at. But these are reasons why I don't follow his posts but....

However, as much as I disagree with the guy, you have to realise that attacking someone is not to way to go about this. I admit I haven't done this but I am not very active on this forum but people who with disagree this strongly need to call posts like this out (by goat or other posters) and reason with why they believe this stuff is tripe. Honestly you may as well be aftertiming if you come on here after the fact and call a lad out for posting tripe. His latest call out for how Monbeg Gold would not lose irked me but only because we had Motivator come on and call him out after-the-fact. Explain how this is not equivalent to being captain hindsight? Would this post have been made if Monbeg Gold lost?

Look, like I said I don't agree with the guy in general but how he is being attacked is uncalled for. He is following the exact charter of the forum .. posting stuff he believes are good selections. If the guy has a gambling problem is more of a reason to call him out and tell him why he is wrong (based on your opinion). But of course people are reluctant to do this until they're sure his betting fails. Like I said, this no better than the critics after-timing.

I'd like to hear why it isn't the case.

BumperD

FatRat wrote: »

This is fair enough. I've read everything he has put up over the past few months and I couldn't get my head around how he was laying 9/4 favourites in class 6 races (or similar) on the reg. That's the main thing I couldn't get my head around. The American race you refer to was a telling factor in fairness, I remember seeing that and wondering what he was at. But these are reasons why I don't follow his posts but....

However, as much as I disagree with the guy, you have to realise that attacking someone is not to way to go about this. I admit I haven't done this but I am not very active on this forum but people who with disagree this strongly need to call posts like this out (by goat or other posters) and reason with why they believe this stuff is tripe. Honestly you may as well be aftertiming if you come on here after the fact and call a lad out for posting tripe. His latest call out for how Monbeg Gold would not lose irked me but only because we had Motivator come on and call him out after-the-fact. Explain how this is not equivalent to being captain hindsight? Would this post have been made if Monbeg Gold lost?

Look, like I said I don't agree with the guy in general but how he is being attacked is uncalled for. He is following the exact charter of the forum .. posting stuff he believes are good selections. If the guy has a gambling problem is more of a reason to call him out and tell him why he is wrong (based on your opinion). But of course people are reluctant to do this until they're sure his betting fails. Like I said, this no better than the critics after-timing.

I'd like to hear why it isn't the case.

I called him out before monbeg gold ( long before) and plenty others too. This is captain foresight, not hindsight. He spouted utter claptrap from the beginning and chose to answer some or ignore others. His behavior was called out very early on of that of an out of control compulsive gambler. Fact. Stop trying to defend the indefensible. It’s ludicrous.

Mostly Harmless

FatRat wrote: »

This is fair enough. I've read everything he has put up over the past few months and I couldn't get my head around how he was laying 9/4 favourites in class 6 races (or similar) on the reg. That's the main thing I couldn't get my head around. The American race you refer to was a telling factor in fairness, I remember seeing that and wondering what he was at. But these are reasons why I don't follow his posts but....

However, as much as I disagree with the guy, you have to realise that attacking someone is not to way to go about this. I admit I haven't done this but I am not very active on this forum but people who with disagree this strongly need to call posts like this out (by goat or other posters) and reason with why they believe this stuff is tripe. Honestly you may as well be aftertiming if you come on here after the fact and call a lad out for posting tripe. His latest call out for how Monbeg Gold would not lose irked me but only because we had Motivator come on and call him out after-the-fact. Explain how this is not equivalent to being captain hindsight? Would this post have been made if Monbeg Gold lost?

Look, like I said I don't agree with the guy in general but how he is being attacked is uncalled for. He is following the exact charter of the forum .. posting stuff he believes are good selections. If the guy has a gambling problem is more of a reason to call him out and tell him why he is wrong (based on your opinion). But of course people are reluctant to do this until they're sure his betting fails. Like I said, this no better than the critics after-timing.

I'd like to hear why it isn't the case.

What a load of nonsense. He said he had been told a horse would not be winning and it won after being the best backed horse of the day, plenty of other examples where his "info" (i.e. imagination) has been so far off the mark that only a fool would believe there is any basis in reality. Do you really think he believes they are good selections or he's just picking out short priced favs and then tossing a coin to decide if he should back them or lay them?

To put it in a different context if you went on the football section of boards and said you were a "professional football analyst" then started making simplistic and patently factually incorrect posts like "Liverpool don't play an attacking style so they won't win" you would get people calling you out as a liar and a charlatan and rightly so.