Page 3 of 73 FirstFirst 123456781353 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 1451

Thread: TV coverage

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,693
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SlimChance View Post
    Disspointing that no one took this one. No is the answer. I bet Paul Carberry wishes you could.
    Not even when passing the stands?

    Somewhere with enclosures both sides it must be difficult not to pick up some of the commentary. Away from the stands they clearly hear feck all.
    I'm clever enough to ask the questions i'm too stupid to answer

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many

    To remove these adverts please either login or join if you are not a member.


     

  3. #42
    Senior Member trudij's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    dorset
    Posts
    4,723
    Thanks
    454
    Thanked 200 Times in 120 Posts
    Not with all the other noise around you (Im presuming its not Bazza and Sprinter Sacre we are talking about here - he probably can cos he can only hear one set of hooves around him!) Its suprisingly loud being in a group of horses galloping, added to the wind thats generated, and everythinhg else, Id be really suprised if they can hear clear commentry.
    May the light always find you on a dreary day. When you need to be home, may you find your way.
    May you always have courage to take a chance And never find frogs in your underpants.
    All posts are based on the following:
    I know what I'm talking about/ I'm having a stab in the dark
    I'm bored/ You're an idiot and I'm poking you with sticks

  4. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,278
    Thanks
    47
    Thanked 165 Times in 137 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by EC1 View Post
    tbh..both these angles i looked at 20+ years ago..and yes they do give winners..but not profits.

    they aren't original by any means..one of the best races that highlighted it was the cesarewitch where i noted that Willie Carson did his minimum weight and won one year..so i followed it in other years only to note that many top jocks did their minimum weight on many losers

    many times jocks miss big meetings to go and ride at far flung evening meetings..and lose on their only mount

    he needs to be more original than this..its like telling someone that a certain horse is today's furthest traveller..everyone remembers when they win..but forgets those that lose

    the furthest traveller angle looks logical..especially when the race targetted is just a seller..again..yes some win..but they don't make profit
    So, are we to dismiss every angle you don't make a profit on?

  5. #44
    Senior Member simmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Riding Beelzebub's back into Hell
    Posts
    4,303
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 111 Times in 96 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HawkWing View Post
    By highlighting this, you seem to think you are proving your point of the incompetence of the tv production crew at cheltenham.

    When in fact, its perfectly plain that all producers of sports know what is important when televising the finishes of horse races. Its not rocket science.

    It was a decision they made not to show a possibly dead horse fall on repeat last week that you disagree with. So be it. Not that logic will sway you on this.

    It is noticeable how quick all commentators are to note that horses (in live races) are up and walking away after falls in the new look C4. I think its a clear focus from the new team.
    There should have been a shot available for them to use that showed more than Katenko and less than the possibly dead horse. Which has already been stated, but never mind.

    That isn't rocket science, it is quite logical (think about the majority of races at Cheltenham - are you looking back to the last fence on the run in shots?) and it most definitely is incompetence.
    Alba Gu Brath!

  6. #45
    Super Moderator Diamond Geezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cheltenham
    Posts
    10,990
    Thanks
    1,419
    Thanked 2,168 Times in 1,096 Posts
    Jockeys often use the big screen as a visual aid even if they cannot hear commentary

  7. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,613
    Thanks
    522
    Thanked 665 Times in 472 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by HawkWing View Post
    By highlighting this, you seem to think you are proving your point of the incompetence of the tv production crew at cheltenham.
    Unlike you, I have no hidden agenda. Merely observing. When I watch racing in TV I want to to see the sport, not the indulgent whims of a tv director who appears not to understand what sport it.

    [QUOTE=HawkWing;506270]When in fact, its perfectly plain that all producers of sports know what is important when televising the finishes of horse races. Its not rocket science.[QUOTE]It's perfectly plain that not all producers of sports know what is important, otherwise we wouldn't get the poor coverage of some finishes or the departure from the head-on view of Bechers at the Aintree meetings.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawkWing View Post
    It was a decision they made not to show a possibly dead horse fall on repeat last week that you disagree with. So be it. Not that logic will sway you on this.
    How thick are you? I said I accepted that they woldn't want to show a stricken horse.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawkWing View Post
    It is noticeable how quick all commentators are to note that horses (in live races) are up and walking away after falls in the new look C4.
    ...and have been for many many years, not just in the new-look C4.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  8. #47
    Senior Member rorydelargy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,836
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 17 Times in 3 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by reet hard View Post
    So, are we to dismiss every angle you don't make a profit on?
    Mick Fitz's jockey angles are hardly astute (he dismissed the big Ffos Las winner as Choc Thornton wasn't riding, for example), and his lack of analysis to go with his C4 tips suggest strongly that they aren't even his selections. Is he still fronting up someone else's tipping service? Jim McGrath seems to get a bit miffed at Mick's approach which is to identify the favourite and tip it, mention that he also really likes the second favourite, and simply describe the silks of any other horse he's asked about. It makes Alan Shearer look a genius, and surely can't last.
    handsome is as handsome does

  9. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,278
    Thanks
    47
    Thanked 165 Times in 137 Posts
    I'd agree with much of that, Rory, but he does add the odd insight from the jockey's perspective, and it's often something that hasn't occurred to his 'more sophisticated counterparts'.
    The condescending Jim McGrath was quite taken aback when MG said yesterday "jockeys will often give a clue.to how they intend to ride the race by where they line up", but it's absolutely basic common sense, even though the illustrious JM had never considered it.
    Depends a great deal on whether your glass is half full, or half empty..

  10. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,613
    Thanks
    522
    Thanked 665 Times in 472 Posts
    In defence of MF, I think it's fair to say he warned us on the ML that neither Oscara Dara nor Roberta Goldback would be winning yesterday, that connections were running them to get their marks back down a bit.

    Or at least that was how I interpreted his comments.
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  11. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Barnsley
    Posts
    1,593
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 132 Times in 91 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    In defence of MF, I think it's fair to say he warned us on the ML that neither Oscara Dara nor Roberta Goldback would be winning yesterday, that connections were running them to get their marks back down a bit.

    Or at least that was how I interpreted his comments.
    Oscara Dara was one of his two nominated bets - 50 win.

  12. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    12,613
    Thanks
    522
    Thanked 665 Times in 472 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by gus View Post
    Oscara Dara was one of his two nominated bets - 50 win.
    Glad I missed that bit, then

    Given I've now had three wipe-outs in the last four Saturdays, obviously my interpretation skills are failing me
    Two's company, three's allowed.

  13. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    583
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 29 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Desert Orchid View Post
    Unlike you, I have no hidden agenda
    Hidden agenda?

    Glad you can see that the decision was to avoid the stricken horse. Apologies, I missed that.

  14. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    583
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 29 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rorydelargy View Post
    Mick Fitz's jockey angles are hardly astute (he dismissed the big Ffos Las winner as Choc Thornton wasn't riding, for example), and his lack of analysis to go with his C4 tips suggest strongly that they aren't even his selections. Is he still fronting up someone else's tipping service? Jim McGrath seems to get a bit miffed at Mick's approach which is to identify the favourite and tip it, mention that he also really likes the second favourite, and simply describe the silks of any other horse he's asked about. It makes Alan Shearer look a genius, and surely can't last.
    Whoever chose Fitzgerald for C4, knew what they were getting. He was hardly too good for ATR. Can only guess his Henderson connections were seen as important. Maybe the better than sex comment....certainly not for analysis.

    Have to say yesterday, coming down to the second last, Third Intention looked like vindicating John Francome's bullish opinion of the horse outlined pre-Feltham. Would like to have him still broadcasting.

  15. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,693
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
    Anyone else having problems with accessing the RUK site?
    I'm clever enough to ask the questions i'm too stupid to answer

  16. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    718
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Anyone else having problems with accessing the RUK site?
    Yes ....
    Man: Do you get wafers with it?

    Salesman: Course you don't get bloody wafers with it, it's a bloody albatross isn't it ...

  17. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    3,693
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked 21 Times in 17 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Muttley View Post
    Yes ....
    Working now.... Overturn very impressive.
    I'm clever enough to ask the questions i'm too stupid to answer

  18. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    late 1960's early 70's
    Posts
    17,679
    Thanks
    207
    Thanked 610 Times in 393 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by reet hard View Post
    So, are we to dismiss every angle you don't make a profit on?
    it wasn't ME..that couldn't make a profit yer dilly..the selections didn't show one..i followed all the big handicaps for a few years noting when a jockey rode at his minimum weight..THEY didn't show a profit.

    in fact f00k it..yes i'm a clueless dick that doesn't know the time of day..sorry for posting
    Last edited by EC1; 3rd February 2013 at 3:02 PM.

  19. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    late 1960's early 70's
    Posts
    17,679
    Thanks
    207
    Thanked 610 Times in 393 Posts
    thanks Slim and Trudij..always wondered about that
    Last edited by EC1; 3rd February 2013 at 2:54 PM.

  20. #59
    CPGagie
    Guest
    I've probably looked at that no more than 20 - 30 times in the past. Those occasions will mainly have been during a 4 - 6 week period, which I think was after hearing someone on the TV waffling on about it's significance in the late 90's. Can't say I noticed anything, but at the same time I wouldn't call it a negative and is more than likely a very small positive. I just don't think it worth the hassle of looking, as it wouldn't influence my decision to bet or not.

  21. #60
    CPGagie
    Guest
    "this might be a daft question..but anyway..can jockeys hear the racecourse commentary during the race?..so if the commentator said it was a steady pace they would know to move nearer to it etc?"

    I was wondering about that a few weeks ago, EC. I thought the noise of them galloping would probably muffle any audio around the stands, especially when they're on the far side. Don't know though, as I've never even ridden a horse, never mind being in a group of them, so not sure how noisy it is in there.

    Maybe when the commentator keeps mentioning a steady pace, he's backed a hold up performer.
    Last edited by CPGagie; 4th February 2013 at 12:31 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. New C4 coverage
    By BennyB in forum General Racing Topics
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 30th July 2013, 5:22 PM
  2. Cheltenham Coverage
    By Guest_ in forum General Racing Topics
    Replies: 107
    Last Post: 23rd March 2010, 7:56 PM
  3. BBC Coverage
    By jairducochetfan in forum General Racing Topics
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 29th September 2009, 10:21 AM
  4. Bbc National Coverage
    By an capall in forum General Racing Topics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 7th April 2008, 11:29 PM
  5. Rte's Racing Coverage
    By Bobbyjo in forum General Racing Topics
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 30th March 2008, 1:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •