Highlights from the week - without doubt my number one was the Gold Cup, just the race in general, Denman, Kauto and Long Run going for it jumping the second last - awesome. I thought Denman had it three out and for the first time in maybe 12 months or more I took my hand away from the mouse to shout at the TV, without having a bet, really wanted him to win but fair played to Long Run. Other highlights include Hurricane Fly, Quevega and Big Bucks, all brilliant champions.
I'm still happy with my decision not to go, and judging by my pre-off guesses without backing them, I reckon I saved around €3k (all things considered in going) in staying at home, and won €150 in-running too which gave me great pleasure seeing as how I am finnish at the horses game in general. Its not that I hate racing now, far from it, its just not worth watching in terms of the return, flicking over to Sedgefield and Huntington reminded me why I gave up, small fields, low liquidity nearing nothing (place market), a time disadvantage and low grade horses - give me Cheltenham however and I'm buzzing - but it all revolves around money doesnt it?
Well, it does. The pluses for Cheltenham (and other big meetings) are, every horse is trying, you have money queuing up on every horse, and you have outsiders involved who arent as sharp as our normal 24/7 crowd. I can watch a race, take a view, get matched and get realistic odds (I'm not gonna preach every bet I have is "value" more so I'd just be happy with what I do and everyone else can do as they please, just as I can). So I'm happy, big fields, money, horses trying, good horses, and liquidity. Now, compare that list to, say Lingfield, tomorrow. There would be absolutely no point in me watching, I wouldnt get fair odds offered to lay (place market), I'd get bored and I wouldnt get money. Money is king.
There are obvious reasons why Cheltenham is better than the normal Monday-Friday grind, but the question is, how can the BHA attract people to the Monday-Friday grind in its currently state?
Anyway moving on, my horse racing Monday-Friday ship has sailed, and we finally have the quarter-finals in the cricket WC:
Quarter-final 1 - March 23rd, Mirpur: Pakistan v West Indies
Quarter-final 2 - March 24th, Ahmedabad: India v Australia
Quarter-final 3 - March 25th, Mirpur: New Zealand v South Africa
Quarter-final 4 - March 26th, Colombo: Sri Lanka v England
Semi-final 1 - Winner of (Pakistan v West Indies) v Winner of (India v Australia)
Semi-final 2 - Winner of (New Zealand v South Africa) vs Winner of (Sri Lanka v England)
I have Pak beating Windies, although both teams blow hot and cold, Pak to edge it if they dont collapse, they have the better bowling. India beating Aus, because Aus have only beaten Kenya, Canada, Zimbabwe and New Zealand, Sri Lanka were odds on when their game was rained off and got beaten by Pak, I know India arent great but neither are Aus. Sri Lanka beating Eng, whoever bats first will have a massive edge because of the chasing stats but Eng have been fairly poor so far, expect to hear phrases like "theyre tired" and "the schedule is too much" etc etc etc if theyre beaten. And Saffers to easily beat New Zealand, bar a choke, they have history for choking but New Zealand shouldnt be good enough to beat them, you would think anyway. India v Pak and Sri Lanka v Saffers would be amazing semi-finals IMO.
Not the first time (maybe the 20,295th time by now) this has happened me! Sitting pretty chasing an easy score..
Green out fully? WTF? Why would I go equal green, theyre fooking cruising..
Yeah I should have greened out.
The same thing happened me with Pak v Aus too, sitting pretty at 1.09 (carrying red, 1.1 too high at the time IMO), two balls and two wickets later its 1.45, feck. You know, sure I mean you make these decisions and you go from there. Obviously I'm always thinking about greening out but theres no point just greening out for the sake of greening out, its easy to look back and say 'I should have done this etc' but at the time I knew what I was doing (everyone knows what theyre doing FFS), I made a decision (at the time, there and then) and it didnt work out. I dont regret the decision because I made it, no one ever makes a mistake in hindsight anyway, thats why we have so many experts commentating on games sitting in Sky saying "he should have done this, he should have done that" once something has gone wrong. I'm annoyed Windies didnt win, because it was fecking easy, I'm annoyed Pak lost two wickets in two balls, but I'm not annoyed at not greening, I did it, I accept it, I move on. (Its nice to still win on both games but I went from €164 and €97 awe-green to winning €21 and €30, but hindsight and all that jazz etc).
I look back now and can say 'should have greened' but at the time, I was happy, so just because I was wrong doesnt mean the world ends, the odds are the odds and you make decisions. There is no "should have" because AT THE TIME there is always the opportunity to "should have" but you didnt, you didnt for a reason. So when it goes tits up, you still have that reason, and your "should have" is armed with the result. And as I said, no one ever makes a mistake with hindsight. Windies at around 1.25 was far too high for the situation at the time, I made a decision, it was the wrong decision for the result, but the odds were wrong for greening too - that was my reason. My "should have" is perfect because I have the result. My reason is still the same, although not perfect, because I didnt have the result. And I can live with that, even though I want to be perfect.. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment