Hi all. A note for all, if you pick any non runners in your removals, please DO replace them. Clearly anyone who has less runners has an easier task, as it's often the last couple that are the trickiest.
Obviously if you are away, that's unavoidable and also if the non runner comes after the first race starts, but other that that, please do replace, so that the system is fair to all.
Cheers,
G
G
Hi G, this difficult one as I always pick from the declared runners at the time I do my removers which is usually the night before and therefore dont know that one is going to be a non runner. By picking that early you lose the chance to see late market movers and I do not swap removers nearer the off as it is not fair to you when picking the horses. Also by having a non runner you are losing the opportunity of plus points which is why i thought we had averages.
As I say difficult but having to adjust your removers when non runners occur after you pick them is a bit harsh . also you could want to adjust a few not just the non runner as the race dynamics have changed.
V
Hi V, as I have said before, I ENCOURAGE, people making amendments anytime before the off of the 1st race based on market moves etc. It is better for them and better for the syndicate, I have ALWAYS suggested this is a good and fair thing to do, what is NOT fair is people having less removers than others. LESS removers = big advantage.
So, with all due respect, unless you are unavailable, please replace non runners, and feel free to make a handful of amendments anytime before the off of the first race, as having the latest info possible at that stage, best simulates the info that is available at the time of bet placement.
I still would like people's initial selections at least 90 minutes before the off, but amending after that is fine. I feel quite strongly about this. I will see how things go from here, but if this situation re-occurs too often then I think a mandatory minus 5pts per Non Runner will be imposed. But I won't enforce that just yet, we'll see how things develop
If people are unavailable fine, but that aside, one should always try and have the full number of runners unless one is announced after the off of the first, in which case it should not be replaced.
An idea might be to allow everyone to have the Non runner(s) as a REMOVAL(S) then it is fairer to everyone. If people still want to pick the full compliment (24 for today) in the hope of getting more points, then that is up to them. I normally find it hard, as you say, with those last couple, and they are usually the ones that win!!!!! ( I might have to start backing them lol) I think this would stop any unfair advantage REMOVERS who have less selections would get....
EDIT.... and after all you had set the amount of REMOVALS before the Non-Runners
An idea might be to allow everyone to have the Non runner(s) as a REMOVAL(S) then it is fairer to everyone. If people still want to pick the full compliment (24 for today) in the hope of getting more points, then that is up to them. I normally find it hard, as you say, with those last couple, and they are usually the ones that win!!!!! ( I might have to start backing them lol) I think this would stop any unfair advantage REMOVERS who have less selections would get....
EDIT.... and after all you had set the amount of REMOVALS before the Non-Runners
+1
Can see your point G but was just posting my concern as it def needs looking at. It could also work the other way for example if Melangerie and Happy Diva non runners today and I was unavailable I would have been stuffed in two races and accepted it. Due to my illness some mornings I cannot worry about changing a few of my selections to cope with non runner(s)
Some mornings I can do and will.
If you bring in a minus 5 points for non runners it wouldnt cause me a problem, however that could be a problem if the non runners have already hurt the persons selections as I have indicated above.
I am sure nobody does this to secure any advantage in what should be a "fun" comp as a tie up to trying to win the jackpot and I would have thought with my suggestion to make the points situation fairer you wouldn't have doubted my reasons for my above post.
Other than it being "this needs to be looked at further".
An idea might be to allow everyone to have the Non runner(s) as a REMOVAL(S) then it is fairer to everyone. If people still want to pick the full compliment (24 for today) in the hope of getting more points, then that is up to them. I normally find it hard, as you say, with those last couple, and they are usually the ones that win!!!!! ( I might have to start backing them lol) I think this would stop any unfair advantage REMOVERS who have less selections would get....
EDIT.... and after all you had set the amount of REMOVALS before the Non-Runners
Yes, the logic makes sense, the only problem is if lots of non runners come along that are short prices and wouldn't be removed anyway, then not enough removers would be set.
Thanks for the idea, I think we'll leave it as is for now, and keep an eye on how often it happens.
Further to the above, when I set the number of removals, I will take TWO off of the number I really want, to allow for an "average" number of NR's that are on the removals list.
Comments
So, with all due respect, unless you are unavailable, please replace non runners, and feel free to make a handful of amendments anytime before the off of the first race, as having the latest info possible at that stage, best simulates the info that is available at the time of bet placement.
I still would like people's initial selections at least 90 minutes before the off, but amending after that is fine. I feel quite strongly about this. I will see how things go from here, but if this situation re-occurs too often then I think a mandatory minus 5pts per Non Runner will be imposed. But I won't enforce that just yet, we'll see how things develop
If people are unavailable fine, but that aside, one should always try and have the full number of runners unless one is announced after the off of the first, in which case it should not be replaced.
Please can you follow this where possible.
Cheers,
G
If people still want to pick the full compliment (24 for today) in the hope of getting more points, then that is up to them. I normally find it hard, as you say, with those last couple, and they are usually the ones that win!!!!! ( I might have to start backing them lol)
I think this would stop any unfair advantage REMOVERS who have less selections would get....
EDIT.... and after all you had set the amount of REMOVALS before the Non-Runners
18TH JANUARY 2018 RESULTS AFTER GO-LIVE AT LUDLOW:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQa77HUl2Qt5lSFKK3Y96xVuAPShdF195f11AOLbkGqC4dMp7f6EAq6_LomONs016KibiHm5z2013vP/pubhtmlVWP Snuff and Rab!
Can see your point G but was just posting my concern as it def needs looking at. It could also work the other way for example if Melangerie and Happy Diva non runners today and I was unavailable I would have been stuffed in two races and accepted it.
Due to my illness some mornings I cannot worry about changing a few of my selections to cope with non runner(s)
Some mornings I can do and will.
If you bring in a minus 5 points for non runners it wouldnt cause me a problem, however that could be a problem if the non runners have already hurt the persons selections as I have indicated above.
I am sure nobody does this to secure any advantage in what should be a "fun" comp as a tie up to trying to win the jackpot and I would have thought with my suggestion to make the points situation fairer you wouldn't have doubted my reasons for my above post.
Other than it being "this needs to be looked at further".
V
Cheers,
G
Thanks for the idea, I think we'll leave it as is for now, and keep an eye on how often it happens.
Cheers,
G
19TH JANUARY 2018 RESULTS AFTER GO-LIVE DEVASTATION AT NEWCASTLE(AW):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vThNabamyoql9RftdolgYJ4u1me_e9VdejlXypezQuhU4iIi3n644Dly79CoXNLS2NRTd1gT3pY1k7V/pubhtmlNew Leader, ROGER fairs best after attritional evening at Newcastle.
# We love sand racing, as Misty would say. :=)
20TH JANUARY 2018 RESULTS AFTER GO-LIVE AT ASCOT:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTCuV2W2goHJHrkTFudvugcga2KClngZu2-sV1XNcqZJEOsl2Ie87MsbnLdo4ysu1es7JnHra0Q-rhw/pubhtmlVWP SNUFFER!
27TH JANUARY 2018 RESULTS AFTER SCOOP 6 GO-LIVE:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTiBYBjlM45uDp7liqzmGgsARzQCkgUolJiXlL51ObfGNx0ckhEmBrGHFU3I4p4YjJ9-xvp4hi6uHXo/pubhtmlSnuffer regains the lead and Wynne avoids the late carnage to produce the best score of the day.