Is it just me? Or is the whole Harry Findlay thing (and the man himself) really boring?
Fair point dilys, what I couldn’t understand was the number of racing pundits wanting a misguided change of the rules based on one man’s experiences, I don’t see a string of owners lined up wanting to lay their own horses.
I hear it repeatedly said Harry only laid his horses to reduce his exposure or liabilities and he was in fact a net backer. I’m still waiting to hear why he can’t just have less on in the first place to reduce his exposure. Sean would be the first to admit he didn’t shine in his Paul Roy interview but I’m sure he would do a good job here, Chapman spouts too much carp for my liking and isn’t as knowledgeable regards the subject.