Professor
However you see it, Rob does rather object to being called Ron!
Not quite as confusing as the time I worked in the same office as Rod, Ron and Robert!
That aside, of course it’s possible to make a profit and for those prepared to put in the ocmmitment it’s possible to make a decent living. Hard graft though and with a margin in favour of the bookmakers then they have the upper hand over most. It’s the margin that makes it a difficult game to get ahead at, not Woolf hackneyed old story about everyone pulling strokes.
A key point to remember is that it isn’t the punters against the bookmakers. On the contrary, it’s the punters who look hard to find an advantage against those who are just playing. The bookmakers just act as go-betweens to redistribute the money, and of course take a percentage themselves to make a profit.
A ‘engrained(sic) poor reputation’? Your ‘opinion’ and no more.
ROB
I thought Ron sounded better for a racing fan. Honest Ron North, tells it like it is.
Last time I looked up the spelling of ingrained it was either/or: in/en.
The racing correspondents of most of the national papers have over the years greeted news of the latest bent racing scandal with ‘this will not help racing’s reputation with the public.’ I see that as indicating that joe public is never surprised by news of a bent jockey, it simply adds to the general conviction that the game is a tricky, artful one in which you are overwhelmingly likely to lose money. That is undeniably true.
As I have said on here far too often – though it never goes through to some people – I don’t think the game is dominated by criminality. I have spoken rather of what I call institutional connivances, which one either accepts or complains about.
In other words, you can explain most things in the game, but that doesn’t necessarily make them right.
I don’t see anything wrong with pocket talk, money lost gambling on horses is simply like paying club or union subs, you are the man who keeps it going, so why not have a moan as you watch the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. can you really disagree?