SPOTTING THE WINNER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVIII, Issue 8336, 25 November 1887, Page 2

SPOTTING THE WINNER.

The racing prophet must by no means ba confused with the advertising “ tipster/* respecting whom no little commotion has taken place of late, inasmuch as the former expresses his opinions and convictions openly and pro bono publico, to the extent, that is, to which the particular journal he represents is read by the British public, whereas the latter can only be induced to part with his valuable (?) information for a pecuniary consideration, ranging from the modest bob up to the regal sovereign or half-sovereign; or, to quote his own language, “ a thick ’un ” or " half a thick ’un.” In an ordinary way it may pretty safely be said that the “ prophet’s '* prognostications are almost, if not entirely, governed by the state of the betting market; at all events, the final selection which appears in the various dailies the morning of, or occasionally the day before, a big race is, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, taken from amongst the first three in the betting; and if preference is not shown for the actual favourite, he (or she, as the case may be), is to a certainty spoken of as “ being likely to be close up,” “ extremely dangerous/’ “in the first three,” or what not. Rumour has it that many of the minor prophets have not at their command any more authentic information than is easily*--, attainable to the veriest outsider by care-' fully studying that inestimable treasure to the racing man, the “Turf Guide,” or some similar publication. Others again of the higher order do undoubtedly obtain from trainers and owners of racehorses, added to by their own personal observations, thoroughly reliable and authentic information; of which of course their regular readers reap the full advantage. Hitherto our remarks have been confined mainly to the non-sporting section of the press, each having its own particular prophet, who boldly states his convictions, that a certain animal will in all probability win; and, as a kind of afterthought, couples it with another, or possibly a third, leaving his readers to decide which is the real Simon Pare. This in itself is perplexing enough, but it is as nothing compared to the journals devoted exclusively to the sport. Some of these have as many as three regular prophets, each of whom has his own particular fancy, and carefully adopts the plan, already alluded to, of dividing favours when making a final selection, so that in place of two, or at the outside three, animals, to decide amongst, the would-be backer has, at least, eight or nine. “ In a multitude of councillors there is wisdom,” we are told; but an equally apt truism, which applies with special force to the subject in question, is, “ Who shall be certain when doctors disagree ?’* Supposing that a thorough outsider scores an unexpected victory, it is amusing to note the ingenious explanations put forward to account for the defeat of the various “ selections for the most part, the prophet of the “ daily ” or other non-sporting organ accepts his defeat with equanimity. No one, he explains in his next article, can lay claim to infallibility; in his opinion would win, but it seems be was mistaken; nevertheless, he is convinced that the horse has a future before him, &c. The prophet of the sporting paper takes a very different line ; he, too, admits that he was mistaken; there is no use disguising the fact. Bat—and here follows an extract from a communication of hia which appeared in his particular paper some time back, and which, when read (by the light of yesterday’s or the day before’s event), shows that, in his humble opinion (here is inserted the name of the actual winner) had a very good chance indeed; he omits entirely, be it observed, to state what made him subsequently swerve in his allegiance and go for a totally different animal, the actual winner not being referred to in his final notes as likely to achieve distinction and possibly being set down as one of the “ hopeless ” division. Incredible as it may appear, many backers, mostly of the small division, pin their faith year after year to the selections of one or other particular paper, never departing from their “ system/’ as they call it, and taking their luck good and bad as it comes. At times some one journal will have a surprising run of luck in naming winners, and the prophet concerned will be lauded to the skies; anon the tide will turn, and the reverse of complimentary will be the language used in regard to him. Judging, however, from the prominent position, afforded in most papers to racing notes and anticipations, it will be a long time before the reading public will be content to accept their daily pabulum of information unless one of the contributions bears the designation of a racing prophet.