Golan Go - WTF?

Nulty

Golan Go was backed off the boards 20/1 to 8/1 at Ballinrobe tonight...got fractious (to say the least!) in the stalls, threw the jockey and tried to climb under the gates in stall 1.

Horse was trotted up in front of vet and then put into stall 16! As the race goes off, the horse just sstands there for two seconds and totally misses the break.

There'll be a lot more made of this hopefully, it was a shocking decision to let it run. I don't know whos responsible or who could have made the call to withdraw it there and then.

Magnier upset after Golan Go stalls switch
By Justin O'Hanlon 8:02PM 19 JUL 2010

TRAINER Paul Magnier was unhappy after bets on Golan Go were allowed to stand in the Derrinstown Stud Apprentice Handicap at Ballinrobe on Monday evening, despite a stalls incident meaning his runner was moved to an unfavourable draw.

Golan Go was backed from 20-1 into 8-1 with the benefit of the inside draw, but when loaded into the stalls became very unruly and tried to get under the front of the structure, forcing rider Tim Carroll to dismount.

The horse was let out through the front of the stalls and following veterinary examination was allowed to run. However, her stall was damaged and she had to be loaded into the spare stall, which happened to be on the wide outside. After missing the break, she eventually finished seventh to Binocular.

Magnier said afterwards: "He was at a disadvantage racing from the outside stall, and then when he did break from the stall he was punch drunk and was consequently left a hundred yards.

"His chances were compromised. I’m not blaming the vet and the starter, they only did their job, but for the integrity of racing and the protection of the betting public who backedhim because of his draw, there should have been an announcement that the horse was running for purse money only and all bets on him should be refunded as would have been done in New York.

"The horse was violent at the gate and they should have scratched him. He went from being drawn on the rail to being drawn seventeen horses wide."

Asked would he have withdrawn the horse, he said: "I would have been happy to withdraw him because when the gates opened the horse was in a state of shock."

http://www.racingpost.com/news/horse-racing/paul-magnier-magnier-upset-after-golan-go-stalls-swtich/744045/top/

UrbanSea

I read about that on irishracing.com, surely if he couldn't have gone back into it's original stall then it should have been withdrawn

Cantoris

Turf Club Rule 207

"For flat races (excluding I.N.H. Flat races) the horses shall take their
places at the Start in the order drawn for them, except as provided
under Rule 200. The rider who was drawn No. 1 shall be placed on
the left-hand side at the Starting Post, and other riders shall take their
places in the consecutive numbers from the left, but the Starter may
use his discretion as to placing unruly horses."

So no issue with where the starter placed Golan Go.

The real question is whether we should have a rule like the UK where a horse who breaks through the stalls cannot run. It happened on Sunday when Lough Mist (I think it was called) of Tracey Collins' burst through the stalls before the Rockingham and was allowed run. There didn't appear to be anything wrong with her but from a punting perspective you would not have backed after seeing that. Problem is, the owner might still be happy to run as if you're not in you can't win.

Nulty

I accept there is a rule covering the starter but the rules must change. What happened is ridiculous. If you look at it objectively, the horse started a goal down. Is this a sport or what?

From Paul Magniers website

(Tuesday 20/7/10) Turf Club “Keepers of Integrity” have a lot to answer on what happened at the start of the second race in Ballinrobe yesterday. My runner Golan Go became upset in the starting stalls drawn no. 16, he went down, got wedged under the gate, broke the gate and after some time got himself up and free. He was then jogged four steps and as quick as lightening he was put back into the stall beside the horse that was drawn one! a very bad draw and allowed to start in a very dazed state.

Where do I start? There are so many issues and the integrity issue should always be the most important. I will list the sequence of events once the horse got up off the ground and ask why.....

1.

1) Why did the starter not scratch the horse after such a violent exit from beneath the gate. There must be an official inquiry, it’s finding published, and a new procedure document issued.
2.

2) What authority exists which allows the starter to put a horse into a different draw position! In this case the horse was drawn sixteen the best draw and moved to minus one draw position! Punters make decisions to back horses from particular draws and would not do so when drawn poorly. The inexperienced rider was given instructions on how to ride the horse from his advantaged draw and not from the worst draw position.
3.

3) Did the starter seek permission from the Stewards to allow the horse to start from the outside stall which was not sanctioned draw position.
4.

4) The vet made a soundness decision on striding four steps having no consideration for the mental state of the horse. The horse stood all square when the race was started and lost as many as twenty plus lenghts on the lead horse.
5.

5) This was an apprentice race and young riders are not seasoned enough to stand up to the starter to withdraw the horse or question why he has to start from an outside and compromised draw position. The horse was loaded in to his new stall as quick as a flash and the race started.
6.

6) I asked to speak with the Stewards and received permission to do so. I felt they had little concern for the betting public firstly or a willingness to hold an inquiry. I was told there were no rules in the rule book to protect the punter. I was upset at the time and I likely did not argue my points as strongly as I should have at that time. I now want and demand to have an official inquiry.
7.

7) If this happened in NY there would have been a public address announcement such as “all bets on Golan Go are cancelled, rule four applies. Golan Go was allowed to race for purse only”

I have a lot more to say on this subject and I will do so later today. I am angry over the hap hazard mess of what went on.

http://web.me.com/broccoli0/Site/Home.html

Cantoris

Paul Magnier is clearly not informed when he makes a statement like "2) What authority exists which allows the starter to put a horse into a different draw position!". Rule 207 Paul, that's what.

If we adopt Paul Magnier's view that a horse should be able to run for "purse money" but be withdrawn for betting purposes, what happens when you run into the betting office after the start of the race, see your horse romp home only to be told that the horse was declared a "purse" runner only and your stake is returned. Carnage. It either runs or not, don't complicate it.

The rule could easily be changed to either say a horse cannot run if it has burst through the stalls or been removed from the stalls. Some owners will be in uproar over this but it's the UK way and seems to work over there. Or, let the trainer notify, at declaration time, whether he wants it clearly stated that in such circumstances the horse is to be withdrawn. Similar to having declare a jockey or a pair of blinkers. Then the owner has had their chance to input. I wonder what Paul Magnier would have put down. If the horse reared in the stalls and no harm done, but was taken out of the stalls to calm it down (while others were loaded) and was then going to be reloaded until the starter saw the "withdraw if unruly" notice and withdrew the horse, would Magnier have been peeved that his gamble did not run and the bookies cards were marked for the next night. I wonder.

It is clear the money was down on this horse and they are partially talking through their pockets. He does make some validpoints but when it is distilled down, it's a simple question, do owners/trainers want to make the decision on whether an unruly horse runs or leave it to the jock/starter.

smartaform

Any horse which becomes stuck, hits its head on the stalls or breaks thru the stalls SHOULD be scratched there and then.
I mean rule 207 is void because a horse has damaged its stall bad enough so it is now pretty much f****d and would be in no state to race! Even if it managed not to hit it's head to damage stalls you need a fair amount of force to dent the things....


It's another idiotic area of the rules and in all fairness the HRI and Turf Club need to look at what the hell they are doing because the entire system is a mickey mouse outfit.

I didn't back Golan Go but watched the whole thing live on ATR and was simply amazed at what took place.

I do think Magniers trail of destruction stunk of a bet gone foul lol .... ''Able to run for purse money'' - not if the thing has screwed the stalls over, settle down buddy

Cantoris

Pardon my ignorance, but for a horse that in Magnier's words was "punch drunk", he ran remarkably well to lead 3f out and be beaten under 15 lengths. You'd have expected a horse in a "state of shock" and missing the break to stay out the back and be tailed off. This lad must be the greatest certainty ever the next day. He must have stones in hand! Is it possible the 12 month absence from flat racing also contributed to his failure to leave the stalls promptly. He ran four times on the flat in 2009 and here's the comment from his first run "dwelt, towards rear, ran slightly off 1st bend, headway to chase leaders and no impression from over 2f out".

I also don't think he actually broke out of the stall. He was trying to get under it and they opened the stall to let him out. I don't think they even bothered to close the stall so are we absolutely sure it was damaged? You can't tell from the pictures whether he is hitting the gate or not and surely the guys on the ground would have been able to hear him thrashing the stall gate. I'll leave that one for any enquiry to clarify as we simply do not know and it is not in keeping with his finishing position.

If the stall was damaged and you believe the rule is "idiotic", what do you want them to do....unload the other 16 and put Golan Go in stall 2 and load all the others up one stall? The rule is sensible. The bone of contention is whether a horse should be withdrawn if it is unruly and there is no rule for this currently. Surely you either go with the blanket UK system (break through stalls and you are withdrawn) or the declaration of intent system. There is no rule for this yet so it can't be idiotic.

smartaform

If the stall was damaged and you believe the rule is "idiotic", what do you want them to do....unload the other 16 and put Golan Go in stall 2 and load all the others up one stall? The rule is sensible. The bone of contention is whether a horse should be withdrawn if it is unruly and there is no rule for this currently. Surely you either go with the blanket UK system (break through stalls and you are withdrawn) or the declaration of intent system. There is no rule for this yet so it can't be idiotic.

Interesting.... I have clearly said to damage the stalls enough it takes a fair bit of force... if the stall is damaged then it is clear the horse had thrashed about enough to damage the stall...
The point is if the stall is damaged by the horse he should be taken out, not moved to another stall, the things are made of steel after all.

Whether he broke free or not he got himself in a bad position for a horse to be in prior to a race start. Possibly more stalls training was needed if he had always dwelt in his races.

The fact there is no rule in place for this is a tick in the box for Idiocracy as it shows a lack of willingness to even contemplate what may happen - regardless of whether or not it happens regularly or every now and then.

Cantoris

smartaform wrote: »

Interesting.... I have clearly said to damage the stalls enough it takes a fair bit of force... if the stall is damaged then it is clear the horse had thrashed about enough to damage the stall...
The point is if the stall is damaged by the horse he should be taken out, not moved to another stall, the things are made of steel after all.

I'd agree, to damage probably takes some force although was it the opening mechanism that was damaged as opposed to the stall itself. In fact, who said the stall was damaged? The rule says he can move the horse if it's "unruly", not just if the stall is damaged. Common sense would suggest that the stall must have been damage or were they simply unwilling to risk the potential of the stall not opening?? We simply don't know.

smartaform wrote: »

The fact there is no rule in place for this is a tick in the box for Idiocracy as it shows a lack of willingness to even contemplate what may happen - regardless of whether or not it happens regularly or every now and then.

God you could be writing rules until you were a hundred then. What's the rule if a dog runs across the track and brings down half the field?? I can tell you one thing as an owner, there will be those owners whose horse has been balloted out five times and then is a little unruly and gets out of the stall (no harm done) and is withdrawn and it's another five ballots before it gets another run. Those owners will not be happy with your rule. It's a rule for the punters first (and I include gambling owners in that too) and owners second. Most owners would want their horse to run.

smartaform

Well i'd say anyone forking out the Training bills could AT LEAST expect their horses be trained properly...lol :rolleyes:
I know **** happens at the races, but is it too hard to have a horse prepared well enough it actually knows to go into the stalls and wait?
On a daily basis i see horse after horse refusing to go in..... why don't we have barrier trials like in USA, AUS and HK???

In regards to the stall, a simple inspection would have seen whether or not it could work, they aren't that intricate... and i was under the impression it was damaged based off magniers rant AND the fact he was moved to stall 1....lol:D
it just sound so bizarre when you say it.

I feel sorry for the owners who cant get a run due to balloting and have a major issue with balloting. it is one area which can be improved if certain areas are overhauled.....

mike65

Spanish Moon got banned in the UK for repeated stalls shenanigans and ended up aquitting itself very well in France, USA, Dubai. So it can happen with the best run operations (Michael Stoute in this case).

Cantoris

Latest on Magniers blog - he is now having a go at his own Trainers Association!! He also contends that there was a stall inside Golan Go's original stall which they could have used. Hmmmm, so why didn't they use that stall in the first place. There must have been a reason, ususally because a bend comes up quickly and they want to avoid bunching so move the runners away from the rail a little. Question is whether they should then have put Golan Go into one of those unused rail stalls. this could be interesting as Magnier has pushed himself so far into this he has to make a big issue out of it or he will lose face. If he's going to take on the Turf Club he needs to realise that they have long memories!

Nulty

Cantoris wrote: »

Latest on Magniers blog - he is now having a go at his own Trainers Association!! He also contends that there was a stall inside Golan Go's original stall which they could have used. Hmmmm, so why didn't they use that stall in the first place. There must have been a reason, ususally because a bend comes up quickly and they want to avoid bunching so move the runners away from the rail a little. Question is whether they should then have put Golan Go into one of those unused rail stalls. this could be interesting as Magnier has pushed himself so far into this he has to make a big issue out of it or he will lose face. If he's going to take on the Turf Club he needs to realise that they have long memories!

It doesn't matter what stall the horse was in, if it stood in the stalls for 2 full seconds before moving the outside stall is as good as any!

Bottom line - Horse broke the gate, it should be withdrawn. If there is a stalls malfunction - let it run.

smartaform

mike65 wrote: »

Spanish Moon got banned in the UK for repeated stalls shenanigans and ended up aquitting itself very well in France, USA, Dubai. So it can happen with the best run operations (Michael Stoute in this case).

A common denominator there is a massive difference in horsemanship from the stalls handlers as well.... I like Spanish Moon HOWEVER once they do get him in he is fine, he is a colt and they can be stubborn buggers, you give them an inch and they'll take a mile.


This Golan Go thing is turning into quite the rant isnt it?? If the guy is still going on his site, something surely is going to happen soon.

bit of a bogey

I'm sorry but I put the blame on the jockey. If the horse was "punch drunk" and being put in a different/unsuitable draw, he should have dismounted. Tim Carroll has a certain responibility and if he wasnt happy he should have withdrawn the horse. Especially if a gamble was on!

Nulty

bit of a bogey wrote: »

I'm sorry but I put the blame on the jockey. If the horse was "punch drunk" and being put in a different/unsuitable draw, he should have dismounted. Tim Carroll has a certain responibility and if he wasnt happy he should have withdrawn the horse. Especially if a gamble was on!

Afaik it was an apprentice race - the jockey was only a kid in all probability. At least Magnier mentions something like that in his rant

EDIT:
Yes, an apprentice - Tony Carroll claiming 4lbs. Hardly feels he has the authority to pull a horse out.

Race Card

bit of a bogey

Nulty wrote: »

Afaik it was an apprentice race - the jockey was only a kid in all probability. At least Magnier mentions something like that in his rant

Yeh I know that in fairness. But it is an education for him.
Personally I wouldnt be blaming the rules nor the starter. And just running the horse for purse would be a ridiculous process. If the horse isint in a suitable state to run or is in much worse conditions that ever predicted, then I believe it is the jockey who the responsibility is placed upon to withdraw the horse. The horse should have been withdrawn, especially considering the money was down.

Cantoris

On the blog before the race, Magnier mentioned that the jock had ridden once before for him and not ridden to instuctions. He said he was going to give the rider specific instructions and he better ride to them. So I reckon the jock was under pressure and once he missed the break, he rushed him up out of the back straight. If he too his time, he might have been placed. I'd say he was also under pressure to let him take his chance. I wouldn't blame the young lad. he was just under pressure and made an incorrect decision. If he had withdrawn the horse, can you imagine the b*llocking Magnier might have given him "that's our gamble gone and the bookies card marked because you're a coward!!". Look at how yer man Whelan reacted when he dropped the whip at the start in the Curragh. He knew his boss, Jim Bolger, wouldn't be happy with that and started making shapes as if he was whipping the horse. We know what happened next. So these lads are under pressure to impress.

Juwwi

The vet should be the person to blame if anyone.
He looked over the horse for around 2 minutes max,troted him up and down a few times did'nt touch the horse as far as l can remember.

The horse broke a stall so no one for sure could of known if there was any muscle damage without fully cheking over the horse.

The horse was worked up and in a state so for me that was enough for the vet to say that the horse is distressed withdraw him.

People thinking an apprentice jockey should over rule the vet is crazy.

Just confused myself tho what exactly Magnier is unhappy about is it because they let the horse run punchdrunk or because he was in the bad draw.Or does he even know himself.

One thing is for sure tho if this happened at chester and the gamble of the race moved out from 1 to the worst draw there would be more uproar than there is in this case.

Nulty

Thats exactly it. There would be uproar in other countries but not here.

If the horse breaks the bloody gate he should be a non-runner. If there is a stalls malfunction in Britain they have the option to run them but if they break through the stall it should be withdrawn - no questions asked nor answered

Cantoris

But there mustn't have been any muscle damage. The horse was beaten under 15 lengths and he lost more than that at the start. It appears to me that unless he had 40lbs in hand, there is no way this horse ran below form. He was a net gainer, lenghts wise, during the race and would have been beaten under ten lengths if he hadn't been rushed up four furlongs out. This does not strike me as a horse who was punch drunk or suffering from muscle damage. Could the vet have been right?

Juwwi

In hindsight yea the vet was right that he was'nt injured but he could'nt of known for sure before the start.
Was he right to let him run in a distressed state l would think no.
It was clear to see the horse was on his toes .
If the horse had'nt of running l dont think anyone who had backed the horse would of complained.

convert

A well trained vet who's used to dealing with horses day in, day out will pick up very quickly whether a horse is sound or not from watching him walk and trot; putting a hand on the horse will just confirm exactly where an injury, if any, is. If you ask a vet to check a horse at home in a yard, the first thing they will do is ask someone to trot up the horse a few times. Only then will they put a hand on the horse. So the fact that the vet didn't put a hand on the horse at the racecourse wouldn't worry me at all.

As for a horse breaking out of the stalls. Sometimes a horse will get anxious in a stalls and may break out or have the stall gates opened for them. Horses aren't machines and such incidents are to be expected. If a stall mechanism is damaged and there's a fear that it won't open then the horse needs to be moved if it's deemed fit to run. However, if a horse has broken out with such force that it has damaged the stall then the trainer/owner should have a say as to whether or not the horse runs. It would probably be ideal to have all trainers stipulate their preference before a race should such an incident occur.

Cantoris

robbie1977 wrote: »

In hindsight yea the vet was right that he was'nt injured but he could'nt of known for sure before the start.
Was he right to let him run in a distressed state l would think no.
It was clear to see the horse was on his toes .
If the horse had'nt of running l dont think anyone who had backed the horse would of complained.

Robbie, I can see what you're trying to say but I think the question is not about this horse but whether there should be a rule that says "if a horse leaves its stall, whether on its own account or having been removed for its safety, then that horse should be deemed a non-runner". Then the vet doesn't need to make the call, a call which I think was right. A horse being on its toes is no reason t withdraw it and it didn't hurt him in the race. You can't b sure if connecions would have been pleased to see the horse withdrawn. People tend to focus on the negatives first "gamble highlighted for the next day" rather than the positives " the horse's chances might have been harmed by wat he did".

Juwwi

After reading the above two posts lm begining to see why people who think he should of ran are right..

Did'nt know that about the vet so basically vet,starter and jockey did'nt do anything wrong.

Apart from the horse Magnier was probably the only one in he wrong then for not having a stable representive at the start knowing that the money was on incase something went wrong at the start which did .maybe?

Rule defenately needs changing tho imo.

Its bad enough the non triers and race course training making irish racing look bad let alone Matt Chapman ranting on after the race when he did'nt know the rules.

Nulty

My point is only focussing on the rules. If the horse breaks through the stall it gets withdrawn.

No fault of the starter/jockey/vet. There should be a rule there stopping the horse from running. And also, there should be a rule saying that if a horse cannot run from its prescribed stall its withdrawn.

EDIT
At the same time though, you could argue about the jockey being changed and the difference that makes compared to a stalls change.

Cantoris

That's sensible enough. You might fnd some resistence from the Owners/Trainers but it's worth bringing forward.

Nulty

They'd better have well trained or well behaved horses then (I know they're not machines but when you take a horse racing there are risks involved!). It would make owners and trainers more inclined to focus on the stalls behaviour of their horses if that rule were in place. Also, if their horses are well behaved/trained, then if the horse is out of character playing up or being aggressive and therefore should not be allowed to run.

We can't be leaving this sort of stuff unspoken for. what happened the other night was wrong what ever way you look at it. If a horse does that and then is allowed to run by its owners then the horse is not the most important thing obviously. As a punter, fan but not as an owner or trainer - I would be in strong favour of a black and white rule like that. It protects everyone. The horse returns unharmed, punters (whos money helps fund the industry) get their money back, owners get a horse back in one piece and don't have to make the difficult decision balancing their financial investment and the welfare of their animal, trainers are relieved of the same responsibility as the owners, starters, vet and jockey don't need to make a difficult decision because its there in black and white.

EDIT:
I did not bet in this race!

smartaform

convert wrote: »

A well trained vet who's used to dealing with horses day in, day out will pick up very quickly whether a horse is sound or not from watching him walk and trot; putting a hand on the horse will just confirm exactly where an injury, if any, is. If you ask a vet to check a horse at home in a yard, the first thing they will do is ask someone to trot up the horse a few times. Only then will they put a hand on the horse. So the fact that the vet didn't put a hand on the horse at the racecourse wouldn't worry me at all.

As for a horse breaking out of the stalls. Sometimes a horse will get anxious in a stalls and may break out or have the stall gates opened for them. Horses aren't machines and such incidents are to be expected. If a stall mechanism is damaged and there's a fear that it won't open then the horse needs to be moved if it's deemed fit to run. However, if a horse has broken out with such force that it has damaged the stall then the trainer/owner should have a say as to whether or not the horse runs. It would probably be ideal to have all trainers stipulate their preference before a race should such an incident occur.

It would worry me for 2 reasons
1. The thing wasn't even trotted after being cast - to an extent - in the stalls.. he was walked back around behind the stalls and subsequently moved to the outside stall.
2. How many injuries are noticable when a horse is fully wound up?? Not many as adrenalin is pumping mad through it's veins :Dlol... Cape Blanco in the Dante springs to mind...

I see ger lyons even commented on it on his Twitter page.

finbarrk

The fact that the money was down is the main reason the connections are complaining.

Cantoris

Surprise surprise, Golan Go missed the break again at Galway. And no-one to blame this time! But Magnier still finds someone....

"After the schooling since his last race Golan Go misbehaved again yesterday in the starting stalls a practice he dose not do at home. He was slowly away last by a few lenghts from the worst draw in the race. Kegan Latham rode him and he was asked to drop down on to the rail and take his chance when gaps opened. I am not a fan of horses been ridden wide through out a race on a race course with with no straight. You give away a lot of ground, run harder to keep position and in defeat you have a harder race. By taking your chance poking your way up the rail if you can not get a run at least the horse has not had a hard race. Kegan rode him wide. The horse I new going in to the race was drawn bad and the ground was too lively for him. He finished 9th, not a bad run all considered. "

smartaform

Had it even been through the gates?? surely couldn't have as it happened AGAIN...

One thing i've noticed on his site is some simple spelling mistakes.. sure you could forgive them every now and again BUT TO SEE IT DAILY??!!!??
How could you have any faith if he couldn't construct a simple sentence!

knighted_1

he has agreat racing club for beginners to join very good value i think-



Stablegate Racing Club.com leases 3 racehorses at any one time to race. No capital outlay.

Club membership is just €600.00 for 12 months or €50.00 for 12 months.

Members share in prize money.

There’s an “optional” €150 sign up charge which covers your AIR card costs. AIR card entitles you to Racecourse access and a Race card on race days.

There will be no further charges levied on members of this Club.

Text and e-mail notification of workouts, entry and declaration status.

View horses training records daily on trainers web-site: paulmagnier.ie

Club anticipates anywhere from 20 to 30 race runs in 2010. To date the Club has won 3 races and 7 finished in the money from 16 runs. That some action! Share in the Owner experience.

convert

Cantoris wrote: »

Surprise surprise, Golan Go missed the break again at Galway. And no-one to blame this time! But Magnier still finds someone....

"After the schooling since his last race Golan Go misbehaved again yesterday in the starting stalls a practice he dose [sic] not do at home. He was slowly away last by a few lenghts from the worst draw in the race. Kegan Latham rode him and he was asked to drop down on to the rail and take his chance when gaps opened. I am not a fan of horses been ridden wide through out [sic] a race on a race course with with no straight. You give away a lot of ground, run harder to keep position and in defeat you have a harder race. By taking your chance poking your way up the rail if you can not [sic] get a run at least the horse has not had a hard race. Kegan rode him wide. The horse I new [sic] going in to the race was drawn bad [sic] and the ground was too lively for him. He finished 9th, not a bad run all considered. "

So basically the horse has learned that if he messes in the stalls he doesn't have to perform on the racecourse!

Nice to see the jockey getting the blame again, too! Bet if he had ridden to instructions and gotten boxed on the rail, the jockey should have taken him out wide!

smartaform wrote: »

One thing i've noticed on his site is some simple spelling mistakes.. sure you could forgive them every now and again BUT TO SEE IT DAILY??!!!??
How could you have any faith if he couldn't construct a simple sentence!

Yeah, I picked up on that too... Poor syntax and spelling throughout a blog/article, etc. is very frustrating. One of two is forgiveable, but four spelling mistakes, an incorrect adverb and poor sentence structure isn't exactly a few. Ok, typos happen, and we all make grammatical mistakes, but for someone not to correct them before posting on their site is sloppy. It doesn't take long to read over something to pick up on these errors. If you don't feel you'll pick up on them all, have someone else do it.

That said, a good trainer doesn't necessarily need to have good writing skills - they just need to be able to understand, assess each horse individually and accurately, communicate effectively with their staff and stop blaming everyone or everything else for a horse's poor run.

Cantoris

knighted_1 wrote: »

he has agreat racing club for beginners to join very good value i think-

It would be interesting to know one thing. If you signed up for 5 shares in March (say start of flat season) until Oct (end of flat season) and paid your €1,650 (7 months of €50 * 5 shares), would you get your share of the prizemoney won. Training and racing costs would be, say, €2k a month or €14k over the period. Three horses. That's about €50k. Your share is around 3%. So if the horses won three nice races between then, they could pocket €20k in net prizemoney. Then you would get €600 back. That's not a bad deal given the horses are ready to run and someone else has paid for them up to now. I appreciate it's a lease which isn't everyones cuppa, but still if you got your fair proportion, it would be a good deal. They bear the brunt of the winter, out-of-training cost. THen you could just stop again in November and start again in March. There must be a catch re the prizemoney.

knighted_1

no catch -when you think about it they have had 3 winners from 16 runners so far this season .prizemoney is really only going to pay transport and assoc costs nobody going to get a return from prizemoney .so 50 euros a month plus 150 a year for air total 750 to share in the experience is nothing really -

knighted_1

this is the blog before the race --

Golan Go is entered to run in the 5.00 race in Galway today. In his last race in Ballinrobe he had the best draw in the race before the starter had him moved to the worst draw after he damaged his stall. The Turf Club (The Keepers of Integrity) thinks this was fair practice to inflict on the betting public will not have to move Golan Go out any wider today as he is drawn the widest of all in stall one. The ground today is as fast as he needs it couple with having the worst draw his task is all the tougher.

this is what he said afterwards

After the schooling since his last race Golan Go misbehaved again yesterday in the starting stalls a practice he dose not do at home. He was slowly away last by a few lenghts from the worst draw in the race. Kegan Latham rode him and he was asked to drop down on to the rail and take his chance when gaps opened. I am not a fan of horses been ridden wide through out a race on a race course with with no straight. You give away a lot of ground, run harder to keep position and in defeat you have a harder race. By taking your chance poking your way up the rail if you can not get a run at least the horse has not had a hard race. Kegan rode him wide. The horse I new going in to the race was drawn bad and the ground was too lively for him. He finished 9th, not a bad run all considered.

what has he said wrong here only point out that the jockey was told to ride the rail and he didnt ,no blame given just stating fact

the blog before the race states that he has the widest and toughest draw and the ground was plenty fast for him .

UrbanSea

Knighted are you one of the shareholders in the horse?

convert

knighted_1 wrote: »

what has he said wrong here only point out that the jockey was told to ride the rail and he didnt ,no blame given just stating fact

The horse, by Magnier's own admission, in both his pre- and post-race blogs, was drawn wide. Managing to hug the rail is difficult at the best of times, even when a horse receives a middle draw, but expecting a horse to get the rail when he's drawn the widest is expecting a lot of both horse and rider, unless, of course, the jockey tucks the horse in at the back and makes his way from there. Having a Plan B regarding to race tactics is always preferable, especially in situations like the one outlined above, because, as we all know, it can be very difficult to have the race go 'your' way.

I know one of the trainers I worked for usually discussed a 'Plan B' with jockeys on the flat simply for the reason that 'Plan A' could go out the window because of a bad draw or slow start.

UrbanSea

I don't like it when trainers come out giving out about jockeys to the public,there's a time and place for that. And the horse in question seems very quirky and mightn't be the easiest ride.

knighted_1

greetings wrote: »

Knighted are you one of the shareholders in the horse?

no not a shareholder,i dont even own a chipper:D

cafollas own it

knighted_1

convert wrote: »

The horse, by Magnier's own admission, in both his pre- and post-race blogs, was drawn wide. Managing to hug the rail is difficult at the best of times, even when a horse receives a middle draw, but expecting a horse to get the rail when he's drawn the widest is expecting a lot of both horse and rider, unless, of course, the jockey tucks the horse in at the back and makes his way from there. Having a Plan B regarding to race tactics is always preferable, especially in situations like the one outlined above, because, as we all know, it can be very difficult to have the race go 'your' way.

I know one of the trainers I worked for usually discussed a 'Plan B' with jockeys on the flat simply for the reason that 'Plan A' could go out the window because of a bad draw or slow start.

he never tried to get the rail ,when he was last at the start he could have dropped in at the back and try to work his way thru it was after all a 2 mile race .
i had a horse that couldnt run the rail and always needed to be ridden wide and see the hurdles ,no matter what the track
i can see magniers point on wide running at these type of tracks and i think he is giving informative views or explanations and they are being misrepresented on here

Cantoris

knighted_1 wrote: »

.prizemoney is really only going to pay transport and assoc costs nobody going to get a return from prizemoney

Ah, the three wins grossed winnings of €20k (net say €14k). Not bad. 3% share of that is €600.....not bad for the €1,650 you put in. I had based the 3% on training and racing costs of €2k a month per horse which would be reasonable enough, depending on how often they run. There must be a catch somewhere and I wouldn't like the fact they don't outline what share of the prizemoney you get.

As for his views on jocks, I'd also be one to stay quiet on those things. If he's not happy with a rider he doesn't have to use him again but the jock has no right to reply on that site. If I remember correctly, the lad that rode Golan Go had previously ridden against instructions according to Magnier. So why did he put him up again?

convert

knighted_1 wrote: »

i can see magniers point on wide running at these type of tracks and i think he is giving informative views or explanations and they are being misrepresented on here

I've no problem with individuals giving their opinion on matters such as the advantages of hugging the rail rather than running on the outside, but like Cantoris mentioned, if they are going to criticise someone publicly, the least they can do is do it somewhere where that person has the right to reply.

I think it's far too easy for jockeys to take the flack for everything that goes wrong. Sometimes they are to blame, and that's fair enough, but from what's been posted here, the trainer in question has criticised the last two jockeys for the rides they gave his horse.

Cantoris

convert wrote: »

the trainer in question has criticised the last two jockeys for the rides they gave his horse.

And, in hindsight, he has made an absolute mountain out of a mole hill on the Ballinrobe race. He claimed the horse fell out of the stalls because it was punch drunk....dazed. When in fact it fell out of the stalls because that's what it does, as it had done on a previous start!! Now I don't suppose we will see Magnier retract that piece, ring Matt Chapman and say he got that wrong. I do believe he has a point on moving the horse to the outside stall, but them the rules and there are ways of trying to change those but he doesn't like his own trainers association. He should have concentrated on arguing that the horse damaged the stall and should have been withdrawn and left it at that.

Cantoris

I particularly like these comments on Inwood from 10 May 2010

"The handicapper in his wisdom raised our horse 4lbs for been beaten half a lenght in a weak handicap of in and out handicappers. Inwood has struggled in the last eighteen months and one competitive run and he gets 4lbs and a beating! Bye the way the winner got 1lb for each €977.50 he earned. That’s nearly three times what Inwood (€361.25) earned per pound."

He was subsequently beaten half a length in second off that 4lb higher mark (67). Went up another 4lbs (to 71), finished 6th and he said the following

"The handicapper is being harsh on Inwood, for yesterday’s effort he gave him 4lbs to a new rating of 71. Inwood is slowly being strangled by the handicapper."

He then comes out and wins on his next start and comes third the time after. I'm lost at this stage!! If he hadn't gone up in the weights to 71 he would have won both those starts and possibly a third!! what does the man expect!

convert

Ok, just to clarify: I'm not actually attacking Magnier as a trainer here; I'm just commenting on what he's written/said in the last while.

On the flip side of the argument, trainers have it tough and have to be answerable to the owners, the punters, the Turf Club, etc. if something goes wrong. Blaming the starters, racecourse vets, jockeys, handicapper, going, etc. is commonly employed by trainers to explain a horse's poor performance. Sometimes it's easier to do that than tell an owner that their horse just isn't that good; it's something a lot of owners don't want to hear!

Cantoris

convert wrote: »

Ok, just to clarify: I'm not actually attacking Magnier as a trainer here; I'm just commenting on what he's written/said in the last while.

I'm with you there convert. I have no idea whether he is a good trainer or not. It's not uncommon for trainers to feel the handicapper is giving their horses a hard time but you have to be sensible. If your horse is placed, you have to give those behind you the opportunity to beat you the next day. There are ways and means of complaining without using a website to voice issues with the handicapper when clearly the handicapper was right!!

smartaform

I'm sure no-one was thinking you were attacking the guy Convert..... apart from the sentence where you attacked him lol ... :D

In all seriousness, the constant whinging about the handicapper is abit annoying, the handicapper is doing his job based off the results given to him. No point complaining, if you can't deal with competition DONT COMPETE!! LOL

One interesting thing - going through the archives is how he seems to be the victim of cruel staff, owners and other nasty folk out to get him!!