best possible placing

diomed

I am a little worried by some connections (owners/trainers) running multiple horses in a race.

The BHA rule is

PART 4 - THE RACE - (B)45 to (B)59
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
58. General requirement for a horse to be run on its merits and obtain best possible placing

58.1 Every horse which runs in a race shall be run and be seen to be run on its merits (see Rule (D)45 (riding to achieve the best possible placing)).

58.2 No owner, Registered Agent of a Recognised Company or Trainer may
..... 58.2.1 give any instructions which if obeyed could or would prevent a horse from obtaining the best possible placing, or
..... 58.2.2 prevent or try to prevent in any way any horse from obtaining the best possible placing.

58.3 No Rider or any other Person may in any way prevent or try to prevent any horse from obtaining the best possible placing.


Any thoughts or comments?

BumperD

If this is in reference to the guineas, I saw no interference. Best horses on the day won both

diomed

I wouldn't be thinking about interference.
My concern is about horses used as pacemakers forfeiting their chances, horses given an educational run, or horses brought to fitness on the racecourse.

Kevhog1988

diomed wrote: »

I wouldn't be thinking about interference.
My concern is about horses used as pacemakers forfeiting their chances, horses given an educational run, or horses brought to fitness on the racecourse.

if they allr an on their merits wed never get a gamble off the ground!!

BumperD

Linked betting for common ownership like on pmu might help.

diomed

I would be happier with smaller fields instead of what I saw in the jumps season with multiple horses in one ownership in a race.
Now in the flat season we have the same with Coolmore and Godolphin.

Backstreet Moyes

diomed wrote: »

I would be happier with smaller fields instead of what I saw in the jumps season with multiple horses in one ownership in a race.
Now in the flat season we have the same with Coolmore and Godolphin.

What you want is not realistic.

What do you want trainers to do not run horses because the owners have other horses in the race?

Trainers to tell owners they are not going to run horses?

diomed

Nuts102 wrote: »

What you want is not realistic.
What do you want trainers to do not run horses because the owners have other horses in the race?
Trainers to tell owners they are not going to run horses?

I would be happy for trainers to run multiple horses in a race if they were clearly owned by different owners, one horse for each owner.
I would be less in favour of multiple horses owned by one person running for different trainers.
The least attractive option to me is multiple horses in one ownership trained by one trainer.

Backstreet Moyes

diomed wrote: »

I would be happy for trainers to run multiple horses in a race if they were clearly owned by different owners, one horse for each owner.
I would be less in favour of multiple horses owned by one person running for different trainers.
The least attractive option to me is multiple horses in one ownership trained by one trainer.

Big owners put big money into the game and therefore usually send to the top trainers.

What you are suggesting is either big owners sending horses among several stables which wont happen or these owners picking one horse per race which is absurd.

National hunt for example if Mullins or Elliot had to pick one horse per owner there would be 2 and 3 runners in group 1s. Or below standard horses competing for prize money diluting the quality of racing.

diomed

To check if things were different in previous years I checked out the 1988 Epsom Derby field

Finish Horse Owner Trainer
12 Clifton Chapel C A Cyzer S G Norton
9 Project Manager D H W Dobson J S Bolger
2 Glacial Storm David Thompson B W Hills
4 Red Glow E B Moller G Wragg
1 Kahyasi H H Aga Khan Luca Cumani
3 Doyoun H H Aga Khan Sir Michael Stoute
10 Al Mufti Hamdan Al Maktoum * H Thomson Jones
14 Al Muhalhal Hamdan Al Maktoum * H Thomson Jones
7 Unfuwain Hamdan Al Maktoum Major W R Hern
13 Maksud Hamdan Al Maktoum R W Armstrong
8 Minster Son Lady Beaverbrook * Major W R Hern
11 Charmer Lady Beaverbrook * Major W R Hern
6 Sheriff's Star M Nishiyama Lady Herries
5 Kefaah Sheikh Ahmed Al Maktoum Luca Cumani


H H Aga Khan had two contenders who finished 1st and 3rd and they were trained by different trainers.
Hamdan Al Maktoum used three trainers for his four runners.
Lady Beaverbrook's two runners were both trained by Dick Hern.

Team tactics not a concern then and I believe all runners were in the race to achieve the best possible placing.

Harry Angstrom

In general, I don't think there should be any limitations, but anybody who backed Hydrangea in the 1,000 Guineas knew their fate early on, as she was clearly being used as a pacemaker. Doesn't seem fair on those punters.

PM me nudes

Gigginstown actually run their horses on their merits so fair play to them

McManus on the other hand can go fcuk himself, running 5 in a maiden hurdle and not one of them trying

Shanee.

PM me nudes wrote: »

Gigginstown actually run their horses on their merits so fair play to them

McManus on the other hand can go fcuk himself, running 5 in a maiden hurdle and not one of them trying

In fairness to McManus he has pumped so much money into the game, I know a lot don't try but untill you have put as much money into the game as him I don't think you can say **** him or don't **** him. If it weren't for the likes of him and gigginstown Irish racing wouldn't be what it is today.

tryfix

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

In general, I don't think there should be any limitations, but anybody who backed Hydrangea in the 1,000 Guineas knew their fate early on, as she was clearly being used as a pacemaker. Doesn't seem fair on those punters.

Hydrangea is a natural front runner, she ran from the front in the Moyglare when she was just touched off by Intricately who shadowed her that day and Rhododendron couldn't go with them that day either. In the 1,000 she again ran in a settled manner up front ( not with the choke out) with plenty of horses right beside her and she just didn't have it in her on the day, neither did the Moyglare winner Intricately who folded easily as well despite having had a very satisfactory staying on Guineas trial which would have left her in peak condition.

Hydrangea had an off day and Intricately likes a cut in it so her poor run makes sense on that ground.

tryfix

Rather than team tactics the biggest problem in racing is horses being trained on the track. O'Brien is ridiculous for it and should be smacked down big time.

diomed

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

In general, I don't think there should be any limitations, but anybody who backed Hydrangea in the 1,000 Guineas knew their fate early on, as she was clearly being used as a pacemaker. Doesn't seem fair on those punters.

Me. I backed her before they announced the jockeys.
When Hydrangea was run on her merits she beat Winter. When used as a pacemaker she was 10th behind Winter.

I'm not in favour of multiple entries (others obviously disagree) because some of them are not trying to gain the best possible place, and that is against the rules.

tryfix

diomed wrote: »

Me. I backed her before they announced the jockeys.
When Hydrangea was run on her merits she beat Winter. When used as a pacemaker she was 10th behind Winter.

I'm not in favour of multiple entries (others obviously disagree) because some of them are not trying to gain the best possible place, and that is against the rules.

Hydrangea

1,000 Guineas 10th of 14 beaten 14.75L

led, ridden and headed over 2f out, weakened over 1f out

1,000 Guineas Trial

led briefly early, soon raced in 2nd, pushed along to challenge into straight, soon led, pressed from over 1f out, stayed on well, all out

Breeders Cup 14 of 14 beaten 18L

In touch on inside, driven along over 2f out, soon weakened, eased when beaten approaching final furlong

Fillies Mile

led stands side pair, pushed along over 2f out, ridden to chase winner entering final furlong, ran on

Moyglare

broke well to lead, driven 2 1/2f out, ridden and pressed 2f out, headed final 150 yards, kept on well, just failed

Debutant Stakes Gp2

led, ridden and joined 1 1/2f out, headed 1f out, rallied inside final furlong and stayed on well to press winner to line

Curragh - Loder EBF (Fillies) Race

led, pushed along and pressed over 2f out, went on from over 1f out, stayed on well

Galway - COLM QUINN BMW EBF (Fillies) M´dn

pushed along early and chased leaders on inner, short of room in 4th 3f out, ridden in 3rd 1f out, went 2nd inside final furlong, stayed on well, not reach winner

Curragh - QIPCO EBF (Fillies) M´dn

towards rear, ridden 2f out, kept on well final furlong to 10th, never on terms

Leading is her thing and it helps her to perform very well. She was given a 30lb beating on Sunday when she led as usual, leading as usual didn't make her flop completely, just as not leading didn't make her lose the Breeders Cup by 18L. She threw in a really bad run, it's happened before to her.

Nuts102

Nuts102 wrote: »

Big owners put big money into the game and therefore usually send to the top trainers.

What you are suggesting is either big owners sending horses among several stables which wont happen or these owners picking one horse per race which is absurd.

National hunt for example if Mullins or Elliot had to pick one horse per owner there would be 2 and 3 runners in group 1s. Or below standard horses competing for prize money diluting the quality of racing.

No, what would happen is that McManus and Gigginstown would stop buying so many horses. That in turn would do something to remove the inflation from the market and make the sport more attractive to potential owners, who are more likely to get a decent horse for a decent price.

In the medium term it would open the sport up and do nothing but good. Particularly in NH it would be very easy for Ireland and Britain to agree rules and seeing as no-one else really cares about the sport that would be it.

At the moment it is hard to warm to a sport in which fantastically wealthy men buy every scrap of talent out there in order to hover up (taxpayer funded) prize money.

Imhof Tank

diomed wrote: »

Me. I backed her before they announced the jockeys.
When Hydrangea was run on her merits she beat Winter. When used as a pacemaker she was 10th behind Winter.

I'm not in favour of multiple entries (others obviously disagree) because some of them are not trying to gain the best possible place, and that is against the rules.

That's your interpretation and obviously the authorities everywhere would disagree with you.

Pacemakers have been part of the game as long as I can remember. Team tactics is a different matter. Lancaster Bomber definitely ran interference for Churchill on Saturday IMO but that would be more a case of careless riding than not running to achieve best placing.

Educational runs are also part of the game and on this I would be far more concerned about the new tweak of the Irish non triers rule. We will be seeing green 2 year olds given unmerciful hidings this season. Is that an attractive sight for the marketing men's target audience? Medium term, there would be concern as to whether eg Coolmore would continue to run their 2yos under that rule if it is going to be interpreted as absolutely requiring jocks to use the stick, with feeling.

diomed

tryfix wrote: »

Leading is her thing and it helps her to perform very well. She was given a 30lb beating on Sunday when she led as usual, leading as usual didn't make her flop completely, just as not leading didn't make her lose the Breeders Cup by 18L. She threw in a really bad run, it's happened before to her.

Hydrangea's RPR on Sunday was 82. Her RPR in the Leopardstown race was 110.
She was the pacemaker in the 1000 Guineas into a headwind.
Winter's RPR on Sunday was 117. Her RPR at Leopardstwon was 109.

Was the trainer called in by the stewards to explain the running of Hydrangea in the 1000 Guineas. There must be an explanation.

tryfix

diomed wrote: »

Hydrangea's RPR on Sunday was 82. Her RPR in the Leopardstown race was 110.
She was the pacemaker in the 1000 Guineas into a headwind.
Winter's RPR on Sunday was 117. Her RPR at Leopardstwon was 109.

Was the trainer called in by the stewards to explain the running of Hydrangea in the 1000 Guineas. There must be an explanation.

Winter was making ground hand over fist in the 7f trial, it was no great surprise that she improved for the mile and better ground. Her performance was Plausible, which was enough for the stewards to not look into it.

Hydrangea could have been in season, or there could be some conspiracy afoot, but tell me how her 1,000 Guineas front running performance was at odds with her normal front running performances. She's a pass me if you can filly who didn't bust a gut by tearing off at a pace that was all wrong for her. Based on past performance she should have stayed going even after making the running, there's no way that an established front runner of her class should have completely folded like paper off that pace at that early a stage in the race ( unless I'm missing something) and there's no reason why team O'Brien would have wanted her to flop in the race.

diomed

I would point out that Hydrangea finishing beaten 18 1/2 lengths 14th of 14 quoted above in the Breeder's Cup Juvenile at Santa Anita "eased when beaten" was in the USA and not covered by Ireland or Britain "best possible placing / "non-trier" rules.

Hydrangea's form was not in and out. That was the only race before the 1000 Guineas where her rating was low and that was because she was 18 1/2 lengths "eased when beaten".

Will her form be "in" again soon? She only has a Group 3 to her name.

Weakened
Seven horses "weakened" in the 1000 Guineas, every horse from 6th to 12th. The remaining two, the 13th and 14th "struggling".
Are these the new terms for "eased when beaten"?
Have the race reporters been told by the publications never to say a horse is "eased"?
Is this to allow the trainers point to the racing commentary to support a "weakened" theory?

The public are mugs if they believe every horse is running to obtain the best place, and that 9 horses in a field of 14 "weakened" or "struggled".
The gap between the horse in 5th and the horse in 6th was 5 lengths, the first of the "weakened" horses.

Stevie Wonder could read the form and see that a 5 length gap is because the rest of the field came in at their own time (money down to 6th), perhaps with the jockeys pushing their elbows up and down and waving their whips at the horses but doing nothing.
I'm not advocating jockeys thrash horses in a lost cause.
It looks like acting is now one of the main skills of jockeys.
Pretending all entries are attempting to achieve their best is the trainer skill.

tryfix

I see what you're saying, as in the horses that were out of the money weren't going to be raced properly once their chances were gone.

Easing down a horse that's no chance of finishing in the betting places seems to be an accepted practice in UK and Irish Racing. Of course it's cheating in terms of their future handicap marks and should be questioned when it's blatant.

diomed

tryfix wrote: »

Based on past performance she should have stayed going even after making the running, there's no way that an established front runner of her class should have completely folded like paper off that pace at that early a stage in the race ( unless I'm missing something) and there's no reason why team O'Brien would have wanted her to flop in the race.

I think the interview with Aidan O'Brien immediately after Winter won the 1000 Guineas was telling. He looked extremely disappointed.

My reading of the race was Hydrangea made the pace for Rhododendron, the intended winner.
There was a headwind, and Rhodendron tucked in behind Hydrangea.
Unfortunately, when Rhodendron made her move Talaayeb crossed her, and checked her.
By the time Rhodendron got clear it was too late.

Breaking the wind is a significant task and takes a lot out of any athlete, even horses.
A very good race to watch is the 1000 Guineas win of Blue Bunting, a race run into a headwind stronger than this year's 1000 Guineas.
You will see that Blue Bunting is drawn three from the right, but the wind is against and from the right.
Frankie Dettori immediately takes Blue Bunting back behind the field, and reappears at the rear of the field and on the left.
This give Blue Bunting cover from the wind.
The other horses break the wind for her and they lose strength.
Blue Bunting has an easy time and in the last furlong she appears to accelerate remarkably to win easily.

Please looks at that race carefully on Youtube.

If you do you will realise that Hydrangea was a pacemaker for Rhodendron in this year's 1000 Guineas and her chance was sacrificed.
She was not run to achieve the best possible placing.

WHIP IT!

Shanee. wrote: »

In fairness to McManus he has pumped so much money into the game, I know a lot don't try but untill you have put as much money into the game as him I don't think you can say **** him or don't **** him. If it weren't for the likes of him and gigginstown Irish racing wouldn't be what it is today.

You clearly don't know much - or anything - about how JP got started in the game and amassed his initial fortune.

Shanee.

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Shanee. wrote: »

In fairness to McManus he has pumped so much money into the game, I know a lot don't try but untill you have put as much money into the game as him I don't think you can say **** him or don't **** him. If it weren't for the likes of him and gigginstown Irish racing wouldn't be what it is today.

You clearly don't know much - or anything - about how JP got started in the game and amassed his initial fortune.

As a bookmaker at the greyhounds and eventually on racecourse. I'm speaking in recent times I wasn't around when he started in the game.

WHIP IT!

Shanee. wrote: »

As a bookmaker at the greyhounds and eventually on racecourse. I'm speaking in recent times I wasn't around when he started in the game.

Ask someone in your business who's a little bit older...

nuckeythompson

WHIP IT! wrote:

You clearly don't know much - or anything - about how JP got started in the game and amassed his initial fortune.

Gambling on foreign currency

diomed

nuckeythompson wrote: »

Gambling on foreign currency

The Irish pound/punt was devalued by 10 per cent
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/02/01/business/ireland-devalues-its-pound.html