Where's my money?

[G-Mac]

I had a lot more on Changeover to win the Len Smith Mile a few years ago than I did on ITMQ to win the ID11 final; so I can't complain...

[aussiebreno]

Probably a bit unpopular... but as I've said before I've found from personal experience that DMSO is not performance enhancing in any way. So whether the horse got a positive or not, on the night ITMQ had every opportunity to run SU down and he couldn't - you would have all lost your money anyway, regardless

Maybe it didn't enhance his performance. Maybe it didn't make him better. But did it give him the ability to race at 100%; whereas possibly he may not have? Also; he should not have started in the race. Smoken Up was what; $3? Thats 40% reduction in the market at a 120% market so reduce IMTQ price by 40% to say $2.50 and give me those winnings; I'll still be happy enough.

[Flashing Red]

Maybe it didn't enhance his performance. Maybe it didn't make him better. But did it give him the ability to race at 100%

Without wanting to really get into this, I think the crux of the argument put forward is that the horse raced drug free in the race itself and that the substance only became present after the race. The only sample taken before the race, ie the only sample that could have proven if the drug was in the horses system before the race, was destroyed.

[aussiebreno]

Without wanting to really get into this, I think the crux of the argument put forward is that the horse raced drug free in the race itself and that the substance only became present after the race. The only sample taken before the race, ie the only sample that could have proven if the drug was in the horses system before the race, was destroyed.

That's an opinion.
Fact: Smoken Up has been disqualified from the race.
Fact: Placings are 1. ITMQ. 2. BAF. 3. Smiling Shard (I think SS got 3rd lol)
Fact: I had $10 on ITMQ to finish 1st.
Fact: ITMQ finished first.
Fact: I had $10 on ITMQ to finish 1st. ITMQ did finish 1st.
Fact: I didn't get my money even though my bet was correct.
So back to the original question. Where's my money?

[triplev123]

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ms=nsw#BHC2887
Sorry to relive your pain VVV. As a bit of trivia I note Young Mister Charles won at that meeting. He of course was disqualified from his placing in a NZ Inter.

And sorry I'm not high roller guys!

[VVV] I did have a fair bit on her but I was young & stupid at the time, as opposed to being older & stupid now, and I really thought she could take it all. I thought that she was a lock. Initially I got her at 18/1 pre post & then I backed up again on the Final night & took the 10's that was on offer for her to win the Final. Averaged well into double figures & had she saluted...geeze, you know I still get to feeling a bit ill just thinking about it. Haven't had a bet even remotely approaching that size ever since. (handbag)

[Flashing Red]

Brendan!!!!! Stop trying to wind me up! :P :P :P :P :P Now your playing semantics which I can too hehehe. :P IMTQ didn't cross the line first because the horse that did, SU, was a better horse (on the night). You put the win only bet on ITMQ because you thought he would cross the line first in the Inter dominion. He crossed the line second and you lost your money. This is not opinion, this is also fact

Moral of the story? Don't bet!! I'll tell you a funny story... I put my first bet on in like 3 years (I probably only bet about 5 times in my life) the other day and I was so anxious about it all day I came out in hives (ask Fred H, lmao!). Red blotches all over me!! The horse won in the end, but I am certainly not cut out to be a punter in any capacity that is for sure. I was thinking more about loosing $100 than what I would win if the horse was first past the post!! :P Then I couldn't sleep that night because I was high with the buzz of it all. Don't know how you guys do it!!

[Mighty Atom]

"Maybe it didn't enhance his performance. Maybe it didn't make him better. But did it give him the ability to race at 100%; whereas possibly he may not have? Also; he should not have started in the race." As quoted by aussie he is quite correct. DSMO is used as an analgesic and anti -inflammatory. Sorry Flashing.

[Flashing Red]

That's OK, my comments were more tongue in cheek than anything. I respect the rules even if I don't always agree with them and I've always liked ITMQ regardless. I always thought Holy Camp Boy had more point to point speed but ITMQ took that mantle for me last season.

[triplev123]

Maybe it didn't enhance his performance. Maybe it didn't make him better. But did it give him the ability to race at 100%; whereas possibly he may not have? Also; he should not have started in the race. Smoken Up was what; $3? Thats 40% reduction in the market at a 120% market so reduce IMTQ price by 40% to say $2.50 and give me those winnings; I'll still be happy enough.

[VVV]...and so we arrive at the very crux of the matter Breno, that being the significant difference that exists between a substance that does not enhance ability but rather affords horses the opportunity to be at & to maintain their best form, or more simply...the case in favour of Maintenance/Therapeutics & against Performance Enhancers.

The fact is that currently, in the absence of a common sense approach to establishing thresholds for various substances, Australian & NZ drug rules serve to work in direct opposition to the very thing that the Industry...that the Stewards try to ensure each & every day and that the TAB & the Punters so strongly desire...that being handicappable, consistent and as much as is humanly possible predictable Form.

Until such time as the Industry grows up a little and gets over its hangups as far as the use of therapeutics is concerned, we will continue to row without both of our oars in the water. That we continue to struggle with TCO2 testing does not fill me with a whole lot of hope for an open debate on anything beyond that, however.

PS. Just as an example...lets say a horse that has a few little aches & pains is given Bute on a Friday night after it races. 12 hours or so later, in the early hours of Saturday morning, that dose of Bute is now of little or no pain relieving benefit to the horse at all and most certainly well within 24hrs it is all over bar the shouting, no effect whatsoever.
Nevertheless, the following Friday the same horse, not having had any Bute for 7 days, drops in to race, is swabbed, duly returns a positive to Bute EVEN THOUGH the level is so minute as to be absurd & EVEN THOUGH pharmacologically it is having absolutely ZERO,ZIP, NADA, BUGGER-ALL effect on the horse at all...yet the Trainer duly cops time on the sidelines & maybe a fine to go with it. How could that be even remotely thought of as being resonable, sensible or fair?

[Lucky Camilla"s Lovechild]

Without wanting to really get into this, I think the crux of the argument put forward is that the horse raced drug free in the race itself and that the substance only became present after the race. The only sample taken before the race, ie the only sample that could have proven if the drug was in the horses system before the race, was destroyed.

Is that true Red? Wow! That was the whole case. Clear pre race and the horse was 'nobbled'. Positive and Lance is/was guilty. If this is the case, then the NZ stewards and ruling body needs to be cleaned out. I suppose the time they took to get rid of Geoff Small is indicitive of their system.