Reply With QuoteYou are spot on Dan but the essence of it is in your first paragraph - he was nowhere near good enough to be in the Inter and deprived a better horse a start
on the one hand, the Irish pacer, Meadowbranch DJ, was "good enough" to get a run in the Perth Interdominion and in the process cost someone else a start, now he is in John McCarthy's stable and about to embark on a Sydney campaign as a C1.!!!!?????
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=29257
if someone would like to explain to me how that is not an absolute farce I would be very happy to hear the explanation.
Anyone who is going to have to compete with this horse in the lower grades is going to be entitled to feel dudded in my humble opinion.
Talk about double standards, this trumps anything I have ever seen anywhere on that front.
You are spot on Dan but the essence of it is in your first paragraph - he was nowhere near good enough to be in the Inter and deprived a better horse a start
per un PUGNO di DOLLARI
Talking about a farce and a horse living up to its name.
Race 4 at Newcastle on Thursday - Can't Explain it
http://www.harness.org.au/fields.cfm?mc=NR240316#4
Conditions: Cannot have an average time of better than 2.01 over last 6 starts, I calculate the average as 2.00.2. Or cannot have won more than $1000 in last 4 and has won over $7000. Last run on 5th March so has not beaten the grading system.
Surely this horse has to be scratched from the race as it is ineligible.
Originally Posted by Pena
Can't Explain It would be spot on Jack!!
Have a look at the Ararat Cup field, can't work out those handicaps ?
Don't die wondering !
Some explaining to do with that Newcastle one.
Danno, you would have been happy with the stand starts getting a go at 11PM at Wagga last night? (Just stirring)
Jack,
Please don't forget these handicappers are "professionals". They are to "increase fields" "more turnover" and a evening out of fields.
They set the conditions of a race to meet the above objectives.
They have a full field.
They now have a $1.40 favorite.....so much turnover.
They could not use last 3 or 4 or 5 because official records for that horse shows
Avg Mile Rate Last 10 2:01.444
Avg Mile Rate Last 6 2:01.001
Avg Mile Rate Last 5 2:00.413
Avg Mile Rate Last 4 2:00.325
Avg Mile Rate Last 3 1:58.562
Just an update for those who have an interest in the results from the "professionals" grading decisions.
Can't Explain It finished 2nd in a mile rate of 1.55.2. Remember it was for horses that averaged over 2.01 in their last 6 starts.
Guess which race on the Newcastle program held the least on the NSW tote.. yep race 4. So much for increased turnover.
Was a great spectacle I thought Brenno, with all mobile racing the way races pan out is SSSOOO predictable its bloody BORING, that race was entertaining in my humble opinion.
Turnover wise they did their best to make sure it didn't do well by putting it on at that time. Just more evidence of the agenda HRNSW has to appease the TAB gods.
If there is a better explanation I'd love to hear it.
cheers,
Danno
Have they ever re-drawn a race? We nominated one of ours for a $100k race this Friday for Westbred 3yo C&Gs. Preference based on horses classed 3C1+. All horses are classed minimum 3C1 but he drew second emergency. SECOND.
His form? 2-1-3-3-2-1 out of 6 starts. What drew ahead of him? A horse with form 8-2-5-7-8-1-2, one with 5-4-2-1-3-8-5-5, another with 4-8-2-1-5-11-4.
We are all fuming.Is there any reason he wouldn't get a start behind those horses?
Posting Permissions