Printable View
From what I read in the papers and hear about Vallelonga I am not a fan but if they have got a $20 hope to get beaten less than a length without resorting to pulling him up in previous starts or prohibited substances good on them. Well played.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
Vince Vallelonga, trainer of Stunning Grin, notified stewards a change of tactics for Stunning Grin to be driven less aggressively, circumstances permitting. This information was publicized. Stunning Grin was ultimately driven forward at the start to obtain the lead, and finished in 4th place beaten approximately 3.8 metres. After obtaining preliminary evidence from Rodney Petroff, driver of Stunning Grin and trainer Vince Vallelonga, Stewards adjourned the matter to investigate all relevant matters.
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=MX081016
It looks like Boris Devcic is being investigated for team driving again!
It seems the stewards are wanting to satisfy themselves that in R6 at Swan Hill the stablemates were not playing - "I will give you the lead so that you can get to the fence and then I will take it back"
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=FD151016
It is off to another Adjourned Inquiry, I hope they don't feel sorry for Boris - just because he is already suspended for his drive in R4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
There was another change of tactics for same horse Friday night. It caused a bit more confusion. "Further forward at start". Horse had run the gate at its previous 3 starts (the one above included). Further forward this time??? I think this time it was mostly ignored. If the 1 horse wanted to lead then no way it was going to cross it which is what happened. Stunning Grin didn't go further forward... it only got a neck in front of the horse drawn inside it at the start and that one was angling to get behind the leader. So why the need for the COT? All it does is cause confusion. Both times above that horse was driven to give it the best chance of winning (in my opinion). All the COT rule has done here is cause confusion (and frustration!).
Talking about giving a horse the best chance of winning Paul.
Here is one from last week where a young fella would have to feel pretty p***** off
He would have lost money on the night for leading and rating
28.2 32.6 28.5 27.8
The horse managed 3rd and its biggest cheque for a year but he was Fined $100 for that 2ndQ
The winner ended up being Times A Bonus - I bet the young fella would have loved to say that to the stewards!
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#BNC07101601
Correct me if I'm wrong but a 32 sec quarter is OK and equates to 45.25kmh. But a 32.6 not OK and (just to put in context) equates to 44.42kmh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
Junior driver... $100 fine.
Again correct me if wrong, but the lights on the poles at the quarters come on to show the slowest time acceptable BEFORE you get to them? So if you run a slow quarter all the light is doing is telling the driver they will get a fine?
its a wonder in these situation why the stewards don't question the other drivers why they let him get away with the slow qtrQuote:
Originally Posted by Toohard
driver gets fined for giving his horse every possible chance to win , other drivers get a nothing for not giving their horse every possible chance
Exactly David - what if young Ashley said he was looking to hand upQuote:
Originally Posted by djgood
Consider this one of the most frustrating rules along with the COT now required.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
Have thought that if I were in a 'bad' mood, I would contest a slow quarter fine on the basis of that as a driver, I am not allowed to carry a stopwatch, I cannot fit a speedometer to the sulky, and the by the time the light on the pole lights up, it is too late to remedy the situation.
They are basically saying to drivers that if you lead, don't keep anything in the tank. That is nearly chargeable under not giving your horse every possible chance! Another argument against being fined for a slow quarter!
A beautiful summary of the situation Phil
Quote:
Originally Posted by strong persuader
Ditto
Ditto
and Ditto
Without any shadow of doubt the #1 dumbest rule we have,
#2 dumbest rule: can't bet on your own drive.
#3 dumbest rule: change of tactics.
I believe all three rules were instigated in order for a public servant to meet his/her annual KPI's.....there can be no other excuse.
I am thinking there must have been a gale blowing at Cranbourne last night or else the stewards would have collected a fortune in finesQuote:
Originally Posted by Toohard
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...R221016&ms=vic
An interesting one from Shep Stewards Report. David Moran was in trouble for looking around when he was in the death in Race 6 - it would seem you cannot make it known that you want to give up the death (or lead?)
he motioned by way of head movement as an indication to other runners to progress forward to obtain the position in advance of him in the one wide line. In assessing an appropriate penalty stewards took into account Mr Moran’s immediate admission of wrong doing and guilty plea to the charge. Stewards also assessed the need for drivers to have awareness that motioning to other drivers in this manner is totally inappropriate and would not be condoned. Mr Moran was advised that had stewards been satisfied of any collusion between himself and any other driver the penalty would be a significant period of disqualification.
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#SPC20101603
While the most interesting thing from Melton was the Supplementary Report in relation to post 82
Tabcorp Park Melton 8 October 2016 - Race 6 Previously Adjourned Inquiry
At Tabcorp Park Melton on 8 October 2016, HRV Stewards questioned driver Rodney Petroff regarding the driving tactics adopted on Stunning Grin in Race 6 the ‘VHRSC Classic’. After initially adjourning the inquiry, Stewards subsequently interviewed trainer Vince Vallelonga and Arthur Anastasiou owner of Stunning Grin regarding the driving tactics adopted on Stunning Grin. On 21 October 2016, Mr Vallelonga and Mr Petroff were questioned further regarding this matter and after Stewards directed both licensees to provide their mobile telephones for the purpose of being forensically examined in accordance with the Australian Rules of Harness Racing, the inquiry was again adjourned to a date to be determined, to enable Stewards to consider any further evidence of relevance that was obtained.
I do not think I would have pleaded guilty to this one if I was Michael Quadra and copped an 8 week suspension! It makes it impossible to appeal the decision on the grounds that 'who says the posn behind the leader is more favourable to all horses compared to the death'. It is a fair whack - I can only think that the Stewards w/o saying it, were worried that he was there to work the favourite. This is the Stewards Report see R7
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic
which includes
Mr Quadara failed to take both a reasonable and permissible opportunity to direct Major Charge into a position behind the leader Queen Of Kings, so as to afford Major Charge a more favourable position, rather than remain in a position outside the leader, where the mare over-raced prior to giving ground from passing the 400m to finish in 7th and last position beaten approximately 26 metres
There is no way he would have got that suspension if his horse had not faded. Even if you accept that he must take the sit behind the leader you would think that he could have argued that the way his horse was pulling it was a big ask or that he feared that it may not settle and could choke down
ps Anybody know what the Adjourned Inquiry is about for Egodan's win at Melton last night?
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#MXM05111604
The adjourned Egodan inquiry is only about whip use
The interesting race in the stewards report was Josh Aiken getting 6 weeks.
I think he just made a split second decision to try a cute Gavin Lang type drive and it came unstuck
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...&fromstate=vic
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#MXM05111609
A well said and very true comment that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
But young Aiken still has a fair way to go to match Lang's effort the night he drove Lombo Skyrider at Harold Park in a Derby heat all them years ago. It staggers me how he only got 12 weeks, should have been much longer. To this day it still counts as the worst drive I've ever seen. And no I'm not talking here through my pocket.
Just a pity there's no replay available anywhere. It truly needs to be seen to be believed.
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...Q100502&ms=nsw
Last race at Menangle last night. Bad Habbott being declared a non runner. Why? I'm totally baffled by this one.
We await the stewards report Greg
Having now watched it, I can only wonder whether the starter missed something that caused BH to have to sprint to make the gate
The failure of the policy is evidenced by the following horse:
1 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
8 october: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, 3 pegs
15 October: draws 1, ambles out of the gate, ends up four fence, runs last (they do go sub 1.50)
22 October: draws 9, no change of tactics, hums out in 26.0, holds out the favourite, runs a record first half (53.6) for mares (I believe) and gets beat only 4metres, inquiry open but adjourned
19 November: draws 10, change of tactics: less aggressive, restrained and finishes 10th (they do go sub 1.51)
26 November: draws 2nd row, no change of tactics, held up for a run late and runs 8th
[perhaps the trainer/driver doesn't want to drive her out hard from Gate 1... next race is 3 December and she has drawn Gate 1, no change of tactics announced, so expect she will amble out of the gate like she has previously done from the gate, or like the latest announced tactics for her]
3 December: draws 1, no change of tactics, hums out to run 47.4 lead time (2300m), holds out the favourite, gets beat 23.4m, inquiry opened but adjourned...
(yes: the favourite posted in both races were trained/driven by the Trittons // no: i have no financial interest in the horses or in the races)
Either police it properly or get rid of it...
Wouldn't QDT and inquiry adjourned on Oct 22 and Dec 3 be policing it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sofoulis
Although it shouldn't need to be policed because it shouldn't be a rule.
Proper policing would also act as a deterrent... this is clearly not the case... clearly there was an issue on the 22nd of October - no ramifications apparent, so just push the "repeat" button and the merry-go-round continues...
Whilst it is a rule: onus is on trainers to comply and the stewards to enforce compliance.
Nothing about Clancys Fobwatch improved performance in the stewards report?
I don't know the answers but 1.52 over 2300 winning by near on 20metres doesn't get a QIP?
"The all-clear for this race was delayed to permit Stewards to review the start and, in particular, to examine whether BAD HABBOTT NZ was afforded a fair opportunity to make its position at the start. After reviewing the official vision and noting the evidence of the Stewards it was determined that when the mobile gate had commenced to move prior to BAD HABBOTT NZ facing the mobile barrier as prescribed by Rule 128(3) and declared that horse a non-runner."Quote:
Originally Posted by Diablo
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=PC031216
A prominent Menangle based Trainer contacted Stewards prior to fields being declared last week and informed them that their nominated horse had pulled up lame after trackwork and requested it not be drawn to run. The reply was, "Bad luck, you're getting a run". Trainer then advised that the horse will be scratched, which it was. This prevented another nominated runner from gaining a run. Ineptness or arrogance on the Stewards behalf?
Or are their hands tied?
M Purdon the Trainer/Driver of ULTIMATE MACHETE NZ explained that he had been disappointed in the performance. He stated that the horse had been in Australia about eight days and had trialled prior to leaving New Zealand. M Purdon added that despite the record time he felt that ULTIMATE MACHETE NZ should have performed better and intended to have blood tests done on Monday. He undertook to advise HRNSW Stewards of these results. ULTIMATE MACHETE NZ was examined by the Veterinary Surgeon who reported no apparent abnormalities.
Should the results of the blood test be given to the punting public so they can decide if they want to have a bet on this horse or not???? or are these results of the blood test available somewhere on HRNSW site???
Anyone know???
You may find it eventually in something like Stewards Supplementary Reports which can be found under Stewards Wrap which can be found under News Room eg.
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=32577
I pushed hard for this as I found follow up inquiries attached to any old meeting impossible to follow but what you are after is unlikely to appear in such a wrap until too late but we can hope Trish
Well done Kevin, that's great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
Well how good is that.........thanks Brendan.
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=32684Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
http://www.harness.org.au/news-artic...?news_id=32685
Which gives Tact Hayleys Delight a run and on the back of likely early leader Frith. Been a long time since Tact Hayleys Delight settled in the front half of the field. Last Gp1 winner I believe was Arden Rooney in Hunter Cup. Could be the best chance since. If not the $15 the place is still overs.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
Have you had a bet yet Breno?
"The reserves to be placed in the barrier positions of the withdrawn horses in order of withdrawal".
Oh, crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by arlington
Edit: Cash out feature on bet365 is handy.
Teecee, Have Faith in Me's form has not been too shabby since he had those hock injections -2 -2nds and a win. Obviously not racing at his magnificent best though
Be interesting to see how he goes in the future after the stewards disclosed that he had hock and knee problems. My interest is also in the injections and whether they are worth it or not.
I will be interested to see what the Stewards make of R3 at Hamilton today
It seemed like Matthew Craven driving Three Wise Machs torched the odds on fav Tell The Future
with his cousin Jason Lee coming over the top of them to win on Rocking Tess
It is interesting to note that the same 3 horses competed in a race at Horsham 12 days ago.
Apart from a different winner, pretty much the same thing happened with TTFuture leading and 3WM in the Death.
At Horsham they ran a 28.6 Q3 and despite having the sit on TTF's back Rocking Tess could not get past her and they finished 3rd and 4th
The driver of 3WMachs who finished 7th (Chris Svanosio on this occasion) was questioned about the performance of the horse and stated:
"Three Wise Machs was forced to race outside the leader without cover which the mare was not suited to and then Three Wise Machs raced keenly during the middle stages"
Today Matt Craven goes to the death again but this time eyeballs Tells The Future all the way and cranks up Q3 to 28.1 and sets it up for a swooper - Rocking Tess had the 1x2 but after that Q3 the field opened up a bit and she was able to get on the Odds on Faves back before the home str and prove too strong along the Sprint Lane this time
We have a QDT for Three Wise Machs - will that be it?
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ic#HMC12061704
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...IC#HSC31051705
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=HS310517
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=HM120617
Three Wise Machs raced outside the leader throughout and raced wheel to wheel with the leader, Tell The Future from the 1000m before finishing in 4th place beaten 13m. Driver Matthew Craven and trainer representative Rebecca East (Three Wise Machs) were questioned regarding the tactics adopted on this mare. Mr Craven explained that he unsuccessfully contested the lead during the early stages and was then obliged to race outside the leader. He added that he raced wheel to wheel with Tell The Future from the 1000m because Three Wise Machs was travelling comfortably compared to Tell The Future which was being placed under some pressure by is driver. Mr Craven added that in his experience when driving Three Wise Machs, the mare is one paced and not able to sprint quickly. He future stated that the mare had a tendency to race inconsistently and considered todays performance an improvement from its most recent form. Ms East confirmed the comments of Mr Craven.
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=HM120617
3 different stewards so I guess they would say they did not know that this testimony is totally at odds with what the stewards were told the week before! (see emboldened quote in the above post)
Only in Queensland:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...9217b1d9749eba
"Integrity Commissioner Ross Barnett vigorously defended the sentence on Friday and said he expected QRIC staff to be treated with a high level of respect”.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beltane
Even the one's stood down because of 'misconduct'?
3 months for taking the piss? Bit harsh.