Could someone please ask the question!!!

If Michael Formosa gets done six months for tapping on the gig and not improving his horses position when the opportunity arose can someone pleeaase tell me what Michael Hardy was doing on Chinghi in the fourth at Young today from the one gate?

Vision http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=YU011112&rn=4

In the first score up the horse galloped and was left hopeless until another horse broke and forced a false start. Take two and the fav although a bit rough in its gear just hands up, ends up 3 pegs and that was where he was going to stay, even though the horse didn't want to be there.

If the drive doesn't figure in the stewards report, then I will say here and now that Michael Formosa has no case to answer.:mad:

G'day Brad,
I didn't see the live action..only the replay you provided the link for..and on that replay alone, I can't agree that it was a crook drive mate..the horse was very iffy out of the gate and indeed almost throught the entire first corner, the only opportunity Hardy has to leave the rails early in the race was just as he has finished wrestling the horse into it's gait, and then the opportunity disappears until its all over! There was not one single opportunity for Hardy to even contemplate using a bit of shoulder to gain a run...and yes I agree with you wholeheartedly...the horse wasn't happy about it either!!

Cheers,
Dan

On the intermediate (I am calling it that because I don't know what else to call it) stewards report issued in conjunction with the race result, looks like the stewards are going to see it the same way as you Dan. Depends on what we see and what our personal expectations are on how we read into a race. Then we see how the stewards reported on the event.

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...sw#YUC01111201 The report said the horse showed gate speed, surely this is a typo or they are just not watching the start. What gate speed?

Dan, I agree with you that the horse was a handful and Hardy did a great job to get the horse around the first corner without causing mayhem. But if you are on the fav over 1700 at Young, wouldn't you think when that opportunity to get off the pegs into the back straight presented, putting the horse into the race instead of wrestling the animal and anchoring 3 back would be the reasonable expectation of an observer of the race. Hindsights a bitch but look at the 2nd qtr and you will see 'grand larceny sic' is taking place by the leader with a 34 something. Last start Chinghi lead from the SECOND row at Canberra 22/10/12 for an easy win. Before that he was racing some smart horses at the Eugowra carnival where he went extra well. I think any punter who has supported the horse has every right to expect a more positive drive from Hardy especially going into the back the first time.

RACE 4 – TABCORP PARK MENANGLE WHERE HORSES FLY SERIES HEAT – 1700 METRES
Pre race swab samples were taken from FIRST CLASS ACT.
A warning was placed on the record of CHINGHI which galloped free of interference at the first attempt of the score up.
A warning was placed on the racing record of AUNTY DAWN which galloped free of interference in the score up causing a false start.
CHINGHI made the first turn awkwardly inconveniencing PADDY CARMODY.
CHINGHI was inclined to over race during the middle stages.
FOUR JOKERS was obliged to race very wide rounding the home turn.
Stewards report Race 4
Rounding the home turn MCARDLES CHANCE hung out and contacted the sulky of ROCKET SEAL and galloped. A warning was placed on the record of MCARDLES CHANCE.
CHINGHI was held up for clear running in the home straight.
FIRST CLASS ACT was held up for clear running in the early stages of the home straight.
When questioned regarding the performance of AUNTY DAWN driver A Frisby explained that the mare hung out briefly on straightening for the run home making contact with the sulky of PADDY CARMODY. He said from this point AUNTY DAWN did not finish the race off as expected however he felt this was due to the inconvenience suffered in the incident.
Post race swab samples were taken from FORTY SEVEN GEMS.

Personally i looked at it different than the stewards as well. I believe he should have got off the fence when entering the back straight the first time and let it race freely as the horse has previously led and also raced in the death at previous runs and when your on the fav more should be expected IMO.

Brad and Greg,
I hear what you are both saying but the opportunity to get off the fence only appeared for a very short time, less than 2 or 3 seconds I'd reckon, sure he's on the fav but the horse has just given him a big surprise by blowing the first start and then going like a crippled crab for the first 300 metres, so speaking from a driver's perspective he wants to get the horse safely balanced up before he can even contemplate getting off the pegs and by that time the door shuts and does so for the rest of the event.

I really think it was a case of the horse doing what horses are good at....being a bit unpredictable and then paying for it because he has drawn the pole.

cheers,
Dan

Dan, my experience behind them is restricted to driving a few around on a tight training track probably getting on to 20 years ago now. Remember working an unraced 3yr old trailing two others. How I kept it out of the cart in front that day I will never know, reefing, head up legs all over the place, got a bit of a fright that day. Needless to say that was as far as any further ambitions of driving went...brains before bravery, but I loved it all the same. So I get what you are saying too, the driver showing horsemanship to keep Chinghi balanced and upright. It is my 'unprofessional' opinion only, that I thought he had a an undeniable window of opportunity to put his horse into the race in a steady manner, that would not have inconvenienced any other runner and would given his horse every chance to finish in a more 'forward' position. And really, thats just what it is, an opinion...everybodys got one, depends from what perspective you look at it.

Triple used to say that 'in his opinion' harness had more pressing issues with punters, not because of any unseen doping issues, but moreso the in-your-face blatantly crooked drives that were there for all to see and harming harness racings image no end. I'm not saying this was a crook drive, I am saying IMO, punters who did their arse on something that looked over the line on form, have reason to feel agrieved that the stewards didn't even ask the question. I can cop a good excuse, but lets have someone ask the question first.:(

Watched the race as it was run and after missing the first score-up the horse was almost out of its gear on the turn in to the straight for the restart and then tossed head around for the first lap.At the time I thought the driver should have hopped off of the fence down the back (first time) and considering that the horse obviously resented being restrained was surprised when he didn't.Watching the replay this opinion was reinforced.
As for the drive,in the old days someone would have said he was probably,"in the bag" but we don't say that anymore,do we?

Have put this one under this topic because someone DID ask the question, but I can't say that I agree with it. Kevin Pizzuto again falls foul of the stewards, this time charged with an unacceptable drive on Leading Lavros over the mile at Menangle. My feeling is he has earnt the stewards wraith because his horse has finished 51m last after applying strong pressure to the leader and odds-on favourite which went under by a lip with broken gear to boot. Stewards must have a dickens of a time deciding on what is acceptable and unacceptable, because (apart from his horse finishing last) I thought he was entitled to force the issue for as long as he did to see what the leader was made of. In his last 3 starts he has been fired out of the gate and contested the lead. How many times have we seen leaders continually hand up to Luke McCarthy trained horses in exactly the same circumstances making these 1609m affairs predictable and boring and Americanised.

It shits me no end when someone has the audacity to drive outside the normal patterns that we have come to expect and be punished for actually turning the race into a race. If you think I am talking through my pocket you are wrong. I actually backed the fav that withstood all that pressure and just got bloused but got beat fair and square. If he chose to appeal this I think he could win it easily however that all becomes moot now because of his behaviour in the stewards room that night defending this charge. He will serve the charge concurrently with the new charges of misconduct for which he has previous form, in fact as a result of a suspended sentence for misconduct on the track at Bankstown if I recall correctly that extra time will now be served. Kevin is obviously a very passionate man and his will to succeed at all costs has landed him in hot water on numerous occassions to his own detriment. I can defend his drive but cannot condone the lack of respect he has shown for the stewards. No matter how frustrated he must feel at these times, he has got to show restraint and respect, and there are other forums to fight these charges without making matters worse for yourself.

Does anyone view his drive in the same light as the stewards?

The story...http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=102495

The stewards report...http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=ME081212 (Cannot access the inquiry, can anyone help?)

Brad

I have to STRONGLY disagree. I thought the drive was absolutely woeful. Sure he has the right to come out of the gate and try get the lead, but it soon became apparent that was not going to happen. he persisted and persisted with his horse then compunding and being beaten 51m.

I think he got off incredibly lightly for his drive alone. if I had my way, drivers would be getting MONETARY penalties. Giving drivers like him 6 weeks means absolutely nothing. Give drivers a 5K or 10K fine and we will soon clean up this sort of behaviour.

I dont know Kevin at all, but he clearly is very passionate and knows how to train horses. However, he might be better suited having someone else drive them

PS - you should see the thought of the drive on other forums. Every single person thought it was disgraceful and worse still he is a repeat offender. They wanted him banned for life!

I'm with you Harvey.I'm pretty sure that one of the rules is something along the lines of "give your horse all possible chance to win the race" i'm pretty confident that a 54.6 first half for a standard M0 does not give your horse all possible chance.Shame because he looks like a talented trainer.

You make some compelling points Harvey, especially heavier monetary penalties for these type of offences. I found it extremely interesting to see on a previous appeal that K Pizzuto withdrew from, then tried to obtain a refund of the $250 deposit citing financial difficulties and his reliance on driving to earn a crust. If you listen to TVOR's logic on these matters (I am sure he would concur to some degree), that the penalties applied to harness racing are already far harsher than the other two codes. Getting that realistic balance is truly a job for someone who is pure of heart and tempered with experience (not much of that around I am afraid to say). I tend to agree that heavier fines would achieve better results but no-one ever wants to take that step.

On the critical score of Pizzuto, I also have said my piece about him on several occassions. He is no angel, reckon if you asked him he too would agree. It is obvious to all and sundry he has pissed off people in the past and never thinks twice about risky drives. With the suspended sentence now invoked he will now do as you wish and probably some others as well and just concentrate on training for a while. He is on track to surpass Miracle Mal in the suspension stakes at this rate.

On the attack for the lead issue, I may well be one out on this, but I am (a) sick to death of seeing drivers afforded the lead simply because they signal their intentions for a short period, get the lead, slam on the brakes and gain an unfair advantage over the rest of the field completing halves of over 65 and copping piss poor fines of going outside acceptable sectional times, all the while stealing money legally...and (b) watching Luke do exactly the same thing applying pressure to leaders that cannot sustain that effort for that long and cruise across to the lead untested...(and that isn't a cheap shot at Luke either).

with regard to penalties, my issue is that giving 6 weeks to Luke Mccarthy, Blake Fitzpatrick or Darren Hancock and many other is not the same as giving 6 weeks to Kevin Pizzuto or any other number of drivers. There is no real deterrent for these drivers. The only way we will improve driving standards is to impose monetary penalties. Whether that be $1000, $2000 or $5000. I can guarantee you that the level of driving will improve dramatically overnight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightymo

with regard to penalties, my issue is that giving 6 weeks to Luke Mccarthy, Blake Fitzpatrick or Darren Hancock and many other is not the same as giving 6 weeks to Kevin Pizzuto or any other number of drivers. There is no real deterrent for these drivers. The only way we will improve driving standards is to impose monetary penalties. Whether that be $1000, $2000 or $5000. I can guarantee you that the level of driving will improve dramatically overnight.

---

Could the reverse also be true, that a $1000 fine isn't as harsh on McCarthys of the world opposed to hobby driver?

absolutely, thats why the stewards should be able to have the discretion to give weeks or $'s depending on the situation. Funnily, its not the McCArthy's of the world who need the deterrents...

Yep there is no one size fits all for penalties but if we suspend those that are making lots of money from driving and fine those that aren't that should do it!

Incidently does anyone read the race this way? The favourite should have eased when the only real challenger for the lead was Leading Lavros, reducing speed to conserve energy and take the trail around the bend, forcing the eventual winner to either take the trail behind him or continue in the running line in the death. Then the favourite eases out again off the bend or perhaps sooner if the eventual winner has opted to pursue the death, goes forward to regain the lead, Leading Lavros hands up to obtain the trail into the race behind, according to the betting the best horse in the race, with the second favourite now either death seat or three back instead of the favourites back?

Perhaps I've watched too much US racing lately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dizzy

Incidently does anyone read the race this way? The favourite should have eased when the only real challenger for the lead was Leading Lavros, reducing speed to conserve energy and take the trail around the bend, forcing the eventual winner to either take the trail behind him or continue in the running line in the death. Then the favourite eases out again off the bend or perhaps sooner if the eventual winner has opted to pursue the death, goes forward to regain the lead, Leading Lavros hands up to obtain the trail into the race behind, according to the betting the best horse in the race, with the second favourite now either death seat or three back instead of the favourites back?

Perhaps I've watched too much US racing lately.

---

Perhaps, or perhaps you haven't seen enough of K Pizzutos!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dizzy

Incidently does anyone read the race this way? The favourite should have eased when the only real challenger for the lead was Leading Lavros, reducing speed to conserve energy and take the trail around the bend, forcing the eventual winner to either take the trail behind him or continue in the running line in the death. Then the favourite eases out again off the bend or perhaps sooner if the eventual winner has opted to pursue the death, goes forward to regain the lead, Leading Lavros hands up to obtain the trail into the race behind, according to the betting the best horse in the race, with the second favourite now either death seat or three back instead of the favourites back?

Perhaps I've watched too much US racing lately.

---

Very good point Dot. Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

I dare say that's what Luke would have done had it been his horse being taken on. I have noticed that he often lets the horse roll off the arm at its own speed and gradually work to the front. This is consistent with how more and more races play out in the states as you suggest Dot.

Easy for us too say this of course and Jarrod was entitled to think in the heat of the moment that a 30/1 shot with little chance of winning would press on and force him to run a 54 sec half. Hence why he probably didn't hand up. I know if I was Jarrod I would have done exactly the same thing.

oh dear...

RACE 2 – HOT TO TROT ICON PACE – 1609 METRES

Pre race blood samples were taken from COME ON FRANK and VILLAGEM.

The all clear was delayed to enable driver J Osborn ( FEELS LIKE MAGIC NZ) to view the official Stewards’ footage of an alleged incident in the home straight. After viewing the footage J Osborn did not wish to proceed with an objection.

Following J Osborn’s wish not to lodge an objection Trainer K Pizzuto ( FEELS LIKE MAGIC NZ) requested to view the Stewards’ footage with a view to an incident that occurred near the winning post on the first occasion. No objection was lodged and the Stewards declared all clear on the numbers as semaphored by the Judge.

Stewards have adjourned an inquiry into the conduct of K Pizzuto in the Stewards’ Room during the course of his abovementioned application to view the video and also with his conduct in the stabling area subsequent. Given K Pizzuto’s behaviour on the night, he was removed from the racecourse.

On returning after the race it was revealed that GLENGOWAN NZ had lost an offside front plate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mightymo

oh dear...

RACE 2 – HOT TO TROT ICON PACE – 1609 METRES

Pre race blood samples were taken from COME ON FRANK and VILLAGEM.

The all clear was delayed to enable driver J Osborn ( FEELS LIKE MAGIC NZ) to view the official Stewards’ footage of an alleged incident in the home straight. After viewing the footage J Osborn did not wish to proceed with an objection.

Following J Osborn’s wish not to lodge an objection Trainer K Pizzuto ( FEELS LIKE MAGIC NZ) requested to view the Stewards’ footage with a view to an incident that occurred near the winning post on the first occasion. No objection was lodged and the Stewards declared all clear on the numbers as semaphored by the Judge.

Stewards have adjourned an inquiry into the conduct of K Pizzuto in the Stewards’ Room during the course of his abovementioned application to view the video and also with his conduct in the stabling area subsequent. Given K Pizzuto’s behaviour on the night, he was removed from the racecourse.

On returning after the race it was revealed that GLENGOWAN NZ had lost an offside front plate.

---

Did K Pizzuto get a bit angry on this forum a while back?
Apologies if I am incorrect.

Yes he did Brenno, the thread was locked by admin because the tone had turned decidedly nasty. Had a quick look at the thread concerned to refresh my memory (wasn't personally active on the forum at this stage myself) and there was a fair bit of unbridled agro from a bunch of posters who no longer post or have since been banned.

The thread was titled One of the worst things Ive seen on a harness racing track EVER!!!! and looking back at the race it just stunk.

His latest outburst just can't be ignored, brushed under the mat or paid lip service...look where D Nikolic is right now on exposed evidence and up until now Kevin still is training. Must be nearly out of Get out of Jail Free cards.

Moving on to another lead attack incident and to prove its not endemic to NSW, here is a classic from Redcliffe tonight, Race 6. The $1.90 fav tries to hold out from the pole while a $150/1 shot presses on for the lead which is just not up for grabs. Attacker eventually capitulates to finish 73m behind the winner, but the fav who attempts to resist its challenge in vain is gassed and finishes 31m behind the winner. Just a couple of questions...how long does the attacker W Waltisbuhl get for his actions? At what point does Whitaker accept some responsibility for his animal and stop resisting the challenge which is killing his horses chances? And how do these drives compare to Pizzutos?

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...ld#REC19121210 for results and video replay.

Ive said it 15 times before and I'll say it again. Giving Waltibushl 4 weeks is completely pointless. The only way we will fix this situation is by giving them MONETARY fines.

I'll bet anything that this will fix things pretty quickly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loz1502

No doubt could be endless questions asked every race meeting as to tactics of some drivers.
Where to does this drive of Royce Gregory-Jack rate?? Adjourned enquiry to check betting records.
http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=WW141212&rn=7

---

That was bad, EVERYBODY on course was looking around dumbfounded at the 1600, let alone by the 800m. In the marshalling yard for the next race I heard one driver ask Gregory-Jack "Where are you taking your holiday?". That was probably the only funny point, but it did set up a nice mile rate for Renayben! He has a great final 400-600m when he can get a sit and unleash. After his first victory at Wagga in about August I thought he would have had some more wins since then. Best of luck with Our Usain Bolt tonight, he went good in front at Wagga last start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

That was bad, EVERYBODY on course was looking around dumbfounded at the 1600, let alone by the 800m. In the marshalling yard for the next race I heard one driver ask Gregory-Jack "Where are you taking your holiday?". That was probably the only funny point, but it did set up a nice mile rate for Renayben! He has a great final 400-600m when he can get a sit and unleash. After his first victory at Wagga in about August I thought he would have had some more wins since then. Best of luck with Our Usain Bolt tonight, he went good in front at Wagga last start.

---

Don't forget Renayben tonight if she can get a run up close with cover she will be hard to hold out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loz1502

4 weeks for Waltibushl, Whitaker doesn't rate a mention.
http://www.harness.org.au/stewards-r...fm?mc=RE191212

No doubt could be endless questions asked every race meeting as to tactics of some drivers.
Where to does this drive of Royce Gregory-Jack rate?? Adjourned enquiry to check betting records.
http://www.trotstv.com.au/?mc=WW141212&rn=7

---

Pretty sure your boy in question is chuckling all the way to the bank, has nothing but contempt for punters and knows he can run rings around the stewards out there judging on Cloudy Beach's latest display 22/12 at Albury, stepping up in distance, going around in a FFA, Change of Tactic placed saying the horse would be driven less aggressively from the second row. The horse gets a dream run from the start that allows it to gain the lead, isn't hunted up at any stage and gaps them on the top corner. MR a bit slower (3 secs) from it previous run. What a *@%!!ing joke. He tells the stewards he is going to do one thing, does the opposite and gets away with blue murder. My rant isn't about the COT rule...its how the stewards are not doing anything about blatant rorting. Horse gets hunted along previous start at 30/1 and drops dead. Same horse 4 weeks later at 4/1 strolls to the front, held together, gaps 'em. The wild wild west still exists, not in the USA but the good old South West Slopes and Riverina.

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...sw#ALC22121207 result and vision
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...sw#ALC22121207 stewards report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loz1502

Thanks Breno we were stoked with his run, was like an early Xmas present when we drew to lead. Will need a lot of luck tonight but as the saying goes "gotta be in it to win it".
Be interesting to see what comes of the Royce thing, wouldn't like to be putting a market up for the outcome. The ones you think look obvious get nothing and the not so bad ones get weeks.

---

You said it Loz...don't these blokes know how to use replay technology...Blind Tom can see what is going on out there, whats wrong with these clowns.

Its hardly picking races apart, its just the ones that stand out begging to be enquired into but nothing happens (or very little). The Parkes race is an almost carbon copy of a race that Trent Rue was involved in on 23 March at Bathurst. He drove the leader Happy Camper which resisted the relentless attack of Kenmore Star. He got six weeks for that, which I thought was a bit rough. Kenmore Star eventually broke in its attempt to challenge and John O'Shea got about 4 weeks I think. Exactly the same type of tactics employed, almost the same result for both horses and at Parkes the stewards do nothing. The charges laid against the drivers still astounded me because at Bathurst for mine, Trent had clearly signalled the lead was not available and got 6 weeks. Not a word at Parkes. Consistency is a word foreign to these stewards. Someone mentioned it earlier somewhere, the gene pool is indeed quite shallow in the stewards ranks at present.

No difference to me Brad and also nothing about cutting the inside runner off in same incident.
Have a look at race 1 at Dubbo on Boxing night 3 wide the journey and nothing.
And what seem's worse is at Parkes the head shirang was on duty for the night.

Like Greg pointed out Sanders was the Chairman at Parkes and also the Albury meeting...disappointing to say the least.

Just to clear something up Loz "stewards intend to interview driver R Gregory-Jack regarding the tactics he adopted given his notification of Change Of Tactics" does that mean we have not heard the end of it yet? If not, should that not read an inquiry has been opened into the tactics employed by R Gregory-Jack?

I backed the winner here and will count it as the luckiest collect I will get this year. Check out Eurasian Hanover the fav in the last, come from an impossible position in a mares trot at the last in Melbourne. A couple of the girls got out of shape at just the right time to allow Nathan Jack to slip back to the inside and keep getting the breaks with the leader going off stride metres from the line. But I am sitting there watching Eurasian Hanover not just come in contact with the pegs but in the end just decide to drive straight over the top of them like they weren't even there. So, being the eternal pessimist, I watched and waited for the horse to receive its inevitable disqualification...which never came. Dumbstruck, I just checked the vision again and still cannot believe it held the race. Sometimes I think just what parallel universe do I live in. So the link is here, what do you guys think? How many pegs must you drive under before it is deemed you have gained an unfair advantage?:confused: The stewards even noted it came into contact with pegs and used the sprint lane. What am I not getting?

http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...X040113&ms=vic Race 12

I will invest all of my collect in lottery tickets in the morning!:cool: