As Excel Stride attacks leader Mach Beauty in a 26.7, second quarter, For A Reason sits back and let's go round the turn to win by 20m in a fantastic 1:50 flat!
Good to see him run such a time and let's hope he can repeat such an effort.
Printable View
As Excel Stride attacks leader Mach Beauty in a 26.7, second quarter, For A Reason sits back and let's go round the turn to win by 20m in a fantastic 1:50 flat!
Good to see him run such a time and let's hope he can repeat such an effort.
Further to my thread entitled 'Lauren Panella' from last week, this time we had the roles reversed and Lukey doing the attacking in 26 quarters carving up the $1.20 favourite driven by Panella. Was always going to happen after the job Panella did on him last week went unpunished!
Hey Jeff. Watched a replay of the race and i dont think anything Luke did was payback. I doubt when you have horses of this quality they worry about playing games. The last thing they would want to do is flatten there horses when they have so many big races coming up in the next few weeks. Go watch the race again and i think you will see Lukes horses started to over race down the back straight. Nothing more then that.
Ummm.....yeah....Excel Stride always pulls in it's races and Luke regularly has trouble holding horses lol
Well obviously Excel Stride really wanted to go and Luke being the experienced driver knew that it was too early for that. Remember Luke is not a superhuman, he doesn't have the strength of ten men.
I think there is a groundswell of people within the industry that have had a gutful of Lauren and her belief that the front is hers and look out if you think its not. I understand why she has this attitude as 90% of her winners lead and when she drives one of the pace her win percentage is far inferior.
I don't know if thats partularly true or not but for sake of my post, lets just say its true. It's a good tactic to employ. Might ruin a few horses chance here and there because would have been better off handing up. But if Lauren, or any driver, gets a reputation for holding the front at all costs, it can very well pay dividends in the future with getting soft leads and/or left alone in front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pena
(note: vested interest as Lauren regularly drives my horses and led/won on my horse on Saturday @ Menangle)
The lead clearly is a prized position, but it is not pre-determined. If others want the lead, have the gate speed and the ability to back it up at the end of a race, then it is equally theirs for the taking.
Lauren (or anyone) handing up on a $1.70 favourite over a mile that has done all of its best racing in front would be more of an issue. My horse led and won from gate 2 and had to contest for the lead early-on but backed it up by holding on at the finishing post - if she hadn't had fought for the lead, it would be a different story. I can understand your point Jack, if Lauren was leading at all costs and the horse's compounding most of the time then I would expect people to be very frustrated. But I think she is weighing up the horse's ability and delivering at a decent strike rate which suggests she is employing the right tactics for the right horses more often than not.
In my (uneducated) opinion, the unfortunate over-racing of Excel Stride taints the great effort of For A Reason's win in 1.50 - but F.A.R's performance means he probably would have won regardless of the tactics intentionally or unintentionally employed by anyone in the race.
Thanku Sofoulis,
"In my (uneducated) opinion, the unfortunate over-racing of Excel Stride taints the great effort of For A Reason's win in 1.50 - but F.A.R's performance means he probably would have won regardless of the tactics intentionally or unintentionally employed by anyone in the race."
This thread was created about For A Reason not Lauren or her driving tactics or Luke wanting the lead, its to celebrate a former great juvenile fighting back to some glory at an older age and how that is good for racing and our sport...
If you want to talk about Lauren then as Scabscat mentioned, he has a whole thread dedicated to her, out of about 7 posts in this thread not one person until Sofoulis actually mentioned FAR...
So does anyone apart from Sofoulis have anyone anything to say about him???
Yes, well.....For A Reason would have finished in the same place it settled(3 pegs) if the leaders weren't carving out 26 quarters up front, the same as Mister Presley would have finished back with the cap catchers the week before if Panella didn't serve it up to the leader. Im looking forward to some great battles between these two leading stables over the next few months, and a few more Steven Bradbury moments when they do......Quote:
Originally Posted by Maorisidol
For A Reason was simply stunning to beat the calibre of horse's by some 20 mts, no easy feat running the sectional's they did. I'm dirty my mare didn't get in foal to him last season but them's the break's.
So do you not rate FAR's performance?Quote:
Originally Posted by ScabsCat
He went outstanding, but had conditions run to suit at the same time.
Fantastic run by For a Reason. But how good must Beautide be. He might be the next ex-Tassie superstar since Flashing Red.
Adam you are right I think you are somewhat blinded by your allegiances. Watch this space as like I said previously alot of people have a gutfull of the attitude and it seems very coincidental that in the last two weeks two horses have taken control of their drivers, Suave Stuey for the Red Army and Excel for the Blue and Green Army. Coincidence that these two class horses have taken control of their drivers two weeks apart. I don't believe it. The Red Army took on the Black and White army in Brisbane and have now turned their attention to the Blue and Green Army. Pesonally I love the competition but truthfully someone is going to lose. I am not sure who but can't wait to find out.
Andrew Bensley - Trotting: Luke McCarthy has been given 6 week suspension for an unacceptable drive on Excel Stride*@TabcorpMenangleSat night. Starts Oct 23
Exhibit 1 In Appeal - 28/9/13 Menangle Race 7.
It seems that Lauren is becoming the new Koala Bear of the industry.
Luke is a morale to get off on appeal.
I would think he would NOT want that as an exhibit at all - for then his drive screams of paybackQuote:
Originally Posted by Pena
[VVV] IMO that's a VERY inconsistent approach by the Stewards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toohard
As I have already said in another Forum, if they view such efforts in a bad light then they either jam BOTH Lauren & Luke up for their respective drives (Lauren 2 weeks ago on Suave Stuey Lombo AND Luke on Saturday night with Excel Stride) or the let BOTH slide.
Jamie, never a truer word has been spoken! Spot onQuote:
Originally Posted by Triple V
Luke is no moral to get off on appeal. Dont kid yourself, he has absolutely no chance he may as well not even appeal. He shouldn't have got 6 weeks i agree totally it was incorrect he should have received 6 months!!! What he did was a discrace on the trotting industry, they should have called him in and cut up his licence. Excel Stride wasn't pulling Luke was chassing it up to lay the pressure on he gave his horse no chance of winning. Some trotting people in a weird world watch the replay no the race no the horses it was clear as day a tactical drive to help the stable mate and intern bury the leader. Pretty simple i repeat again Luke Mcarthy a discrace! No wonder the trots in NSW are going down hill with the main stable having to turn to these tactics with a champion like Excel Stride.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pena
This drive was no worse than the Suave Stuey drive. Although the 47kg girl seems to be an acceptable excuse. Well it doesn't cut it with me. If Reid Sanders and his team want to take the hard line position then go for it, but just be consistent. In 3 weeks Panella had two incidents of not being able to hold a horse "APPARENTLY", with the COT drive on Longtan Luke and the Suave Stuey. Penalty - ZERO. When you see people like Adam Francis getting 6 weeks for I am still not sure why, there definitely seems to be a massive bias towards the new golden girl of harness racing.
Hi Jack
Would have to agree with you totally, just watched all drives again on the horses you have mentioned and can't understand how Luke get's time and Lauren not a thing. I would like to know what the stewards see different in those races to what i'm looking at. In know way am I having a go at Lauren as I think she is doing a great job but in saying that if she apparently can't hold certain horse's maybe she should not be driving them.
There have been a lot of curious decisions by stewards in recent months. I can think back to August 10 when the now infamous "Mister Chow" race occurred. Ashlee receives a 6 week suspension for going to the rear and disappearing at the horses previous start, then on August 10, Mister McRooney a noted leader hands the lead up to Mister Chow who leads from barrier 5. No COT on either horse, Mister Chow is backed into even money after it's "disappointing" run the week before. And not a question asked by the Stipes. I believe that to be the moment harness racing took a turn for the worse in NSW.
I am a massive advocate for the removal of the Change of Tactics rule.
To start with I do not believe that the rule helps the everyday punter in the TAB it only helps the professinal punter. The rule takes away any initiative and can lead to uncompetitive racing especially when a favourite going further forward.
The sooner the rule is scraped the better. It amazes me that the participants don't take action through their representative to get rid of the rule as I have never spoken to anyone that thinks the rule is either good for the sport or the participants.
I agree Boydy, you either have to police it fully or get rid of the rule. I don't think it was simply an oversight on August 10 however.
Dallas, the facts are any fair minded person can see the Suave Stuey drive and the Excel drives were almost identical and produced the same result both horses sets of horses getting beaten 30+ metres. In each circumstance both drivers gave their horses no chance of winning. Adam said in one of his previous posts his horse has always won from the front, but Adam Mach Beauty has never been subject to a 26.9 second quarter. By holding in this instance MB had no hope, particularly being first up.
On the rules of racing, if a race is run too slow the driver of the leader gets fined. If the race is run too fast the driver in the death gets suspended. Does any one find this strange???
I am sure glad that my livelyhood does not depend on the current rules of harness racing.
Gday DallasQuote:
Originally Posted by mango
I agree. Maybe the times had something to do with it. They went 1.55 in SSL race. Ideal Scott went 1.56 same night. C3-c5 1.56 too.
Saturday night 1.50. And (I'm not suggesting anything!) the stablemate won Saturday night.
The rule COT is one of the best rules in the industry. If your betting on harness racing yu have every right to know whether the driver or trainer has decided to vary there tactics. I don't want then going forward one day and back on another willy nilly!!! They should always have to declare if the are changing tactics or else we would have cowboys doing watevaaaa they like going back one week sitting 4br pulling horses up then spearing to the front the next week. By the way without professional punters you would need the COT rule cause the drivers would be racing for 200bucks prize money! Punters deserve to know there the reason the drivers have a job! Don't forget thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
The drives were kind of similar except suave stuey limbo attempted to find the lead but couldn't so sat up Mach stride actually ran along down the back straight I'm not sure why people are suggesting stuey attacked he didn't he was half a metre behind Luke was the one running along, it should also be noted stuey had previously been leading and running along so sitting in the death attempting to run along would have been acceptable. Now MB a known leader was never handing up, Excel stride is not known and has barely if ever attacked in the 2nd and 3rd qtr and attacked a horse which freely runs along in front he beat option anyway would of been to sit on MB who would of still run along and then Excel stride could have his chance to come off his back in straight and as we know MB would have run time and being first up Excel would have got his chance. In doing wat Luke did his option was not to sit outside MB and win his option was clearly to bury MB with no thought of winning himself. The week before Lauren still had thoughts of trying to win! That is the difference here Lauren attempted to win on stuey Luke made no attempt to win just to bury and help his stable mate... Like I said he should have got 6 months!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Pena
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScabsCat
[VVV] If the rule remains in place then not only must they police it fully but they must police it accurately & police it in the spirit with which the rule was first instituted. It's going back a little bit however in what was nothing short of a classic piece of Keystone Cops style slapstick...I can vividly recall former NSW Chief Steward Bill Cable quite bloodymindedly fining Luke McCarthy when driving Roman Stride for snagging off the gate and coming with one late go at them to win the race.
It apparently mattered not that Roman Stride, the short priced fav, won the race exactly BECAUSE of the fact Luke snagged off the gate instead of adopting his customary style of leaving for the front & duly becoming involved in an early burn with at least a trio of other fast beginners drawn to his inside. All that apparently mattered to Bill & his Panel was that he was 'not driven as per normal'.
The inescapable fact that had he been driven as per normal, the short priced fav. would almost certainly have gone down & the COT rule would have in fact served to defeat its own purpose by way of dudding the Punters on said short price fav. who's interests it was designed to protect, well...it apparently never crossed their minds. Honestly. WTF????? The COT rule is an absolute abomination & it should be dispensed with immediately if not sooner.
[VVV] Could not agree more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boydy
Got to agree with Boydy and VVV, Get rid of the rule and make racing more interesting for the fans and the everyday punter. As I mentioned in an earlier post, There's nothing worse than seeing a $1.10 pop just roll around and win as it pleases. I'm sure the big punters would disagree, But I'm sure that racing would be a greater spectacle if you didn't have to disclose your tactics and the chance of backing a winner at longer odds would certainly come into play and would increase turnover.
Im not sure how people believe taking away the COT rule will help you back longer price winners and ill tell you 100% taking away the COT will only make turnover decrese thats for sure. What are you under the belief punters will bet more not knowing what is gong on and just hope for the best. The turnover is already low on say Menanglke harness on a Tues or Saturday and say the pool is 20 k it will drop 5K per race on some races with no COT rule in place. for the person who said roman stride was 1.10 and was snagged of the gate and Luke received a fine he received the fine for not letting stewards know of his intentions to restrain at the start as the horse normally goes forward. You said if he went forward he may have cost him the race well the COT rule didnt cost him the race, he is allowed to go back at the start but he should of clarrified that before restraining. All punters are benefited my the COT rule it allows you to have a better understanding of how the race will be run and keeps fairness in the game as without it you can basically do as you like. Pulling horses up would become stock standard going back to last for 3 weeks then charging to the front the next week... sure that will entice people to bet...
Until such time as the big punters (whom the COT rule was brought in to placate) decide to step up & contribute towards service fees, agistment, feed, Vet & Training bills...they can go and slam right up their respective fundamentals...vigorously, hard & sideways...that which they have totally erroneously come to see as their God given 'right' to know exactly what an Owner's horse may or may not be doing when the arms of the Mobile Barrier fold back.
Maorisidol. I think that For A Reason, or Frank the Tank if I remember correctly is an absolute champion. To come back from what happened to him and run a time like that was just crazy! Lets just hope he can keep those times going until the Miracle Mile and then that will be a very exciting race! Because I personally cant wait til this champion goes up against some of the old and new!! I just don't know what story would be better. Mat's Miracle or if he was to win a race like the Mile.
I like ur enthusiasm but please... For a reason will not get an invite for the miracle mile it ran on good race off a farcically run race! Well done on winning but if you look who was running on with him Mr Prezly yeah there's a miracle mile candidate not!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollie
I understand your point but unfortunately without the big punters you wouldn't have vet bills and feed and adjistment, you wouldn't be racing well maybe for hay bails. I think people fail to realise the big punters keep trainers and drivers in a job that's how it is. And what are you saying owners should be shifty aNd not declare what they are doing? All the COT is asking for is to keep the sport fair if you normally lead and your going back you should say so keep the racing fair and just. No one wants some cowboy going back one week and forward anotherQuote:
Originally Posted by Hollie
Quote:
Originally Posted by german
Well if you take a look at Mr Presleys last two races, you wouldn't rule him out to be entering the lead up races. Sure he was following for a reason up and was beat by twenty metres. But remember that F.A.R did run 1:50 flat and I know that that may not have happened if Luke didn't drive Excel the way that he did, but that doesn't mean that either of these horses wouldn't have run the races that they did. You have to give these two horses some credit. It will be tough for them to even get near the Mile, but I am not ruling either of them out. If you don't think that way, then that doesn't worry me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by german
I know that it would be tough for either of them to even get a shot at the miracle mile but you don't rule them out because of the status. F.A.R may have only run one race in that time, but he is only three runs back. Hell, if he ran that time I wonder what Beautide is capable of. All that I can say is that we don't see times like that everyday and I know that it may not have been like that if they didn't go hard at the start, but they still did run that time. Its not like them horses don't just sit there they still have to run trying to keep up with the front horses. I am saying that I am not ruling them out of being contenders in the lead ups, but I don't care if anyone doesn't feel the same.