Sign in to follow this  
Beach Racing

Ben Hope Rulz

45 posts in this topic

12 minutes ago, Beach Racing said:

How did this horse keep the win after completely extinguishing the chances of another runner at the top of the straight?

 

From the Stewards report:

Race 8 GOLDEN EDGE NELSON HANDICAP PACEVideo  Video 
SAYING GRACE - broke at the start. Driver R May advised that the removeable deafeners on this gelding failed to activate due to the cord breaking.
BLACK ART - hampered at the start. Again hampered leaving the final bend. Junior Driver A Fitzgerald was fined the sum of $100 for failing to activate this gelding's hopple shorteners.
SUMMER WEALTH - broke at the start losing considerable ground. Placed on the unruly for its future standing starts at the request of trainer R Dunn.
THE DIRECTOR - broke at the start and again nearing the 1600 metres.
JOEY MAGUIRE - broke at the start.
LAYTONS LASS - broke when placed in restricted room to the inside of BENHOPE RULZ leaving the final bend losing its chance.
BENHOPE RULZ - placed LAYTONS LASS in restricted room exiting the final bend resulting in the mare breaking and losing its chance. Junior Driver B Hope(assisted by senior horseman D Dunn) admitted driving carelessly at this stage of the race. After hearing submissions on penalty the JCA imposed a fine of $450.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hunterthenutter
17 minutes ago, Thejanitor said:

From the Stewards report:

Race 8 GOLDEN EDGE NELSON HANDICAP PACEVideo  Video 
SAYING GRACE - broke at the start. Driver R May advised that the removeable deafeners on this gelding failed to activate due to the cord breaking.
BLACK ART - hampered at the start. Again hampered leaving the final bend. Junior Driver A Fitzgerald was fined the sum of $100 for failing to activate this gelding's hopple shorteners.
SUMMER WEALTH - broke at the start losing considerable ground. Placed on the unruly for its future standing starts at the request of trainer R Dunn.
THE DIRECTOR - broke at the start and again nearing the 1600 metres.
JOEY MAGUIRE - broke at the start.
LAYTONS LASS - broke when placed in restricted room to the inside of BENHOPE RULZ leaving the final bend losing its chance.
BENHOPE RULZ - placed LAYTONS LASS in restricted room exiting the final bend resulting in the mare breaking and losing its chance. Junior Driver B Hope(assisted by senior horseman D Dunn) admitted driving carelessly at this stage of the race. After hearing submissions on penalty the JCA imposed a fine of $450.
 

rules for some and not others if it was owner trainer driver it be gone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive already read that! To me it reads stuff the owners of Laytons lass who were a live chance of getting the money on the turn. Oh shit but we better blame someone. Ok let's give him a $450 fine for careless driving. Clearly he wasn't going to defend the charge, why because there is a video with his hand in the cookie jar! I think Ben hope is a great kid and will have a long and successful career in this industry BUT what is he going to learn from this fine? I guarantee the owners will pay it for him if not mum and dad. Clearly this horse has ability and it won't be its last race win but in my opinion it was the one and only reason laytons lass galloped at the top of the straight when it was a realistic win chance. Ben would learn more by having this win taken away from the the owners and seeing the real consequences that your driving can have instead of being slapped with a fine someone else will pay. I think it would make him a better driver also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The thing is that  the ridiculous rule that is currently in is a total farce.

For The winner to have been put out Layton’s Lasswould have needed to prove that it would have beaten  Ben Hope Rulz and needed to finish I think in the first 5 to have an enquiry.

It is just one of the blatantly stupid rules that need amendment or this crap will continue

Not the stipes fault but someone from HRNz who brought it in without thinking about the consequences.

They need to admit they have stuffed up and rectify

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's the rule Brodie than your correct what an absolute joke. The first thing terry has to do after having his legs taken out is return his horse to the proper gait and then try make ground on them when they are going full clip 300m to go, no wonder there was no enquiry with a dumb rule like that Terry wasting his time even thinking about it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hunterthenutter
1 hour ago, Shad said:

Must admit was surprised no inquiry, other surprise was a suspension for a senior driver, nelson meeting full of surprises.What going on up there.

the devils own dun same thing at addington to aloka one night run in and put it into a gallop and got away with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Beach Racing said:

If that's the rule Brodie than your correct what an absolute joke. The first thing terry has to do after having his legs taken out is return his horse to the proper gait and then try make ground on them when they are going full clip 300m to go, no wonder there was no enquiry with a dumb rule like that Terry wasting his time even thinking about it. 

 

 

3 hours ago, Hunterthepunter said:

the devils own dun same thing at addington to aloka one night run in and put it into a gallop and got away with it

As I said at that time....its all a farce.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
6 hours ago, Beach Racing said:

If that's the rule Brodie than your correct what an absolute joke. The first thing terry has to do after having his legs taken out is return his horse to the proper gait and then try make ground on them when they are going full clip 300m to go, no wonder there was no enquiry with a dumb rule like that Terry wasting his time even thinking about it. 

 

Yes that is the rule!

Happens all the time, HRNZ brought the rule in so that there weren’t as many enquiries!!!

Sorry,  but I wouldn’t call it a joke as it isn’t funny.

The 10 hit rule also isn’t a joke!!

HRNZ should admit that they have stuffed up and amend those rules, but we know they won’t as they will not admit fault!

Yes I know there will be “The Brodster” knockers that will come on and defend it but at the end of the day Guess who is on the money?

“The Brodster”

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule is the same as Australia. Why promote a horse that gets 2nd to first when it wasn't involve in the incident. Does it deserve to get 1st. But minimum penalty should be at least 2 weeks suspension plus a fine. Fine only is a joke.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
5 hours ago, dkc said:

The rule is the same as Australia. Why promote a horse that gets 2nd to first when it wasn't involve in the incident. Does it deserve to get 1st. But minimum penalty should be at least 2 weeks suspension plus a fine. Fine only is a joke.

 

So because the rule is the same as in OZ means it is right?

There Rule is probably there because they have so many meetings and any enquirey would make a mess of programme timing!

If a horse wipes out other horses, you beleive it should retain its finishing position then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brodie, just to add to the above, re time involved for enquiries, in USA they have a system at the gallops anyway, where they , the stewards, have a phone down to the track. If interference has happened they immediately, on return to scale, talk to the jockeys involved,( while fresh in their mind and before any excuses can be thought up)and make their decision then, which is fait accompli.This means that the stewards have more power, could be a good thing, but everyone knows where they stand, and enquiries, after a short review, are settled in an instant....gets rid of the extended  Judicial system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dkc said:

The rule is the same as Australia. Why promote a horse that gets 2nd to first when it wasn't involve in the incident. Does it deserve to get 1st. But minimum penalty should be at least 2 weeks suspension plus a fine. Fine only is a joke.

 

To use your example, It isn't about "promoting the second horse", it's about "relegating the offender".

We shouldn't have horses being able to completely eliminate the chances of another runner - irrespective of whether that runner was a winning chance at the time or not - and still being able to go on and retain their position at the end of the race. That actually provides an incentive for drivers to take desperate measures and cop the fine or a brief suspension, whilst retaining the spoils of victory.

The old system of being automatically relegated to the position behind the horse you interfered with was a much stronger deterrent against foul or careless driving, removing the financial reward, not to mention knowing that a fine and/or suspension was also coming your way if it was your neglect that caused the incident.

Fair enough that connections can't lodge a protest if they get flattened and finish 100m last, but the stipes should be required to do so.

All protests in fact, should be lodged by the stipes to eliminate the "mates not wanting to protest against mates" thing that happens all to often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JackSprat said:

To use your example, It isn't about "promoting the second horse", it's about "relegating the offender".

We shouldn't have horses being able to completely eliminate the chances of another runner - irrespective of whether that runner was a winning chance at the time or not - and still being able to go on and retain their position at the end of the race. That actually provides an incentive for drivers to take desperate measures and cop the fine or a brief suspension, whilst retaining the spoils of victory.

The old system of being automatically relegated to the position behind the horse you interfered with was a much stronger deterrent against foul or careless driving, removing the financial reward, not to mention knowing that a fine and/or suspension was also coming your way if it was your neglect that caused the incident.

Fair enough that connections can't lodge a protest if they get flattened and finish 100m last, but the stipes should be required to do so.

All protests in fact, should be lodged by the stipes to eliminate the "mates not wanting to protest against mates" thing that happens all to often.

But the only winner is the second horse and whoever backed it when they don't deserve to win the race. They were not involved in the incident. So is the best result not a hefty suspension and a fine. Or a payment of part of the winning stake to the horse that was knocked over.

People bet on these horses so there are others effected by putting dividend bearers out.

I'm just giving another perspective

Why doesn't the horse that gets knocked over get 50% of the stake won by the horse that finishes in the dividend bearing place. That way the horse that is effected gets something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharing the prizemoney with the effected runner has been tossed around as a possible solution in the past, but then you start getting into the area of rewarding victims, not unlike the soccer players who are more than happy to throw themselves to the ground in search of a free kick. There's also the knock on effect. What happens if the victim of the interference then interferes with 3 or 4 others? Who gets what?

The only real deterrent is relegation. Being allowed to retain a placing after causing interference is simply laying the groundwork for desperate drivers to "do whatever it takes" to win knowing that the prizemoney, the punting proceeds, and the sling are all safe!

There will always be an element of luck in racing, and being the fortunate beneficiary of someone elses foul driving relegation is just another way to get lucky.

In my view any rule that contributes to cleaner racing is a good rule, and you can't get a much stronger deterrent than being relegated to behind your victim, as the punishment will always fit the crime - the worse the interference you cause, the further back you go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

under the new rules designed to have few inquirys the horse interfering would hold the posistion it finished in but stake would be paid to interfered horse and interfered horse declared late scr but the last two rules haven,t been implemented unless interfered horses owners protest,one such case ocurred in southland last season.i could be wrong but there might have been a lawyer in ownership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, gazza123 said:

under the new rules designed to have few inquirys the horse interfering would hold the posistion it finished in but stake would be paid to interfered horse and interfered horse declared late scr but the last two rules haven,t been implemented unless interfered horses owners protest,one such case ocurred in southland last season.i could be wrong but there might have been a lawyer in ownership

Pretty sure for this to happen the affected horse has to first finish in the 1st 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, gazza123 said:

Could be but pretty sure its owners call,not the riu stipes then jca rule on

Gazza, Owners have no day whatsoever!

Up to the Stipes to call for the enquirey but wont be one unless the horse that is checked is placed in the first five!

Then it is pretty hard to prove anything!

Blatantly stupid Rule in place and needs changing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this