Dubious rides?????
 

I would be extremely interested to hear any opinions on the rides of.........
1) Mearas
Darren Beadman(slaughtered,given no chance)
2) Zipping
Steven Arnold (same as above)
they can bull******** about bad barriers etc. all they want.
how can robbo and newitt get 3 months for similar rides?
if a horse is in last place and the jockey does not move on it until they straighten up for the run in,how can stewards not enquire??How was it in the best possible position to win .place??
you tell me,I'd be interested to know.
PS
Please don't tell me they were victims of circumstances

Whats the alternative?
Come 5 / 6 / 7 wide around the bend?
Dont ever ride for luck?
Are you suggesting that the jockey of every horse running last in a race be investigated by the stewards?
A number of people I know predicted that this would happen. I was quite happy to lay Mearas on Saturday for exactly this reason. It was no surprise to me.
R.Gort.

Phil Purcer might be right about Zipping [read his article] and a vague injury. Doesn't seem to want to be there, even though it was good run.

I think Beadman made his run on Malcom far too late [was closing on RTW in the end]. Had a big weight advantage to go earlier than he did and sit a lot closer to the leaders. Just my thoughts anyway.

Flemington potential track ratings on any day: fast, good, dead, Makybe Diva, slow and heavy.

The ***** had the sprinklers on all week apparently. Started Dead, then went to Makybe Diva 'good' [going by the times] and finally a genuine good as it dried out some more. The fence was obviously NOT the place to be in any race of the day unless the horse was a serious wet tracker.

Crash i disagree with what you said about malcolm. If you watch the tape again, he started his run before rtw, and as soon as rtw put the foot down, he put two lengths on him in two bounds. I think its clearly just malcolm isnt in the same class as rtw. (btw i didnt bet on eother of these horses so im not biased to either)

HORSE WHISPERER

I didn't bet on them either. I'm strictly a $5 bet interest punter in group races
during the spring, but I never bet on that one [only in the comp].

Last time Malcom and RTW met [19th. Sept. I think it was] there was .7 of a length between them at the finish and the weight advantage then was all RTW's way with a light weight and Malcom carrying 57kg. The horse surely could have done better, considering the huge weight turnaround.

I do think though that RTW is one out of the box to win with that weight as a 4yr. old. It will be great to see how far the horse goes. Maybe a champion in the making[?].

gort,

Horses running last are usually NON favoured runners,and no enquiry is warranted.However,when a horse that is carying the weight of public money,is trained by a high profile trainer and ridden by a high profile jockey,IMO some explanation should be forthcoming.To say he was riding "for luck"is a cop out.

Maybe he thought Moses was going to part the field for him!The horse is a backmarker anyway so the wide barrier meant nothing in the scheme of things.

My point is he had every chance to improve his position earlier and did not.

Good luck to you for laying it,BUT the average Joe who anchored it in doubles,quins etc.don't use Betfair and did their money cold.

To get beaten less than2 lengths coming from where he did tells me if he had have come 5/6/7/wide BEFORE the turn he just about wins the race.

I think Robbo and Newitt were pretty hard done by.

While wer'e on the subject,what about the ride on Miss Finland???
Do you think that warrants an enquiry??
Same scenario trainer & jockey wise,again the average punter does his money cold,then gets a B>S explanation,and no enquiry forthcoming.

Not at all. To suggest that the jockey / trainer / connections of Miss Finland werent trying to win that race is rediculus. Not having heard the explanation I put it down to the jockey making a professional judgement about what was happening at the time. I had money on Miss Finland and while Im upset that I lost that money I dont blame the horse or the rider on that one.

A little later on Saturday there was a similar run by a horse at Toowoomba by the name of Adavale Hornet. This horse went straight to the lead and never slowed down until utterly stuffed - but managed to win the race by a nose. The second horse gained about three lengths in the last 20m. Do you suggest that we enquire into her running as well? It could be a conspiracy by the winner to try to lose, or perhaps if the second placed horse had made its move a little bit earlier it could have won, or perhaps its just the nature of racing?

I never suggested anywhere that Miss Finland was not trying to win!

It IS NOT a leader,and I can only assume that when they jumped the horse "bolted" and Williams had no option but to keep going.Again,ridden DIFFERENTLY it wins,simple as that.

As to Adavale Hornet,THAT is it's racing style,and the only reason the 2nd horse made up ground in the closing stages is because the leader was "stuffed" as you so succintly put it.

A lot of jockeys got caught out by the state of the Flemington track [especially the Sydney jockeys]. It was quicksand on the fence and many jockeys got caught there with nowhere else to go. Not one winner came home on the fence.

An inquiry into the track conditions [and the watering policy too] is what is needed. Flemington won't be getting a penny of mine during the carnival.

Please note:

We are prepared to accept posts about "bad" rides. Please explain why you believe the ride was not good. Punters who find bad rides can sometimes get good odds about that horse next time out.

However under no circumstances will we accept posts that:

1. Accuse a jockey or trainer of deliberately arranging a bad ride.

2. Make personal insults about the jockey or trainer.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Moderator.

Go4it.
I dont think it is as simple as that. If a horse decides it wants to run then the jockey has to decide in a matter of seconds whether to let it run or not let it run. How often do we see jockeys fight with a horse that is "overracing" for 100 / 200 / 300m and how often do we see these horses run poorly. The fact is that horses who are fighting the jockey are expending far too much energy doing the fighting and have little left for the running.
I will agree that *if allowed* to ride the horse differently then it could easily have won - but it seems the horse had different ideas on Saturday and for that its difficult to blame anyone but the horse.

bernborough
 

the confidence exuded by jockeys can be explained.
they all think they are riding bernborough.
how else does an $118 shot win the spring champion stakes.
some races you expect horses to come from in the field to pass the front runners. aapparently in this race the frontrunners were supposed to pass the others on their way back to the rear of the field.

i have often said that it is an accident if i back a winner and after the spring champion stakes i hold that opinion.
who ever happens to be in front at the finish will be the winner but probably through no fault of the jockeys.

How about Plagiarism???

to be fair
 

i expect somethng would have taken the frontrunner on in the champion stakes but giving credit where it is due i have been very impressed with larry cassidy's riding of late and no doubt his skill had a lot to do with getting the horse home. same as with desert war he almost did the impossible.
also pleased to see danny nikolic ko the jocks in melbourne with a clever and brave ride.

when your're out ridden you are outridden.
also not beefing have had a winning weekend both days. (for a change)

On the run of Mearas: after the interference around 250m from the post, before finishing 1.1 lnegths from the winner. I am not a qualified expert, and I am not going to speculate on what the interference cost Mearas, but the 'domino effect' which ended with Mearas shifting noticably toward the outside rail undoubtedly, losing any momentum in the process.

The protest, and the focus after the race was on Tuesday Joy, but I thought that Mearas would have been the winner had the incident not occurred. Therefore I can't see how any blame whatsoever can be placed upon the rider of Mearas. Exactly when, and how, was Beadman supposed to have moved closer toward the leader before entering the straight? It was a 15+ horse field!

I disagree to an extenct mercuriel. The interferance certainly cost mearas maybe a place at best. Tuesday Joy was clearly coming home alot better. The interferance cost Tuesday Joy the win, no questions asked.