Why don't you explain what you believe is so suspicious and please explain the logic behind your suspicions. I assume you are talking about the winner.

It's pretty obvious to me. My Vegas, a 5YO horse, had 2 wins and 3 seconds from 7 starts. It was 3rd. up in a Listed race at Rosehill over 1100 metres. First up it won a Newcastle Rst65 over 900 metres. Second up it only finished second in a Rosehill Rst91 and started at $12.00. Of course it looked out of its class in a Listed race. So why should the racing media discuss it? Add to that the trainer, Charlie Britt of Gosford is not exactly a high profile trainer. So it is pretty obvious to me with the horse being plunged from $9.00 to $5.50 and winning that connections knew something the rest of us did not. In fact, they were probably too eager and should have let the horse ease out much more in the betting before putting on the money.

Definitely gave this horse a good chance, but I think the plunge was lucky to come off. A few hard luck stories in this one. German Chocolate and Gamble Me just to mention two.
That's racing.

The RB65 win at Newcastle was by 3L coming from 6th on the turn in a race they ran home in 33.61sec to do this My Vegas had to run home in under 33secs, OK it was only a 65 at Newcastle but that's a super sectional & big win anywhere.

He was then backed from 16-1 into 11-1 when he ran a close 2nd to Kiloton (a horse with a huge wrap on him) in a Saturday RB91 (1 class below city open) at Rosehill.

All his form in Mexico was on city tracks except his 5L maiden win at Kilmore. He also started fav in his 1st 4 runs. Obviously he's always impressed in trackwork but has had his problems. So it was all there for anyone who wanted to look hard enough.

I didn't spend more than about 5mins on this race before I decided there where too many chances & the market agreed with me with a 4-1 fav and another 5 horses in single figures 4 of them under 11-2. An ambitious plunge in a listed race with so many chances but nothing suspicious. Mr logics also made a few very valid points.

While my intention is not to inflame this issue I feel that an explanation of some of my comments is helpful.
First, I will always reject some interloper(s) attempting "to put words into my mouth" with statements such as: "what did you mean by that...are you suggesting...etc?"
We've seen/heard it all before-anyone who steps up to express their constitutional/god-given rights of free speech are immediately attacked by others who may have a hidden agenda...you work it out for yourself.
So, fellow forumites...are you going to allow the "thought-police" to intimidate you expressing your views or cower to their wants/demands?
Thank You.

Cheers.

From the Forum Terms of Use:

Please note that the Forums are a free service extended by a commercial entity and are not public property. The Forum Terms of Use take precedence over freedom of expression...

Moderator.

Point taken,

No offence intended.

Cheers.

Yes OK. You have your god given rights all sewn up, but are you going to expand on the My Vegas race or just throw a suspicion out there and then go down the "God Given Avenue" when someone throws up valid reasons for the performance.

C'Mon Xanadu, please explain.

No, Top Rank,
My comments were intended to arouse serious/intelligent debate without casting aspersions on any runner...you didn't back it did you.....?
I am sure you would agree with the principles of this wholeheartedly...am I right..?

Cheers.

So do you have a position on this one or are you getting splinters on the fence?
Clearly KT, Mr. L and myself believe "no big deal" with this one, is that what you were after?

For the record I was on German Chocolate.