Scottsville Tuesday

the only way you will MAYBE get consistency is if you get THE SAME STIPES doing all the objections countrywide whether they sit in a central office and its done via video conference because at the moment its fcuking shambles and nobody has a clue what they doing...its a multi billion rand industry where the results of races have a major impact on peoples lives ie breeders and its being run by fcuking ameteurs on all levels

ShezaPunter Wrote:

---

> If My Jelly Bean wouldve definitely beaten
> Contidor, then surely shouldve been awarded the
> race as Ottimo was beaten fair and square by
> contidor.
> Anyway, all the best Homer, hearing this horse
> will be better over further has made me very
> excited for your horse mate, you will have fun
> with this colt.


Appeals to my logic. But appears not all see it that way.

Englander I think to simplify it, the rule allows the stipes to play God and decide whether they think horse A would have beaten horse B and that is it. If a horse is making up ground fast on the other one then that is a big factor in the way they make their decision I am sure. In Jhb case Pom bumped RB before the post and deadheated, in my book no question he should have lost it.In yesterdays case Mjb had to ease back to come on Con's inside as Con was hanging out and to do that he must have been at least half a lenght behind Con's hindquarter so as not to clip heels and possibly come down. That means that inside the last 100m he made up at least1.15 lenghts on Con. Probably the right result with the rules as they stand now. ShezaP you cannot place Mjb in front of Ott as he did not interfere with Mjb at all.

Criag, thanks for that. And therein lies the problem to me, there are no Gods on this planet, nor should there be. If they are going to play God in that way then they should equally be allowed to say that MJB would have beaten the second home, which as there was no interference on the second, must be what they think. In their infinite wisdom they should be allowed to call MJB the winner irrespective of the fact there was no interference to the second and that horse did nothing wrong. It is absurd in this day and age that this is allowed to happen and does, in my eyes at least, leave too much open to question, not all of it legal. Why are these people so blind to what is so obvious to so many others? No need to answer that me thinks...

Craig - No attack but let me put your comments on this issue and others in perspective. I appreciate your positive outlook on racing, but you fail to face wrong doings by the ''establishment'' - whether Gold Circle or the NHRA or others for that matter. You always defend their actions and I am not sure what your agenda is. I am a positive person by nature but cannot condone all the wrong doings in racings.

This past sale I spent R1.3m (excl VAT and other costs) and this exclude my breeding operation or horses I buy from the farm or the running costs of these animals. I spend this and more every year. Currently I have 30+ horses in training (probably more than some stables) and even being a small owner my voice needs to be heard when there are shocking calls made. I invest heavily in this game and wrong stays wrong - look again today in CPT! No ego or bragging, but just to show the level of committment and investment I make in this game!

I think the time has come for all to stand together and address the problems in racing and get rid of the personal agendas and individuals throwing this beautiful sport into disarray! By condoning wrong doings and injustice we will get no where. I made peace with the whole Contador issue (costing me about R 170k with the added bonus) but I will never say it was the right call. I did make this clear today when I spoke to Sean Parker - I saw worse in one week! Yet you say it was the right call!

By the way - my whole issue was that if MJB would have beaten Contador then surely he would have beaten Ottimo as well! We finished in front of Ottimo so shouldn't Contador have been placed 2nd and MJB declared the winner? But again the rules don't allow this and so we must stick within the rules. Didn't someone think of this situation and ammend the rules? But what we did 20 years ago is still applicable and works!

Homer,I think people who know me well will tell you that I support whoever I believe is right. Whether I am right or wrong is another question and some will believe I am wrong but I stand by what I believe and that does not matter if it is with or against the big or the small. The Jhb objection result was wrong and I myself believe MJB would have caught Con if they had both run straight.He was cathching Con too quickly for the easing around behind him not too have been the difference of 0.35 lengths. 2 things I was told years ago to watch if I ended up in an objection. 1) watch the grass cutting lines on the track. they are pretty straight and you can see how far a horse has drifted very easily. 2) Imagine you are driving a car and you in the left lane and want to pass the car in front of you. You pull out to the right and as you start to go past the car in front of you starts to drift into the right lane in front of you.Do you still keep going and go into the car or will you instinctively tap off? You will tap off and that is normal. The same with a horse and especially with a young horse. He will be wary and cannot put his best foot forward when being intimidated and taken off a straight course. As I said and maybe I am wrong in both but I believe the Jhb stipes were wrong and Kzn right.(Apparently it got quite firey when Anton said Corne did not need to switch. Corne was not happy and the head on proved he did need to unless he wanted to carry on being taken out)