MY MAMA SAID THERE WOULD BE DAYS LIKE THIS!!!!!
When will I ever learn? Surely a trainer with my experience should know by now that one should never make comment about a RWWA official (unless it is handing out a bouquet), especially at a post race interview.
After my horse ALMOHAD won the 1800m handicap at Ascot this afternoon I was asked by the on course mounting yard host Wes Cameron, how I felt about the win? I do recall saying something about it being a fairly hollow feeling and that I had fully expected the horse to win the Perth Cup later in the afternoon in similar fashion had the horse gained a start.
I then went on to express my disappointment in the fact that there were discretionary balloting conditions in place on the race however the handicapper had not seen fit to elevate one of the most in form nominations for the race in preference to a more higher rated but out of form galloper. I did say something along the line that the handicapper should either use or remove the discretionary balloting conditions instead of being a weak bastard and doing nothing.
In the following half an hour or so I had owners, trainers, press and even committee men of various associations congratulate me for my comments. Unfortunately later in the afternoon I had the chief steward call me to tell me that an enquiry had been opened into my post race comments and I would be advised next week as to when the inquiry would be held.
Once again it would appear that I have chosen the wrong place or the wrong words to bring a ludicrous situation to the fore. Irrespective that I have yet to hear from anyone who disagrees with me either pre or post race. The only ones who don't seem to get it are those in charge. Pardon me for thinking that the distance of the Cup was reduced from 3200m to 2400m in an attempt to get a better field in order to maintain the status of the race.
Before I go any further let me say that I took the risk of running when and where we did prior to the Cup and I was well aware of where we sat as far as gaining a start. I also realise that we could very well have been 30th in line to gain a start. That being the case I wouldn't have an argument. The fact is we were 17th in line to gain a start and in my opinion there was definitely room to exercise the discretionary clause.
Now don't get me wrong. I would be upset if my horse was balloted from a race in preference to a lower rated horse as would have been the case if ALMOHAD had been elevated into the race. The truth is that we either accept that the discretionary balloting conditions of a race are such that this is what can happen or we get rid of the conditions.
Once again, no disrespect to the horses or the connections of some of the horses which gained entry in front of ALMOHAD as some are or have been very good racehorses. Like most races run in this state, the fact is that there are no qualifying conditions for the Cup. Stakemoney and or ratings seem to be the sole yardstick. That is the very reason that discretionary powers were given to handicappers many years ago.
In the field for the 2010 Cup, there was one horse who had not won or been placed at further than 1400m albeit he is a very good horse and another who had won two races, a maiden and an open handicap in November 2008. Since that win it had run one minor placing in its next 11 starts. Both horses were rated as 70/1 shots for the Cup by the bookmakers at Tuesdays barrier draw and calling of the card. ALMOHAD was rated at 10/1 or 12/1 by both bookmakers officiating at the same function.
I will say it again. This is not a whinge nor a cheap shot at those horses or their connections. I am simply saying that the conditions for the race state clearly that discretionary balloting conditions apply to the race. In my opinion the handicapper failed to use that discretion.
All that said, I doubt that any of this will count for much when I attend the inquiry next week. MY MAMA SAID THERE WOULD BE DAYS LIKE THIS!!!!!!!!
After my horse ALMOHAD won the 1800m handicap at Ascot this afternoon I was asked by the on course mounting yard host Wes Cameron, how I felt about the win? I do recall saying something about it being a fairly hollow feeling and that I had fully expected the horse to win the Perth Cup later in the afternoon in similar fashion had the horse gained a start.
I then went on to express my disappointment in the fact that there were discretionary balloting conditions in place on the race however the handicapper had not seen fit to elevate one of the most in form nominations for the race in preference to a more higher rated but out of form galloper. I did say something along the line that the handicapper should either use or remove the discretionary balloting conditions instead of being a weak bastard and doing nothing.
In the following half an hour or so I had owners, trainers, press and even committee men of various associations congratulate me for my comments. Unfortunately later in the afternoon I had the chief steward call me to tell me that an enquiry had been opened into my post race comments and I would be advised next week as to when the inquiry would be held.
Once again it would appear that I have chosen the wrong place or the wrong words to bring a ludicrous situation to the fore. Irrespective that I have yet to hear from anyone who disagrees with me either pre or post race. The only ones who don't seem to get it are those in charge. Pardon me for thinking that the distance of the Cup was reduced from 3200m to 2400m in an attempt to get a better field in order to maintain the status of the race.
Before I go any further let me say that I took the risk of running when and where we did prior to the Cup and I was well aware of where we sat as far as gaining a start. I also realise that we could very well have been 30th in line to gain a start. That being the case I wouldn't have an argument. The fact is we were 17th in line to gain a start and in my opinion there was definitely room to exercise the discretionary clause.
Now don't get me wrong. I would be upset if my horse was balloted from a race in preference to a lower rated horse as would have been the case if ALMOHAD had been elevated into the race. The truth is that we either accept that the discretionary balloting conditions of a race are such that this is what can happen or we get rid of the conditions.
Once again, no disrespect to the horses or the connections of some of the horses which gained entry in front of ALMOHAD as some are or have been very good racehorses. Like most races run in this state, the fact is that there are no qualifying conditions for the Cup. Stakemoney and or ratings seem to be the sole yardstick. That is the very reason that discretionary powers were given to handicappers many years ago.
In the field for the 2010 Cup, there was one horse who had not won or been placed at further than 1400m albeit he is a very good horse and another who had won two races, a maiden and an open handicap in November 2008. Since that win it had run one minor placing in its next 11 starts. Both horses were rated as 70/1 shots for the Cup by the bookmakers at Tuesdays barrier draw and calling of the card. ALMOHAD was rated at 10/1 or 12/1 by both bookmakers officiating at the same function.
I will say it again. This is not a whinge nor a cheap shot at those horses or their connections. I am simply saying that the conditions for the race state clearly that discretionary balloting conditions apply to the race. In my opinion the handicapper failed to use that discretion.
All that said, I doubt that any of this will count for much when I attend the inquiry next week. MY MAMA SAID THERE WOULD BE DAYS LIKE THIS!!!!!!!!
posted by Lou Luciani at
9:18 pm
1 Comments:
Your mumma said if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all! Your mumma also taught you to have the courage and stamina to pursue justice! Lets hope the inquiry board confirms the rules and regulations as you have stated and sees fit to only take your soap box and slap you on the wrist and not fine you as was the previous case!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home