Interesting Reading

spot on pirates

it was well documented on ABC how Rob De Kock as head of NHRA and a member of IFHA would not support me by arranging for me to go and present the good SA racing product Formgrids at the Asian Racing Conference in Turkey last year, i wanted a 10 minute or so spot on the podium, he was booked as a speaker and never even attended because of a knee injury, prominent South Africans who were there said they felt embarrased as SA never contributed a single item to the conference ,, in May its the 35th Asian Racing Conference to be held in Hong Kong and i will ask the NHRA to make presentation to IFHA for me to show Formgrids to the 50 or so countries that attend this conference, i hope i have better luck with the NHRA this year and would appreciate support from ABC

pirates Wrote:

---

> mr tipster the millions that get taken from
> punters by the means of rounding off fractions and
> unclaimed tickets can be used to payout any horses
> that earn stake money but are disqualified for
> being impeded....there are solutions

That's not the point at all. I just gave two examples of an argument for and against. But what happens if the impeded horse finishes second and the Tote favourite finished unplaced? A rule has to be made one way or the other. There is no solution that will satisfy every punter in every situation... impossible.

There is definitely valid arguments for both sides of this story but if a fancied horse gets hampered in running and runs 4th any PA punter will consider themselves a victim if they had bankered it...but there are always going to be pro's and cons in this case....hard to imagine a ruling that will keep everyone happy.

Tipster for the sake of discussion and i stand to be corrected but either way the rules of racing state each horse must have an equal chance of winning so if a horse is impeded then i think it should be declared a non runner, even if it won the race

mister a Wrote:

---

> Tipster for the sake of discussion and i stand to
> be corrected but either way the rules of racing
> state each horse must have an equal chance of
> winning so if a horse is impeded then i think it
> should be declared a non runner, even if it won
> the race

Ok, but that could upset a huge amount of people who would disagree. For example, the owner who won the race, a punter that backed it etc.

Here is an article I wrote at the time this was a hot topic that shows some of the differences and similarities between different country's rules.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
It is interesting to note that in the UK only through a new rule that will be introduced on March 30 will provision be made for such a circumstance that led to the crowd trouble at Clairwood on Sunday, while in Australia a very similar condition in the rule governing impeded starts exists to the one in South Africa.
However, it would appear that the stewards in both countries have greater discretionary power to declare a race void than South Africa’s have.
In Sunday’s race at Clairwood the odds-on favourite My Sanctuary’s stall opened palpably slowly, causing her to crash through it.
However, despite losing many lengths, she was declared a runner after finishing third due to a provision added to National Horseracing Authority (NHA) rule 61.5.10.1 in 2009.
This rule deals with “no starts” through faulty starting stalls or other causes, and the 2009 provision states that a horse can only be declared a non-runner if it did not finish in the first four.
In Australia, rule AR.134A, which governs such unfair start, ends with the provision:
“Provided that a horse which is ultimately declared first, second or third placing in a race shall not be declared a non-starter.”

However, if they feel it is justified, it appears the Australian stewards could fall back on Rule AR.139:
“The Stewards appointed under AR.8 may declare any race void and, if they consider it
expedient, order such race to be run again on the same day.”

In the UK, the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) recently made the following announcement:
“Also coming into effect on 30 March is a new Rule of Racing that gives power to the Raceday Stewards to declare a horse a non-runner after the race has been run. This provision will only apply to Flat races and only in certain circumstances. Examples are when starting stalls do not open but false start isn’t called, or if a jockey is not on the horse when the stalls are released.

Consequently, bets on such horse(s) which have palpably lost all chance at the start will be fully refunded to punters and, where applicable, Rule 4 deductions would apply to all other bets.

As the Rules of Racing currently stand, all horses in the stalls are deemed runners as soon as the Starter starts a race, unless a) a false start is called or b) there is then a void race for whatever reason.

This new provision will not apply in cases where:
a) The gates open properly but the horse chooses to plant at the start, be fractious or refuse to race; or
b) The gates open a split second after the rest of the field – an existing protocol exists for such circumstances.

Currently, the stewards in the UK would not have been allowed to declare a horse in My Sanctuary’s circumstances a non-runner, but it appears that they could have fallen back on BHA rules 10.4.1 or 10.4.2 if necessary.

10.4 The Stewards may declare a race void in any case when
10.4.1 the start has been affected due to a faulty action of the starting stalls
10.4.2 the Starter has failed to declare a false start under Rule 38; and
10.4.3 the Stewards consider that the faulty action of the starting stalls has materially prejudiced the chances of a sufficient number of the horses running in the race to justify declaring the race void.


However, it would appear that after March 30, the stewards in the UK will be given discretionary powers to declare a horse that has gone through My Sanctuary’s circumstances a non-runner.
With such discretionary powers and, with both the UK’s and Australia’st discretionary powers to declare a race void, Sunday’s fiasco might have been avoided.
Perhaps South Africa’s NHA could also look into giving the stipendiary stewards a loophole that would allow racing as a whole to extract itself from the type of debacle that occurred.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

very interesting, did anyone publish that article ? its easy for me to miss important info in the game coz i dont follow closely, was this discussed on TT ? i wonder how the crowd would react if ever they declared a race void re run was called

phoned the NHRA 2x yesterday and both times was told Mr Pillay is in a meeting, left my cell number with a message for him to please return my call.

Mr Pillay returned my call this morning and says pop him an email and he will do his best to make inquiries for stage time at 2014 Asian Racing Conference so i am hopeful and truley believe that Formgrids fits the bill for the international website with form that the IFHA are looking for, i hope they havent spent too much money developing their own, perhaps im biased but i cant see a better system of displaying race results than what we have