Chief Stipe

That's your opinion that wasn't shared by the JCA. There is no evidence to say Mr Ellis INACTION made it worse. Whatever "worse" is. No I never wrote that I or those I spoke to said it was a "straight forward case." What I said was that Thomaas's fantasy about what was said and done before the protest did not match what I was told. I'm not interested in hearsay or "off the record" comments. If that is what she said then that concurs with what Mr Ellis said. The JCA still had the option of calling the jockey to give evidence. However would it have changed the outcome? I doubt it unless they applied the rule as Australia does that "withstanding the interference the second horse would not have beaten the winner." That's your opinion. I don't agree. Feel free to criticise the process and those that run it. The connections of the horse behaved entirely as they are entitled to. In that regard there has been some fantastical interpretations written which are far from the facts. As I said feel free to debate about the process and those that run it.

I happened to watch the replay of the Ellerslie races from Saturday 30 November yesterday and I must say in my opinion the track raced really really well. The horses were finishing evenly all over the width of the track. I've long been a critic of the track surface at Ellerslie but this was either an aberration or they've done some work. It did start the day at a G3 and no doubt improved as the day went on. The times were exceptional for the day as well.

View the full article

View the full article

View the full article

What's your beef? What's your point?

I don't see your point. I haven't seen that particular Syndicate Agreement but I have seen others from professional syndicators and they are as I say.

You have no idea who is in the Syndicate. You will also probably find that in the Syndicate Agreement/Contract that Mr Ellis and or Te Akau representatives have the say on racing and training matters. LOL! Far from it. If you have followed my posts over the years about Te Akau you will find I have had a balanced view and have been critical at times. I'm no sycophant and never will be. Hence the way BOAY is run. My issue was and still is that a certain individual gave a fantasy version of what happened and through inference and innuendo proceeded cast aspersions against Te Akau that were unfounded. I'll make it clear there was no breach of the rules in terms of lodging the protest and the subsequent hearing. If you are willing to remove the individuals from the debate and discuss the merits or otherwise of the "protest process" then feel free to do so.

You are splitting hairs. He who pays the bills has the final say. Although that doesn't help me much on BOAY. You'll find if you bother to stretch your knowledge that Mr Ellis is a Director of Te Akau Stud and Te Akau Racing. Further did you know that anyone can lodge a protest? (I don't think that rule has changed). As for your democracy comment there isn't much democracy in a judicial system.

Aside from Te Akau Stud having bred the horse it is raced by a Te Akau Syndicate named Te Akau Fine Red. Isn't Mr Ellis the Chief at Te Akau? I'd say he has every right.

No doubt in Petone there is a in-house book being run.

That's their call.

I didn't say I believed it or not. There are conflicting reports from those directly involved (which I've heard first hand from two people) and even from the Stipendiary Stewards. Regardless if this is all it takes for the conspiricists to suck oxygen when there are far bigger issues in the industry then heaven help us. BTW there is no evidence the Biden's were involved in the hearing!

A change in the ARCI's interference policy could come to a possible vote after it was tabled at the previous Model Rules Committee meeting Aug. 8 in Saratoga Springs, N.Y. A shift to Category 1 rules are listed on the agenda to be considered. With the Category 1 standard, disqualifications would likely be more limited as DQs would occur only when it's determined that a horse who was interfered with would have finished ahead of the horse who caused the interference—if not for that foul. With the current Category 2 standard, if the stewards determine interference cost a fouled horse a better placing, the horse that interfered is disqualified and placed behind the horse or horses that it fouled. The United States and Canada are among the few remaining countries operating under Category 2. The International Federation of Horseracing Authorities adopted Category 1 as its model in 2017.

Perhaps but what if the international rule - "would the protesting horse withstanding the alleged interference been able to beat the winner?" In this case I doubt it.

That's not what I've been told. Either way Mr Ellis is entitled to take the action he did. What I object to is Thomaas's fantasy narrative describing what happened. It isn't even good satire.

Will it be Racing NSW's Chief Operating Officer, Graeme Hinton?

Rule Number(s): Careless ridingStewards charged Mr K Chowdhoory with careless riding – r 638 (1) (d) in that he caused interference to CELINE inside the final 150 metres. Mr Chowdhoory (RENOUNCE) did not admit the charge. (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): 969(2)& Use of the Whip RegulationsFollowing the running of Race 9, Hope Racing Stables Trot, an information was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr R A Quirk, against Licensed Open Driver, Ms P J Wakelin, alleging that Ms Wakelin, as the driver of RUSTY I AM in the race, “used her whip on more occasions than permitted in the last 400 metres ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Rule Number(s): Careless ridingStewards charged Mr C Johnson (DANNY GREEN) with a breach of careless riding –r 638 (1) (d) - in that he caused interference to several runners inside the final 200m. Mr Oatham outlined the incident with the use of the video replays. He stated DANNY GREEN was racing one-off the running rail when leading ... (Feed generated with FetchRSS)View the full article

Allpress, Tinsley, Herd. Not sure who the other two are. Gray has had over 15 apprentices. He also worked for Brian Deacon.

That isn't correct. Get over it. At the end of the day the judiciary can call whoever they want to speak.

OK it seems now that you are accusing the Stipes of lying. As for your other assertions I don't lie unlike you. This story is done. Move on.

That wasn't the issue - the issue was his fantasy depiction of what unfolded before and during the inquiry. He probably thinks man didn't land on the moon.

No I wasn't referring to All The Aces - I was referring to Thomaas. As I said I have spoken to two people who were there and I accept what they said. Thomaas has had no direct knowledge.