Kenilworth and Turffontein Wednesday

Greg, he certainly is a very nice horse. Hope he runs well this season!

Phantom punter must be on this one 3 ALWAYSAHUMMER Tote paying R1.40 win 90 cents a place..............

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> Eachway on Market Watch .... stable in good form
> tonite.


Stiff Gregs .

Yar but I think we must keep an eye on the Matchett stable...(tu)

Payouts were not that great for that race, go look at the trifecta and quartet:S .... me think someone knew something about Nicodemus:(

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> Payouts were not that great for that race, go look
> at the trifecta and quartet:S .... me think
> someone knew something about Nicodemus:(

Was being backed on tote .

Tommy_Hotspur Wrote:

---

> I think the stipes are not only blind but
> completely incompetent in my view. Luckily I can
> no speak from a place where money doesn't matter,
> but the 2nd placed horse CLEARLY cost Mystery Dame
> 3rd as she was severely snatched up 50 meters from
> the line. The eventual winner shifted in slightly
> but that was before the main interference was
> caused.
>
> If anyone could clarify the official rule for an
> objection being upheld? That, imo, is the only
> reason why the objection should not have been
> upheld? (me not understanding the rules properly?)

The stipes had to decide whether MD would've finished ahead of Lassiter but for the interference, not whether the interference cost MD 3rd position.

That is a stupid rule, interference BY LASSITER cost MD third place, us punters got screwed because of this....imo Lassiter should of been demoted to 4th place .... They NEED to change that ruling?

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> That is a stupid rule, interference BY LASSITER
> cost MD third place, us punters got screwed
> because of this....imo Lassiter should of been
> demoted to 4th place .... They NEED to change that
> ruling?


Its 6 of 1, half a dozen of another Greg. I remember a few years ago a heavily supported runner at Kenilworth winning going away by 4 or 5 lengths. We all were celebrating wildly when the objection hooter sounded. The objection was 4th against the winner.
As the winner was making his run he slightly interfered with the 4th horse. He went past it like it was standing still. The 4th horse would never have come close to the winner but it should have run 3rd. Objection was upheld.
It left a very bitter taste in the punters mouths. Not long after that the objection rule was amended.

Whichever rule is implemented, you will never be able to satisfy all the punters all of the time.

Yar I suppose I'm talking from the pocket...:X

gregbucks Wrote:

---

> That is a stupid rule, interference BY LASSITER
> cost MD third place, us punters got screwed
> because of this....imo Lassiter should of been
> demoted to 4th place .... They NEED to change that
> ruling?

That's the way the ruled used to be, and I suppose the most famous example of the old rule in action was Surfing Home losing the July. There will never be an objection rule which satisfies everybody, although I am tempted to think that the old rule was better than the current one by a margin of 51 to 49.()

But I could change my mind again in less than the time that it takes to click on the "post message" button. There is no satisfactory answer to this, but it's hard to argue that Mystery Dame would have beaten the 2nd horse and in terms of the existing rule the right decision was made - IMHO.

thanks magic for bringing up the surfing home objection ...worst day of my punting life...garth puller should have got an oscar for it