what happens to jockeys log when a horse is disqualified

pirates Wrote:

---

> the point is you have to obey jockey
> club rules on medication doping call it what you
> want

Spot on pirates!

Time to take my medicine, sorry to have dragged Pirates into a fact slinging match with Titch, for once Pirates started a thread on a less than negative vain and I without knowing at 1st where Pirates got his info from. Gave my 2 cents worth- The abrieviation disq. appears in both the Computaform and its co-produced official racecard which would rule out a typo. Since horses are post official result, disqualified it can only be assumed that the race result is now reversed due to an infringement after the race. This would lead one to think that it is a "doping" incedent. Equally as fustrating is that there has been no press release in this vain
which is again highly inconsistant as other trainers have been named and "shamed" and many of us put the boot in here on this forum. I'm with Pirates on this one and do not care if the doping or medicating was intentional or not, the fact still belies that this young passionate and highly dedicated trainer has breached rules.

Taken from the Sporting Post. I hope this puts this matter to rest


Inquiry – Trainer Paul Peter
The National Horseracing Authority confirms that at an Inquiry held in Durban on 3 October 2011, Trainer Paul Peter was charged with a contravention of Rule 73.2.4 in that he was the Trainer and the person responsible for the horse STARSPANGLEDBANNER, who ran in and won the 2nd race at Clairwood Racecourse on 26 June 2011, after which a urine specimen taken from this horse disclosed upon analysis the presence of Methandriol which is a prohibited substance in terms of the Rules of The National Horseracing Authority.

Trainer Peter pleaded not guilty but was found guilty of the charge. The Inquiry Board imposed a fine of R45 000,00.

Trainer Peter has the right of appeal.

Furthermore, in terms of Rule 72.3.2 STARSPANGLEDBANNER is disqualified from this race and the stake monies are to be returned for re-distribution in terms of Rule 67.7.8.

All has gone quiet on this and the related thread. I try to give the horsemen a benefit of the doubt over the "accidental " slip ups, and I may have been a tad harsh on the young trainer before knowing what he was found to be using. Steriods, on a horse trying to break his maiden why the rush, now I feel vindicated for "jumping down his throat." I wonder if the same can said for Titch, who is not a bad guy but may realize that overly dedicated people can also have alterior motives and they may lack the understanding on how the use of these medications can make you look like a CROOK.

I know Paul and how dedicated he is to his horses and find it hard to accept that he would deliberately do anything that would be detrimental to them,however if he has then that would be inexcusable and I will not defend his actions because at the end of the day IMO it is all about the horse and any abuse should be dealt with severely... I just dont know both sides of the story but will make a point of finding out before I can make a judgement needless to say if it transpires that this was as it now seems I will be extremely disappointed..

the irony of the question i asked as to how it would affect the jockeys log is that delpech rode the 2nd horse red revenge who is now declared the winner and marcus rode starspangledbanner..so it would have minus one marcus and plus one delpech...the bookies would have paid out on bets on the jockeys title according to the nhra official log at the end of july but it would have been an interesting scenario if this case was done a few days before the end of july and therefore the log would have changed..as we are betting on it it would be nice to clear up this matter as the title this year could also go down to the wire...

Titch Wrote:

---

> I know Paul and how dedicated he is to his horses
> and find it hard to accept that he would
> deliberately do anything that would be detrimental
> to them,however if he has then that would be
> inexcusable and I will not defend his actions
> because at the end of the day IMO it is all about
> the horse and any abuse should be dealt with
> severely... I just dont know both sides of the
> story but will make a point of finding out before
> I can make a judgement needless to say if it
> transpires that this was as it now seems I will be
> extremely disappointed..

The major problem is that no one informs any one about the ill effects of medication. Say Paul allowed a vet to administer a course of medicine to treat a suspected muscle tear. The vet should have been forthright and warned him of the possible downside of the treatment and that it was in fact a steriod and that these products apart from being banned for racing can lead to stomach and digestive complcations and possible renal infections. Then not with standing that an injury of that nature will resurface should the animal be kept in racing fitness. So he got a win and then lost it, so why yet, no rest? Is racing that competitive that horses have to be "glued together" and kept in training to to pay the bills? So when a trainer says in an interview that he has found out what the horse needed he is indicating that he has found the right GLUE!!!!

pirates Wrote:

---

> the irony of the question i asked as to how it
> would affect the jockeys log is that delpech rode
> the 2nd horse red revenge who is now declared the
> winner and marcus rode starspangledbanner..so it
> would have minus one marcus and plus one
> delpech...the bookies would have paid out on bets
> on the jockeys title according to the nhra
> official log at the end of july but it would have
> been an interesting scenario if this case was done
> a few days before the end of july and therefore
> the log would have changed..as we are betting on
> it it would be nice to clear up this matter as the
> title this year could also go down to the wire...

and then back to the orginal subject, Pirates one would think that a bet on a championship winner is exactly the same as a bet on the horse, it won, I got paid out regardless if the disqualification takes place after the event, so same rules should apply. What is not clear to me though is that should a horses wins be reduced in records of the Studbook. Punters now know courtisy of Computaform that this horse in still technically a "maiden" and will this disqualification now affect the MR.

can starspangledbanner compete in maiden races now been disqualified?

No he cannot. Stays as a winner.

thanks craig..... does his MR change etc?