Race 3 Clairwood?

Colin I am 100% correct believe me there has not been a change to the ruling...if there was then the horse in question would get a "free ride" in other words if you get hampered then win you keep the race and if you dont then get a refund on all bets..cant happen bud

So is it a different rule for a horse that gets a fast start?

A few interesting changes have occurred however notably the new handicapping guide lines which came into operation June of this year:-
www.horseracingauthority.co.za/pubs/docs...delines_June2012.pdf

also the new appy claiming adjustments now in place:-

The words that have a strike through them are to be deleted and the words in bold and underlined are to be added.

54.14
OWNERS or TRAINERS may claim and are responsible for the claiming of an APPRENTICE allowance in any RACE, except any RACE specified to preclude APPRENTICE allowances, for the RACE MEETING concerned. The APPRENTICE allowance shall be 4Kg until the end of the RACE MEETING in which the APPRENTICE has ridden his 10th 20th winner; thereafter the allowance shall be 2.5Kg until the end of the RACE MEETING in which the APPRENTICE has ridden his 30th 40th winner and thereafter 1.5Kg until the end of the RACE MEETING in which the APPRENTICE rides his 50th 60th winner.
(Amended 01.05.2012)

And the sponsorship restrictions that have been in place for some time now:-

The National Board have in terms of Clause 16.2 of the Constitution, amended the following Rule, with effect from 11 May 2012.

The words that are in bold and underlined are to be added.

21.16 No RIDER or his SPOUSE shall be involved, directly or indirectly, in any concern or entity which conducts business as a bookmaker, a betting operator or a totalisator and shall not be sponsored by any such concern or entity.

(Amended 9/05/2012)

hibernia Wrote:

---

> So is it a different rule for a horse that gets a
> fast start?

If his/her stall opens ahead of the rest then the same rule will apply...ie a non runner irrespective of placing,

Titch ,if the horse had run 3rd,keeping the tickets in the PA and then scratched COS IT SHOULD HAVE RUN BETTER and all tickets became losers,you would have had a riot.
I disagree with your technical ruling anyway..............the start should technically have been a FALSE START...........The starter missed it and the catch 22 situation ,IF THE HORSE HAD QUALIFIED FOR PA's,would have forced the race to be declared NULL AND VOID...........any other decision would be unfair to one set of punters..............either PA punters or those who backed it to win!

Titch Wrote:

---

> hibernia Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > So is it a different rule for a horse that gets
> a
> > fast start?
>
> If his/her stall opens ahead of the rest then the
> same rule will apply...ie a non runner
> irrespective of placing,


well this is what this thread and the other thread has been all about Titch...

ColinF Wrote:

---

> Sorry Titch I disagree with you....the rules may
> state that, however there have been a few
> occasions where a fancied horse has been hampered
> at the start (by the gate and/or handler) , and
> won....and no one lodges a complaint and the horse
> has kept the race. So do you believe if the fav.
> won race 3 they would have declared it a non
> runner.....they would have said it never gained an
> advantage so therefore it should keep the race

FFS why should the rules be bent or amended based on betting indications.... all horses in the racce are deemed to be given the same chances regardless of who has how much wagered....by the same token the starter cannot declare a false start based on the horses favoritism as he is an official and is like the stipes supposed to impartial regardless... had a dog of a horse been impeded not one word who the hell cares....what if the starter declares a false start on a said dog being impeded and and the next 3 dogs fill the places then again joe punter again cries foul
the rules are a little grey only because past occurrences have tried to be swayed in favor of the
The betting public...

Titch you are completely foolish to believe that had the horse ran 2nd or 3rd they would have scratched it! not a chance in hell.

Muhti,stick to medicine.............your point is nonsense........................if there was no punting there would be a lot less rules.........................................many are only there to protect the punting aspect of the industry!

Muhti put it in a nutshell...(tu)

also If a horse is impeded and looses 5 l then runs 2nd beaten 1L should he be declared the winner?
I will post the official ruling tomorrow to clarify the point cant get it online but will get it per email in the am

flaunt Wrote:

---

> Titch you are completely foolish to believe that
> had the horse ran 2nd or 3rd they would have
> scratched it! not a chance in hell.


Care to take a small wager?? I will lay you R1000/R500 to a charity of your choice

the fact of the matter is if the gate opened early it would not have featured!