Response from Graeme Hawkins to Larry

I think this is awesome, debate, counter debate , facts, fiction, brilliant.


The ONLY thing i ask and its a small minute eensy teensy little thing is.


Had the question/ allegation/ inquiry been made by lets say


Gregbucks


Would the mighty gc or anyone in the powers of sa racing answered?





Because it seems to me that many many many other important questions go unansered.

Good reply G H you come a long way from your putt putt days in cape town.

Hi

I agree it appears to be a concise reply from GH. My problem is that IMVHO neither the complainants, nor I, was aware the the MR of certain Horses were OFICIALLY revisted and altered. Why was this done and why the SILENCE.

Another point of concern to me is how the Handicappers (professionals) can get it so wrong, according to GM, not once but twice by choosing the WRONG line horse. If this is the case for such an important Race the mind boggles as to what is happening with total MR system, maybe time to do my own Ratings.

GH thank you for explaining the selection process.

You are correct with the below statement.
'In my book, no owner, no matter how wealthy or powerful he/she may be inside or outside of horse racing, or how important they may think they are, has any automatic advantage over any other owner and, equally, no trainer, no matter how successful he/she may be, enjoys any automatic privilege or right of entry/acceptance based purely on the merits of their own performance or ability.'

Good to see GC respond. I have one question though......

At what point (date) did the handicappers decide that they got the ratings wrong in the Derby???

Was it when they realized they got it wrong or was it when they realized that there was going to be a s$%itstorm with regards to the VDJ log and GC called in a favor from the Gauteng handicappers?

Just wondering as it seems awfully convenient that the ratings were changed in hindsight (his word)

What does rule book say about changing ratings?

Does it have to be done within a specific time frame or can it be done anytime?

Interesting......

"Rock Cocktail was excluded as he has yet to win a Stakes race and has yet to be Grade 1 placed, his sole Graded Stakes performance being 2nd in a Grade 2."

"Rock Cocktail whose sole Graded Stakes form is a single Grade 2 placing"

Am I missing something here? Does finishing 5th in the Daily News not count as "Graded Stakes Form"?

Nevermind the fact that RC's rating is above 6 of the runners he has also beaten Tribal Dance, E-Jet, Wagner, Wild One and Love Struck, all of whom take their place in the July.

GH may have some valid points about the ratings but he mentions that "For me, performances in Grade 1 races are the single most important criteria in assessing the credentials of horses." Well then surely the Daily News result should carry the most weight for the 3 year olds? On this basis how is it possible that RC was overlooked? There are a few tried and tested donkeys in this line-up and the more I think about GH's reply the more ludicrous it seems that RC was omitted. How a horse like Wagner has made it into the final field is beyond me!

Anyway, it's all academic now but I still believe this whole process and lack of transparency has been a shambles.

JustinV Wrote:

---

> very very well said GH


so now you accept your bosses horse tellina shouldnt be in the july?

Tommy_Hotspur Wrote:

---

>
> Just wondering as it seems awfully convenient that
> the ratings were changed in hindsight (his word)
>
> What does rule book say about changing ratings?

Which ratings have been changed?

Based on GH's letter- if they erred in the Woolavington in that the handicappers "chose to use fifth-placed runner Jet Supreme as the line horse (notwithstanding that she made a complete mess of the start)" then Do You Remember is over rated by 5 points and carries 2.5kgs too much in the July. Given that she won the race and in theory this got her in to the final field, may have been worthwhile appealing her rating....

pirates Wrote:

---

> JustinV Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > very very well said GH
>
>
> so now you accept your bosses horse tellina
> shouldnt be in the july?


i said very well said..not yes 100% correct reasoning..i still think tellina should have got in over punta arenas and maybe one other..he was a ball hair away from winning the first two legs of the triple crown

JustinV Wrote:

---

> pirates Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > JustinV Wrote:
> >
>

---

>
> >

---

> > > very very well said GH
> >
> >
> > so now you accept your bosses horse tellina
> > shouldnt be in the july?
>
>
> i said very well said..not yes 100% correct
> reasoning..i still think tellina should have got
> in over punta arenas and maybe one other..he was a
> ball hair away from winning the first two legs of
> the triple crown


he was the only horse to have placed in all three legs and would have won a cash prize for accumulating the most points in the Tripple Crown - He made up the most ground in the Derby and had one poor run in Kzn with Blinkers -

Jack Dash Wrote:

---

> Tommy_Hotspur Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> >
> > Just wondering as it seems awfully convenient
> that
> > the ratings were changed in hindsight (his
> word)
> >
> > What does rule book say about changing ratings?
>
> Which ratings have been changed?

Apparently GH said that the MR's for the Derby was changed after the fact? They decided that the wrong line horse was used and instead of gothic being rated a 97 he is now a 10 and something?

Perhaps I miss read his post, I tend to do stupid things