Musselburg 14:45
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
Do you guys know what is the objection of the stewards enquiry. I saw nothing wrong with the race..
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
Will it take all day to decide the winner?
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
They changed the results.....Does anyone know where to find the reason why the stewards decided to change the results. Is it because the lost money them-self...Just kidding..
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Hayley's horse took the 2nd, eventual winner, right across the track off its racing line. It was only just beaten so they deemed with a clear run it would have won. Correct decision imo.
-
JollyGreen
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am
I don't know if anyone else noticed but on the photo finish they were betting around 1.30 for Hamish McGonagall to win and around 3.6 for the first to cross the line Bear Behind.
At the time I thought it strange because to my eye it was the other way around. Sure enough Bear Behind was called the winner but that betting made me realise plenty of people were aware of a likely enquiry and were offering prices like that in the belief the decision would be reversed. I didn't see the prices when the steward's enquiry was in progress.
I am in agreement with Andy I also think it was the correct decision but trust me when I say there will be more blatant ones than that in the coming season and they will not reverse the placings!
At the time I thought it strange because to my eye it was the other way around. Sure enough Bear Behind was called the winner but that betting made me realise plenty of people were aware of a likely enquiry and were offering prices like that in the belief the decision would be reversed. I didn't see the prices when the steward's enquiry was in progress.
I am in agreement with Andy I also think it was the correct decision but trust me when I say there will be more blatant ones than that in the coming season and they will not reverse the placings!
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
The real winner was around 1,8 when the market reopened, but half way it dropped to 1,3. The other winner ( the official one) was traded around 2,3 but half way in the enquiry was traded up to 4/1. I was not paid because of the changing of the winner but, I have seen so many races with the same enquiry but the result was not reversed.
So my question is if the rule saying the winner has to be reversed why it does not always happen. is it depending of how much the stewards have lost or won? Isnt fair void all bets if the stewards decide to reverse the winner?. How can we tell the reverse was fair and it will always be reversed. You are saying it was fair and I believe you but can the stewards guarantee the same reverse every time it happens?
So my question is if the rule saying the winner has to be reversed why it does not always happen. is it depending of how much the stewards have lost or won? Isnt fair void all bets if the stewards decide to reverse the winner?. How can we tell the reverse was fair and it will always be reversed. You are saying it was fair and I believe you but can the stewards guarantee the same reverse every time it happens?