The result was changed by the stewards as the first past the post was deemed to have interfered with the runner up and in the stewards view cost it the race.
This is always subjective and different people will always have different views, usually depending on which one they had backed.
Some decisions are more controversial than others, and connections can appeal and get the result changed again, I think a high profile example of this would be last years St.Ledger.
However, even if the result is changed again on appeal, I'm afraid for betting purposes it won't be changed again. Some bookmakers pay out on first past the post and the amended result, though you have no chance of getting your money back on the exchanges. It's frustrating, though it's just one if those things.
Plenty of people will have backed what look like easy 1.01 winners, only to lose after the result is changed in the stewards room. There is always risk, things like weighing in light, or failing to weigh in at all can see the result changed. In this case it was down to the interference.
I've done it before, took what I thought was easy money in a photo, whilst not noticing that the two had come really close together, and the price was reflecting the likelihood of a stewards enquiry, rather than just the result of the photo. It was an expensive lesson to learn.
Today's Horse Racing
result turned over by stewards inquiry, below is the stewards report.
Race 6 - 7:20pm THE RACING UK IN GLORIOUS HD HANDICAP STEEPLE CHASE (CLASS 5)
The Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B)11.6 into possible interference from bypassing the last fence. Having heard their evidence and viewed recordings of the race they found that the winner, INCHCOLM (IRE), ridden by Danny Cook had interfered with DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE), placed second, ridden by Harry Challoner and that the interference had improved INCHCOLM’s (IRE) placing. In that INCHCOLM (IRE) carried DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) off its intended line before DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) appearing to head the winner briefly half way up the running and then received two bumps from INCHCOLM (IRE) approaching the line, which resulted in DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) losing momentum to be beaten a neck. They placed DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE), first, and INCHCOLM (IRE), second. The Stewards found Cook in breach of Rule (B)54.1 and guilty of careless riding in that he failed to take sufficient steps to avoid causing interference to DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE). They suspended him for 3 days as follows: Thursday 5, Friday 6 and Saturday 7 May 2016.
Maurice Linehan, the rider of COMBUSTIBLE KATE (IRE), which was pulled up, reported that the mare hung right.
Race 6 - 7:20pm THE RACING UK IN GLORIOUS HD HANDICAP STEEPLE CHASE (CLASS 5)
The Stewards held an enquiry under Rule (B)11.6 into possible interference from bypassing the last fence. Having heard their evidence and viewed recordings of the race they found that the winner, INCHCOLM (IRE), ridden by Danny Cook had interfered with DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE), placed second, ridden by Harry Challoner and that the interference had improved INCHCOLM’s (IRE) placing. In that INCHCOLM (IRE) carried DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) off its intended line before DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) appearing to head the winner briefly half way up the running and then received two bumps from INCHCOLM (IRE) approaching the line, which resulted in DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE) losing momentum to be beaten a neck. They placed DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE), first, and INCHCOLM (IRE), second. The Stewards found Cook in breach of Rule (B)54.1 and guilty of careless riding in that he failed to take sufficient steps to avoid causing interference to DR BEAUJOLAIS (IRE). They suspended him for 3 days as follows: Thursday 5, Friday 6 and Saturday 7 May 2016.
Maurice Linehan, the rider of COMBUSTIBLE KATE (IRE), which was pulled up, reported that the mare hung right.
-
convoysur-2
- Posts: 1110
- Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:00 am
some serious big lays on little stevie the fav kilbeggan 5.40 wasnt placed,,no supprise there
good morning,
I was not able to understand the trading aspects 2-3.
If the answer is' very difficult just a tip, a link where what is explained.
1) How can I understand the rule of xm in markets with so many horses? for example, if I back £ 50 to @ 90, on which other horse lay my money go?
2)I often feel that the market InPlay Betfair actively participate ..
so it is?
3)it seems to me that just before the start of a race does anyone know 'what will be' the SP and its exploits this knowledge...how you can know at all times How much is sp for its use (or at least not to suffer it)
thank you so much
I was not able to understand the trading aspects 2-3.
If the answer is' very difficult just a tip, a link where what is explained.
1) How can I understand the rule of xm in markets with so many horses? for example, if I back £ 50 to @ 90, on which other horse lay my money go?
2)I often feel that the market InPlay Betfair actively participate ..
so it is?
3)it seems to me that just before the start of a race does anyone know 'what will be' the SP and its exploits this knowledge...how you can know at all times How much is sp for its use (or at least not to suffer it)
thank you so much
I noticed that if you just go for the lower odds upon a photo finish, you normally back the winner. How often is that not the case? I've been making good money just waiting for that to happen, but surely there are times, like the one above, when the market doesn't get it right.
-
Crazyskier
- Posts: 1301
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:36 pm
cpierre wrote:I noticed that if you just go for the lower odds upon a photo finish, you normally back the winner. How often is that not the case? I've been making good money just waiting for that to happen, but surely there are times, like the one above, when the market doesn't get it right.
I once lost a small fortune (for me) when a 'dead cert' in a photo was trading around 1.04-1.07 and ultimately declared a DEAD HEAT!
The theme of consecutive small wins which are then more than eradicated by a single bumper loss is a common one I'm finding!!