Taking the piss or not! Interesting article

And one that makes you wonder... Why not? Especially with the "shock win"

And when we are on the matter when are shitty runs going to be tested? You know the ones when the fancied runs end up running 8th... With no explanation

BACK TO THE ARTICLE (credit sporting post)



Conspiracy theories abound in horseracing. And nothing quite fuels the fire than when officialdom deviate from the norms and act marginally out of character. Even when there may be a very good reason for it.

Predictability will always be a flaw in routine controls. That’s why in the old days, for example, retail staff were asked to draw out of a bottle full of marbles when departing for home on closing. If one drew a red marble, you were pulled aside and frisked.

Nobody complained as it was completely random. And definitely not personal, contrived or favouritism.

But what’s the point, you’re probably asking?

Most every winner countrywide has a specimen taken for analysis. The winner seems to be the horse that gets a specimen taken. It’s not a rule, but it’s an unwritten process.

But not the longest-priced winner in recent days.

That’s the 50-1 Matsuyamo, who won the fifth race at Fairview on Monday 28 August.

Punters notice this kind of thing. Call them pocket talkers or keyboard warriors, they ask questions. And a quick look at recent meetings tells a story.

At the Vaal on Thursday 24 August, all nine winners were tested.

On Friday 25 August at Fairview, all eight winners were tested.

At Hollywoodbets Greyville on Sunday, all eight winners were tested.

But at Fairview on Monday, Matsuyamo (50-1) beats El Romiachi (11-2) narrowly, with the winner’s stablemate and favourite Central City (7-2) in third.

Only 0,30 lengths seperated the top trio.

Matsuyamo, who is on a sale in a couple of weeks, doesn’t crack a mention for an improved run inquiry, or a test.

( READ IN FULL www.sportingpost.co.za/50-1-shot-no-questions-no-test-but-why/ )

Sure zoro or ziets can comment as George had a wonderful bet on his horse and very unlucky and disappointed 😪
So was I ........

THE STIPENDIARY STEWARDS REPORTED:

a) EQUESTRIAN AFFAIR (R Khathi) over raced in the early stages.
b) At the 300m LIFE ON MARS (S Khumalo) rolled out marginally and brushed IRISH RAIN (M van Rensburg).
c) Jockey S Khathi was charged with a contravention of Rule 58.10.2 (read with Guideline M on the use of the crop) in that as the rider of MATSUYAMO he misused his crop by striking MATSUYAMO more than 12 times (13) which was not warranted when considering the circumstances of the race. Jockey S Khathi signed an admission of guilt and was fined R2 000,00.
d) EL ROMIACHI, the second-place horse, was selected for the taking of specimens for analysis. Trainer Z Oosthuizen was advised. (LM)
e) FIRE LORD, unplaced, was selected for the taking of specimens for analysis. Trainer GD Smith was advised. (LM)


all other races the winner was tested. sure this is an admin error. if not smacks of underhanded/dodgy goings ons

As a part owner of El Romiachi im astounded how the MASSIVE outsider was not tested. The horse must have destroyed many P 6 tickets and besides the excess use of the whip, i wonder how corrupt the game is. Shame on the officials who have shamed the game with being totally inconsistent once again.

zoro wrote:

As a part owner of El Romiachi im astounded how the MASSIVE outsider was not tested. The horse must have destroyed many P 6 tickets and besides the excess use of the whip, i wonder how corrupt the game is. Shame on the officials who have shamed the game with being totally inconsistent once again.

Surely this has cost you a packet Zoro. yet as a owner you support the game but this crap from the officials really takes the cake. lol

When was a winner ever not taken for a dope test since testing was introduced????????

When was a trainer of a 50/1 winner not questioned about the run ?

Jockey gets only 2k stick fine but his comm atleast doubles after fine is paid ..... lekker man

And oñ top of this the Handicapper gave EL ROMIACHI 3 points penalty for runnimg 2nd ..... Why why why???????
His best ever rating in 82 starts was 79 . He was running of a 78 rating on monday. He was actually the linehorse who ran to his best abilty but the handicapper decided he ran 2 points better than ever on his 83rd start as a 7 year old.... and it was his 28th start in last 13 months


Yes, im godsmacked....

Does anyone actually expect a reply from the stipes?

Jackson, if a specimen had been taken from the winner.. & IF the result was changed a few weeks later this would not have helped poor George ( & all other punters ) with his bets on the day or the P6

YES, the stake money would be redistributed.... but as far as all his loosing bets...... they would remain loosing bets even if EL have been given the race weeks later :silly:

durbs wrote:

Does anyone actually expect a reply from the stipes?

Vee is very approachable

Must agree with you Ziets- your horse should have been the line horse. He was my pick on consistency and draw, and does not deserve a penalty.

I suspect that the intention was to test the winner as is usual, and that there was a mix up with the 3rd place stable companion tagged instead. One hopes a proper and swift enquiry will happen.

Despite the huge price, I don't think that the winner was that much of a shock, although he is inconsistent and the stable jockey was on the other one. This was a closely rated handicap and the favourite was too short. Four runs ago, Matsuyamo ran 4 lengths off Heathcliff at level weights.

The 9/4 hot pot fav that ran 3rd was not tested either Peter. It was oy 2nd place EL ROM and the fire lord 50/1 that ran 2nd last......

Dear Dave,


I attach a copy of Matsuyamo's form line. Please study carefully. There was absolutely no reason for the Stipendiary stewards to open an inquiry or question the trainer for the so called "improved run "performance. It's clearly evident that he performs better on the poly track - as all of his 3 wins were on that surface. His prior run, he was beaten 9,75 L on the turf over 2000m , his first run in just under 3 months, & wins 10 days later. What surprises me, is why there was no request for an improved run inquiry when on the 17.02.2023 Matsuyamo was beaten 10,40 L behind Light Without over 2400m & then won his next start on the poly over 1900m, 11 days later.I am of the opinion that the " starting price " bias is dominating the conversation. It is obvious that when the " odds makers (Bookmakers ) price up runners they have certain jockeys at much restricted odds & others at much longer odds, stable jockeys selection are an indication, especially when there are couplings. From a racing control perspective, the winner ( we ignore betting) won a handicap of a MR 71 28 February & was adjusted to a MR 75 , he was beaten an average of 5 L in his last 4 runs, coupled with a 2 point MR drop,& this being a handicap, where every runner should have a equal chance of winning, there was no need to inquire into the win. I trust that this settles your first query.


As for the deviation, for specimen collection in this particular race, I cannot expand on the exact details for obvious Racing Control reasons, the Stipendiary Board & the Veterinary Surgeon on duty applied themselves accordingly, & fully supported by Executive Management, post race.


On another note, if you follow the Stipendiary stewards Reports nationally, you would notice a host of changes on our standard specimen collection procedures & selection criteria.


Thank you


Vee Moodley