View Full Version : stewards' enquiry
Shallow Hal
23-09-2002, 23:06
Stewards will continue this Thursday their enquiry into Eric Saint-Martin's riding of Double Happiness at Sha Tin yesterday.
He'll need to do some fast talking and certainly cannot afford any more problems. Already on last chance with HKJC according to licensing committee.
Quite surprising that I haven't read that many venomous criticisms of Saint-Martin's riding of Double Happiness. Rather, there's a sense of bewilderment. ESM is enjoying such a fabulous run. People just don't understand why he would ride like that. After all, Carry The News went inside from gate 14 to win the race. OTOH, Double Happiness dropped back from gate 1 to go outside, only to lose the race by 2-3/4 lengths. Most people would think that without ESM's curious move Double Happiness might well have won the race, or finished in the quinella at the very least.
maybe the stewards cant take eric talking to the press and his recent good form.
Homer J.
27-09-2002, 01:50
Eric got 16 meetings and Andy Leung a big fine.
Bye-bye Eric.... :confused:
Horny Harry
27-09-2002, 02:02
Brian Kan had little to say for the press after winning the Forbes Cup with rejuvenated Splendid Patrol, winner of two of his three starts since joining the stable, but did indicate he had expected a bigger cup at the trophy presentation.
I thought someone else would have got rubbed out after the severe interference on the home turn in race 3.
[ September 26, 2002, 08:07 PM: Message edited by: Horny Harry ]
Huh, there was no interference in that race????
I think you mean the third race. anyway, this isn't to do with the Saint-Martin problem. boy he's going to be really annoyed and will probably just go to the airport after this?
I live and go racing in Macau and we see a few things like this quite often but maybe not too much in Hong kong.
Wow. The stewards didn't mess around. But they never seem to go after the trainers like they do the jocks.
Leung got fined $250,000...
According to the JC's press release:
quote:Mr T W Leung, trainer of DOUBLE HAPPINESS, was charged with being a party to the breach of the Rule by Jockey Saint-Martin [Rule 99(3)]. The charge against Mr Leung was particularised in that the instructions given by him to Jockey Saint-Martin before his ride on DOUBLE HAPPINESS had contributed to the horse being ridden in such a manner that it was not given a full opportunity to win or to obtain the best possible placing in the field. Mr Leung pleaded not guilty, however, after careful consideration of all the evidence submitted, the Stewards were of the opinion the charge could be sustained and accordingly Mr Leung was found guilty.
Mr Leung was fined $250,000.
So ESM was only following Leung's instructions. How come he was only fined $250,000 whereas ESM was suspended for 16 days? Most likely the fine will cost ESM his licence whereas Leung will still be around for a while. IMHO, a much heavier fine for Leung was called for. Still I am not unhappy because in the past trainers were rarely fined for similar breaches.
IMHO, a much heavier fine for Leung was called for. Still I am not unhappy because in the past trainers were rarely fined for similar breaches.
agree as usual masun. tis criminal the jockeys have always taken the rap in the past and the trainers escaped scotfree.
Steppin Short
27-09-2002, 20:42
Maybe the stewards have it wrong this time. Consider that ESM rode the horse 13/4/2002, held back worse than midfield, came round them and won, admittedly he had drawn 11 on that occassion. the horse has also shown some reluctance to race tight inside in a previous race. And when Legrix rode him previously on the pace he failed to go on and finished worse than midfield.
Wonder would the stewards have enquired if Dye had ridden the horse? Similar type ride to a lot of RSD's.
Interesting parts are a) as Steppin Short mentioned, the necessity to get the horse away from the inside because of his own reluctance inside horses and b) the apparent bias to the outside during the meeting.
Was R S Dye doing the intelligent thing (without hindsight) by taking the favourite back to what appeared to be the slower going? And had it not managed to win, would his ride have been inquired into?
I've got no brief to defend jockeys but I do think it is hard to hang Eric SM on any rational viewing of the race. He spent most of the race tracking the main opponent - Dye - and no wider on the track than him through the parts in which the stewards have alleged he destroyed the horse's chance, he turned the circle on the arse of C The News but went to the centre of the track when Dye surprised by going up the inside. Had Dye come to the outside, would ESM have faced any charge for the same ride?
Talk at the track is Leung came up with the idea that the track wasn't good on the rails and his horse was best away from the rails as well. So he tells Eric the plan and Eric follows it, probably a little too much to the letter? Might have been better to suspend Leung and fine Eric.
some years ago i heard a story re darryl holland riding a geoff lane horse which he had pulled in the past. for his last ride on the horse a couple of pros advised him / lane? that it was too far down in the weights, too good and too fit and begged ( ?? ) lane to let it run. lane said no so holland did as he was told and the stewards ended his career here.
maybe the stewards case was weak on that particular ride but holland supposedly said they got him not just for that ride but 5 others prior to it.
for months afterwards the story going around was that lane would not get a license for the next season but suddenly his strike rate of winners and placed horses DOUBLED for the rest of the season and he survived. why ??? the licensing committee must have been either corrupt ( i don't really believe this ) or morons.
another possibility is they did not want to harm the image of racing here but if they allow corrupt trainers to survive it does long term harm so i would still class them as morons.
Might have been better to suspend Leung and fine Eric.
good idea vincent. if the ride was a badun then i would allocate the blame 90% to leung and 10% to ESM.
if there was any sort of outside bias then i think this riding plan is not all that bad given his other runs from behind. so maybe a bit stiff. however they should have let the stewards know they would ride him back (& wide).
does barrier 1 mean you have to go up & in?
[ September 27, 2002, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: Scarper ]
however they should have let the stewards know they would ride him back (& wide).
This is the crux of the matter. Had they informed the stewards so that the unusual tactic could be announced to the public beforehand, no one could have complained. Leung and ESM should have been experienced enough to know that the stewards wouldn't have let them off a ride like that.
Btw, most messages I have read in the Chinese forums are sympathetic to ESM. Most posters don't want to see this talented rider disappear from HK.
I agree with Masun , if the connections had have announced there riding intentions prior to the race then nothing would have happenned...ESM & Leung should have been experienced enough for that.....anyway i think ESM has been harshly treated.
Cant believe the trainer gets off with a slap and Eric's career in HK is in ruins. In saying that he gave the horse an impossible task. He is erratic as a rider at the best of times. A genius one minute a dope the next.
Bye Bye Eric
It didn't occur to me but someone pointed out in Apple Daily's racing forum that the heavy fines might have something to do with BBC's upcoming programme "Panarama". From what's known already, HKJC will be mentioned in the programme. So it could be the case that the JC wants to act tough now in preparation for any potential furore which may follow after the broadcast of the programme in October.
Btw, what's unusual about the case is that Leung and ESM were charged for breaching Racing Rule 99 whereas in the past similar cases were dealt with under Rule 131. I am not familiar with these racing rules. What exactly are the differences between Rules 99 and 131?
This Panarama program is causing no end of confusion.
I really doubt the angle is towards race fixing etc in HK - this would be very misleading as racing in HK is predominantly honest IMO.
So while i was in the UK i was surprised to be reading articles stating that the program was predminatly about the HKJC races. Mention of triads (one idiot refered to them as yakuza) was frequent. One journo seemed to think it was triad groups in the northeast of england that were behind the race fixing. English racing, which i would be quite sure is less honest, was hardly mentioned in many. Perhaps this is because english racing seem dull in comparison with stories of HKs huge pools and the infamous triad gangs etc.
ESM was only following instuctions, he has been treated much worse
horseshoof
01-10-2002, 04:03
On a slight tangent...
I can't fathom that in Britain they have allowed Egan to continue riding when there is still (I believe) a warrant out for his arrest in Hong Kong.
It is one thing for them not to demand him to return, but to allow him to keep riding shows no respect for HK as a judicial jurisdiction or more importantly for the HKJC and of course those bafoons at ICAC.
What if HK allowed an English jockey to hide here when he was accused of similar offences and also gave him a licence to ride.
Whether there is substance in the allegations against Egan is not the point.
They have more or less said f#%$ you HK. Stay here Johnny boy and keep riding, we are not worried about race fixing allegations.
How could the public have confidence in an organization that does that.
Surely they should at least ask him to return to face the music, or more importantly not allow him to ride until he has, or he has been cleared here.
horseshoof i think you will find the HKJC did NOT impose a worldwide suspension on egan so i think the responsibility it theirs not their UK counterparts. i have also been curious why they have not imposed the ww ban since he failed to turn up here but p'raps they feel the ICAC can sort it out. there is also a precedent involving gary moore who rode overseas whilst the ICAC wanted him here.
allegro winner of R1 today @ 38/1 had not finished better than 2nd last at his 3 starts last season at an average price of 209/1. raced with blinkers, trained by leung and ridden by ESM.
Another black mark against leung !!
allegro winner of R1 today @ 38/1 had not finished better than 2nd last at his 3 starts last season at an average price of 209/1. raced with blinkers, trained by leung and ridden by ESM.
What's remarkable is that the horse was @38/1, for a horse that's lost more than a total of 70 lengths in its last three races! Granted the horse dropped in class but that hardly justifies the drop from 209/1 to 38/1. Wonder who backed the horse to such a short price?
Btw, in another Class 5 race at HV on September 18 -- which incidentally was also R1 -- Kashmac won the race after having its blinkers and hood removed. The horse showed very little last season, and finished 13th in its last two races. Again a simple gear change turned a loser into a winner. It seems that studying the form of such low class affairs is a complete waste of time.
Horny Harry
02-10-2002, 15:26
'I have to clear my name' - Saint-Martin
NICK PULFORD, Racing Editor
Eric Saint-Martin last night said he was determined to clear his name at his forthcoming appeal against the 16-meeting suspension imposed by the Hong Kong Jockey Club stewards for his ride on Double Happiness. Saint-Martin had a treble at Sha Tin yesterday to move three clear at the top of the jockeys' table, but even that could not lift his spirits as he contemplated the ban and its effect on his career.
"I was given a very fair hearing by the stewards, but I have to appeal because the verdict was unjust," a subdued Saint-Martin said after racing. "I made a mistake or a misjudgment in the race, call it what you like, but I have been punished as if I have committed a crime. Even if they think I'm guilty, 16 meetings is too much"
The Frenchman, son of legendary jockey Yves Saint-Martin, added: "The news of this suspension has been in the press in Europe and it is damaging to my reputation there and to my father's name too. He rang me from France and was so concerned that he said he would fly out here next week, but I told him to stay at home and that I would sort it out. I have had a long career riding all over the world and I have to clear my name"
Saint-Martin said he had appealed only once before in Hong Kong, in his first season back in 1994. On that occasion, his original nine-day suspension over a fall on the dirt track was reduced to three days on appeal, he said.
"I don't usually appeal because sometimes you have to accept you are guilty, but this time I have to fight because it is unfair"
The Frenchman was banned at an inquiry last Thursday for failing to take "all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure Double Happiness was given a full opportunity to win or to obtain the best possible placing" at Sha Tin 10 days ago. He was originally suspended with immediate effect until November 25, but was able to ride yesterday as he had been given a stay of proceedings after lodging his appeal on Friday. He made good use of the opportunity by scoring aboard Allegro, Royal Army and Wise Choice to take his score to 13 as the season moved into its second month.
The first two winners were for Andy Leung Ting-wah, who also trains Double Happiness and was fined a record $250,000 for being party to Saint-Martin's offence. Leung has also lodged an appeal.
Both appeals are likely to be heard tomorrow week. Saint-Martin will be permitted to ride at Sha Tin on Sunday and Happy Valley a week today but, if his appeal fails, he is likely to be replaced on any mounts he has accepted for the Sha Tin meeting on October 12.
I think ESM was guilty of another poor ride & not of pulling Double Happiness up.
The JC has been too harsh , ESM may deserve a holiday? but not 16 meetings.
Woods bridles at `please explain' Luckswell victory
`If I tell everyone then they aren't tactics are they?'
GOLDEN BOY: New trainer Sean Woods is delighted with Golden Air's victory, but his joy was tempered when asked to explain the tactics on Luckswell (left), who led all the way. Garrige Ho
Alan Aitken
Rookie trainer Sean Woods should have been walking on air after a winning double at Sha Tin yesterday but was dragged barefoot over hot coals in the stewards' room instead. The stipendiary stewards had a "please explain" request for Woods after Luckswell won the Class One feature over 2,000 metres at his debut run for the Englishman, and the trainer was seething on what should have been his happiest day in Hong Kong.
Luckswell (Weichong Marwing) was seen in the unaccustomed role of frontrunner, while stablemate and regular leader Idol (Rodney Quinn) sat outside him in the slack tempo. The pair turned for home virtually on level pegging to fight the race out, while those chasing were left napping.
Woods was hauled in to explain the tactics on both runners, and especially the winner, but said that he had not sent the riders out with a set plan of action. "I told both of my riders the same thing - have the horse travelling where he is comfortable in his gauge. If that meant they were going to be last or first, so be it," Woods said, then bridled when told he should have informed the stewards panel of any change of tactics in the race.
"They were both having their first start for me, so it was not a change of tactics as far as I was concerned," an angry Woods said. "And I don't believe I should divulge my tactics anyway if there had been set instructions. If I tell everyone then they aren't tactics are they? I don't even tell the two riders what I want from the other one. I seem to recall a jockey was heavily fined here a couple of years ago for discussing tactics before a race." Woods was referring to New Zealander Greg Childs, who copped a $300,000 fine for admitting he had discussed race tactics on Sunline before she won the Hong Kong Mile.
The stewards reported that the explanations tendered by Woods were accepted, but the trainer said he was frustrated by the line of inquiry. "There was no speed on and I think both jockeys rode good sensible races," Woods said. "When the pace is slow, the best place to be is in front. The horses were relaxed and travelling comfortably. Had the pace been different, I expect they both would have been ridden differently."
Luckswell, a Derby fourth placegetter last season, looks a horse with some upside. "I see Luckswell had a pretty tough season last year as a young stayer coming through and so we will have to see how he will progress this year," Woods said.
"The trouble with him having a lot of racing is that he is such a giving horse - he would run through a brick wall for you and as often as you ask him to do it. With a horse that puts in so much effort, you have to be careful not to race him too much.
"And we have to see what the handicapper does. Hopefully, he will acknowledge that there was a false pace in the race and not penalise him too heavily."
" Marwing said no one wanted to take the lead and he was happy to stay there. "He won leading today and I think he is going to be a nice stayer for Sean. But I also think in time it will become clear that leading is not really the way to ride the horse - he'll be better with the box seat than the front. The way the race panned out today, that was just how it happened," Marwing said.
"He came out of the gates a bit fresh, a bit keen and took himself up there. I would have preferred to have someone else take the front and Luckswell sit off them but nobody wanted to do it."
Woods was optimistic after the effort of former Hong Kong Gold Cup winner Idol, too, even though he weakened out of the placings late. "He ran very well. He was a bit above himself and after coming to win at the 200 he just blew up in the latter stages," he said. "He needed that and will come on from the run. Idol might want a bit further than 2,000 metres, too, so I was very happy with his effort."
If he can recover his best form for Woods, Idol may be a chance to head towards the International Races in December. "At the moment both of these horses are a long way from that standard," Woods said. "After this I suppose they are both about 100 in the ratings and that is not good enough. But they will be entered and we'll see how they progress."
Woods first winner yesterday came in the previous event, also with Marwing, as Golden Air equalled the course record for the 1,200-metre all-weather course. The gelding had been the subject of a different difficulty for Woods when he was withdrawn by the Club's new regulatory vet, Dr Brian Stewart, the day before a race on September 25. Dr Stewart had reported Golden Air as lame in both front legs in his pre-race check, forcing the withdrawal. "I didn't think there was anything wrong with the horse," Woods said. "And I was so sure of it, that I put him up for his vet check again three days later and he was passed fit."
The delay meant Golden Air could not start at Happy Valley and instead returned to the all-weather track where he had shown his best last season and never looked like losing yesterday.
sounds like the stewards went OTT this time - maybe they just wanted to let woods know they mean business!
i agree with woods in that its not a change in tactics given its their first start for him.
10 October 2002
Appeal – E Saint-Martin
The Appeal lodged by Jockey E Saint-Martin, against the decision of the Racing Stewards made on 26 September 2002 to suspend him from riding in races for a period to expire on 25 November 2002 for a breach of the Rules of Racing 99(2) and (3), was heard by the Stewards of the Jockey Club at 5:15 p.m. on 10 October 2002.
The Panel dismissed the Appeal but decided to reduce the penalty originally imposed. Jockey Saint-Martin is suspended from race riding for a period to expire on 14 November 2002. His suspension takes effect and runs after the race meeting on 12 October 2002. The Stewards further decided that his deposit be refunded.
Appeal - Trainer T W Leung
The Appeal lodged by Trainer T W Leung, against the decision of the Racing Stewards made on 26 September 2002 to fine him $250,000 for a breach of Rule 99(3) of the Rules of Racing, was heard by the Stewards of the Jockey Club at 5:15 p.m. on 10 October 2002.
The Panel dismissed the Appeal but decided to reduce his fine to $100,000. The Stewards further decided that his deposit be refunded.
By Order of the Stewards
of the Jockey Club
[ October 10, 2002, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: VINCENT ]
vBulletin v3.6.2, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.