It proved a tough day at the office on Saturday at Rosehill for both Dynamic horses LAUGHING & MASTERSTOKE after our horses were inexplicably ridden against specific instruction which ultimately, cost the owners and supporters any chance of winning.
It was a day where even those who don't follow our sport closely recognised you had to be on pace and certainly no wider than 3 deep because the track bias was not allowing horses from back off the speed to make ground.
Laughing still managed to run 3rd on Saturday
Riding instructions were given to acknowledge these issues and both riders without logic, totally disobeyed our tactical requests. Both our horses we considered were in winnable races but circumstances beyond connections control ensured their horses could not fight out the finish which their owners deserved.
Whilst racing is a sport and things can and do go wrong in almost every race, we all accept that you have to be a gracious looser to become a gracious winner. There is no such thing as a certainty and jockey error is one of many reasons why statistically, a good horse wins just 1 race per 7 starts. The variables are many.
However on Saturday, we were dumbfounded how both horses could be ridden so deliberately against instruction.
In race 1, the rider of the Gerald Ryan trained LAUGHING was given one very deliberate instruction - Lead. Surely that is not too hard to follow in a field of 4 for a any rider of city standard. Pre race, various speed maps had LAUGHING leading with ease. We anticipated to run along in front controlling the tempo. However having jumped away in a level line, our jockey disputed the lead for just a short distance before instead of pushing forward as instructed, he elected to ease out of that battle at the 1000m and take a sit on the back of the $1.30 favourite Sessions with the second favourite Catkins to the outside, locking Laughing away in a pocket in a slow run race. The jockey of Sessions Peter Robl, crossed us without sufficient room causing us to be checked and get on the heels of that runner. That caused us to over race and strike the running rail a furlong later.
The fact is - jockeys are engaged to follow instruction. It's a pet annoyance of ours that after hours of race analysis, specific instruction are deliberately not followed. As soon as Laughing did not lead, the race was over as the pace was gone and the favourite had a picnic in front. That was very dispiriting for all connections. We were very confident had our instructions been followed, we would have been extremely competitive based upon her exposed form lines and ongoing track work. After all, our filly had just 52.0kgs and had recorded blistering sectionals at both her starts to date. Then as she did balance up for the run home, the race was over and she just rolled to the line. Apprentices get allowances based upon inexperience and they do make mistakes. The allowances are why they are given opportunities against the senior riders. However even to the most tolerant of people, this was not an instruction that was capable of confusion.
That ride was unacceptable for connections and punters alike from a capable young apprentice with plenty of experience.
Protecting the integrity of racing, the stewards did question our rider about the incidents at the 1000m and again the 800m. However it was disconcerting for our connections of Laughing to read in the Stewards report that our rider was "Spoken to by the Stewards regarding the veracity of his evidence".
VERACITY definition: Truthfulness; Honesty; Full Disclosure; Accuracy; Conformity to Facts; Abstain from Misrepresentation or Deceit.
MASTERSTROKE
However as disappointed as we all were in the ride of Laughing, it was not as poor as the ride the connections of MASTERSTROKE witnessed and had inflicted upon their horse.
MASTERSTOKE was in our opinion given a poor ride after his jockey deliberately disobey riding instruction. He was advised that, by the last race of the day, no horse had made ground wide on the track. We had an awkward draw and the speed maps had this event being run quickly upfront setting things up for a back marker to make some ground but only as long as you were close to the fence.
Our speed maps had us settling at the rear of the field. So between trainer Jason Coyle and ourselves as racing managers, we devised a specific plan to win the race.
We wanted to get back in this field here to find the fence. Because they would run so hard up front, we believed by getting back to the fence or just one off if we could not have found the rail, we could sneak up behind the leaders and cut the corner turning for home saving valuable ground. Then we would ride for luck that a gap would open. If it didn't, that's just racing and bad luck but, if we went wide, the pattern of the day said we had no hope. We were confident we could win but just needed a vital touch of racing luck. Connections knew the plan and the rider acknowledged what the plan was.
So what happens? The horse gets back in the ruck to the tail but instead of going across to the fence, where we believe on the footage we saw he had ample opportunity to get there, he sits 3 deep ! Then at the 600m, he gets pushed out 5 deep around the turn. As he balances up for the run to the post, he angles out to be the widest runner without exaggeration, he was 10 deep and a long last. MASTERSTROKE powers home against the pattern of the day to run 5th beaten 0.9 lengths. On pure mathematical measurements, getting this wide around the turn and angling wider in the straight, he has lost a minimum 4 lengths in distance before coming from 8 lengths off the speed, to be defeated 0.9 len, his run was awesome. We can only ponder what could have been, had the horse been ridden as requested and not totally against instruction.
Masterstroke ran 5th at Rosehill beaten only 0.9
We understand things go wrong and mistakes happen. Its a fast moving, fast thinking sport. Things go wrong, races don't pan out as they appear they will on paper and riders misjudge opportunities. However when riders deliberately disobey basic instruction and cost the owners competitive opportunities, it's a demoralising position for all connections.
The stewards do a tough job extremely well questioning wherever they can to protect the integrity and transparency of our industry.