THIS website continues to listen to what our readers have to say and has introduced a ‘Wednesday Whinge’ where you can express your feelings on racing industry issues of the past week. Try to keep them objective. Just e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
WE have devoted a deal of space in this week’s Wednesday Whinge to the Gai Waterhouse – John Singleton – More Joyous saga and included some editorializing to go with your e-mails. The same applies to the decision to hold another Commission of Inquiry into Racing in Queensland. The bad blood between Robbie Heathcote and jockey Larry Cassidy prompted several e-mails entirely in support of the leading trainer. We decided to have our say on this one as well. There are numerous other contentious topics covered in a column that is quite different to the norm.
As usual we start the WEDNESDAY WHINGE with our popular feature: THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY SIDE OF RACING and again this week have decided to start with ‘The UGLY’ section because that was what dominated the headlines.
CONTROVERSY IN RACING SPREADING UP THE EAST COAST LIKE A PLAGUE
CONTROVERSY in racing seems to be spreading up the east coast of Australia like a plague and it is about to cross the border into Queensland where the tourism slogan boasts beautiful one day, perfect the next – but in racing it goes from chaos to crap fight.
The ugly side of the sport has moved on from the race fixing and jockey betting scandals in Victoria to airing of some dirty washing at the More Joyous inquiry in NSW, to Brisbane, where the spotlight will focus on yet another Government-ordered Inquiry into Racing to begin in July.
This is the third of its kind in the Sunshine State – the two previous ones were farces and fizzers – where politics continue to dominate what is happening in racing and they just don’t seem to be able to get the industry on a stable footing as emphasized by the poor prizemoney and lack of punter confidence in the product.
The Government can find millions of dollars for inquiries in Queensland – many of them political witch-hunts as some have described the latest one in racing – but when it comes to desperately needed prizemoney increases to keep the industry in touch with the southern states, by and large the cupboard is bare.
There is no doubt that the previous Bob Bentley Board was entrenched for far too long and got far too close to some in the Labor Government – just how close hopefully the latest inquiry will determine.
Now that the LNP have won Government it is obvious that the political witch-hunt has begun to claim some very big scalps in racing and they would hope even in politics. At the top of the list is Labor heavyweight Bill Ludwig who sat alongside Bob Bentley in the dying years of the RQ Board.
The campaign mounted by The Courier-Mail and The Australian has already questioned whether Bentley and Ludwig were working as much for their mates in the Labor Government as they were for the racing industry. Questions need to be answered. Some stake-holders believe the inquiry should be extended to include the first year of the new Board to prove it is apolitical.
Allegations of racing links to former Premier Anna Bligh and Treasurer Andrew Fraser; multi-million dollar contracts awarded to a Sunshine Coast engineering firm (and another with friends on the then RQ Board) without going to contract. Massive ‘golden hand-shakes’ to key loyal executives, two of whom left RQ days after the Government changed and walked straight into jobs with a firm awarded questionable cushion track contracts; and failure to secure almost $100 millionn in fees for the racing industry that remained in the coffers of TattsBet, the contracted TAB provider in Queensland. The list goes on, becomes very embarrassing and calls for some tough questions and acceptable explanations from those responsible.
DECISIONS THAT COST THE RACING INDUSTRY ALMOST $100MN NEED EXPLAINING
DECISIONS that cost the racing industry in Queensland close to $100 million dollars in fees centre around the operations of ProductCo, an arm of RQ formed to deal directly with TattsBet, which Bob Bentley was not a member of because of a conflict with his Tattersalls Board directorship.
Sacked RQ Board members, the popular Bill Andrews and highly respected Michael Lambert, raised questions and provided warnings about the operation of ProductCo which was chaired by Bentley’s first lieutenant at RQ in Tony Hanmer, a less than popular figure in the eyes of many in the racing industry.
Questions are already being asked why racing in Queensland should go back to Tattersalls when the new TAB agreement is negotiated. The current one has proven an absolute disaster despite the fact that it was steamrolled through by the Premier of the time and the then Racing Minister, Peter Beattie and Bob Gibbs respectively.
TattsBet has done nothing for racing in Queensland in the eyes of the stakeholders; punters regard it as a third rate betting service to the two big tote providers; and the message being sent to the new RQ Board is this: ‘Negotiate a better deal with the best provider. It could be a step towards a national tote if you walk away from Tatts.’
On another note some are questioning the budget of $3 million to run another inquiry into racing when the Ian Callinan probe into the Crime and Misconduct Commission was completed at a cost to the taxpayers of just over $300,000.
Regardless of the cost argument it needs to happen. Perhaps though it would have been easier to have had the serious allegations investigated by the appropriate authorities and if there was sufficient evidence to charge those responsible, rather than hold an inquiry, force them to face the courts to decide whether they have a prima facie case to answer.
Interesting times ahead as the controversy cloud floats north over racing in Queensland at a time when the winter carnival should be enjoying the spotlight. The big question being asked is: Will this inquiry amount to nothing like the other two did?
CALLS FOR RACING INQUIRY TO BE EXTENDED TO INCLUDE THE PAST YEAR
WE received several e-mails and phone calls from readers who believe there is merit in the proposal made by a respected sporting commentator on racing radio on Tuesday that the terms of reference of the latest Commission of Inquiry into Racing in Queensland are to a degree flawed.
Here are a couple of examples that we have chosen to run without using the name of the commentator because we did not hear what he had to say and didn’t have sufficient time to have it properly researched overnight.
‘THERE was a terrific suggestion made by (a high profile sports commentator, name with-held) on racing radio today that made a lot of sense politically.
He believes the terms of reference for the Racing Inquiry in Queensland should be extended to include the first 12 months of the Interim Board.
No-one is suggesting anything wrong occurred during that period but it overcomes allegations that the LNP Government is on a political witch-hunt against Labor when it is restricted to the time that Government was in office.
Much has been made in the media of how Anna Bligh, Andrew Fraser, Rob Schwarten and Tim Mulherin could be forced to give evidence along with Bob Bentley, Bill Ludwig and co.
It is hard to escape accusations of political square-ups when you consider some of the Labor luminaries that are likely to face a please explain for what happened in racing during the Bentley era.
To avoid the political witch-hunt theory from growing, is it too late for the Racing Minister to suggest to the Government that it should expand the inquiry to include the first year of the Interim Board?
There were things that happened during this period that some stake-holders, club officials and former Board members might like to raise. If the LNP wants to ensure racing that this Inquiry is transparent and a level playing field then they should be prepared to hear any legitimate grievances about the men they put in power who they keep telling us are doing such a wonderful and open job.’ – As I am a senior official of a TAB club I would ask that my identity be with-held for obvious reasons.
And this one:
MORE BROWNIE POINTS FOR TTC AS THEY SUPPORT THE RACING INQUIRY
‘MY friends and I have been followers of racing on the Downs for some years and we had a little chuckle on hearing that the Toowoomba Turf Club was supporting the latest racing inquiry.
What was it the CEO reported on behalf of the committee – something like it was the inquiry that racing needed to have to air some of its dirty linen and restore confidence?
No doubt there are some in the TTC hierarchy who would like to see former chairman Neville Stewart dragged through the mud again.
“We will co-operate 100 per cent,” was the sentiment echoed on behalf of the club by CEO Clancy (of the Overflow at the mouth on this occasion). No-one needed to tell the industry that. They all know that the Chairman would bend over backwards for his good mate the RQ Chair.
It’s a funny business racing – not long ago when running the Breeders organization he was happy to support anything that Bob Bentley wanted done.
What this inquiry needs to do is broaden its terms of reference to include some of the decisions made by the Board that replaced Bentley and whether they had the power to do so in an interim capacity. I won’t go into details. – Fred Cox, Toowoomba.
EDITOR’S NOTE: TRANSPARENCY has been an important aspect of the decision making process when major changes have been announced by the new Government. We at LGHR support the latest inquiry. We see nothing wrong with the proposal to include the first year of the Interim Board but doubt that will bear any fruit. It would however overcome suggestions of a political witch-hunt and if there are stake-holders with grievances that involving the new powers-that-be then they should be given the same opportunity to air them. As for the Toowoomba Turf Club statement in support of the inquiry, well they’re just playing racing politics which comes as no surprise.
BENTLEY SUPPORTER CALLS FOR HIS SIDE OF THE STORY ON RACING INQUIRY
‘THE protector of everything right in racing, the good old fish and chips wrapper, The Courier-Mail, is taking all the credit for the latest Commission of Inquiry into Racing in Queensland.
Through their recently departed Racing Editor Bart Sinclair, the newspaper did a good hatchet job on the Bentley Board. Unfortunately, until Michael McKenna started writing some investigative pieces in The Australian involving the former RQ Board no-one took the CM seriously.
The reason for that is that Sinclair for so long did the bidding of the old Queensland Turf Club and his dislike for Bentley was so well documented that the majority in racing just put it down to another one-sided attack from a less than objective racing journalist.
Whether you liked him or not, Bentley was entitled to his side of the story which was rarely published by Sinclair. In fact it has hardly been a fair go that he has received in the latest attack on the integrity of him and his Board by The Courier-Mail.
But then to be subjected to that finger down the throat ‘I told you so’ by the former Racing Editor in the CM on Tuesday was the final straw for those of us who cannot cop the guy. The last thing we needed was his ‘gloating’ or quick return from much overdue retirement.
I could repeat what was said about Sinclair at the last inquiry but one thing I would rather you to check out is this. Has the Kevin Dixon-led RQ Board employed Bart Sinclair on a part-time or consultancy basis to work for them? If so, was the job advertised? - Les Lamb, Toowoomba.
EDITOR’S NOTE: IT is impossible for me to criticize the job The Courier-Mail has done in forcing another racing inquiry as I believe it needs to be held. There are too many unanswered questions relating to contracts and tenders. As for what Bart Sinclair is writing or what work he is doing now, who cares? To ensure that the Bob Bentley side of the story gets an airing here is part of what AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATED PRESS & ABC NEWS quoted him as saying about the inquiry:
A FORMER Racing Queensland boss has welcomed Government plans for an inquiry into how taxpayer funds were granted to the organisation.
Former RQL chairman Bob Bentley says the allegations are ‘an absolute load of rubbish’ and he welcomes an inquiry to put rumours to bed.
"We'll get it out on the table once and for all," Mr Bentley told AAP.
"People making all these accusations will have to put up or shut up now."
BENTLEY told ABC NEWS it was a chance to put to rest the rumors and innuendo that have plagued the industry in recent years.
"I welcome it - it's a properly set up commission of inquiry, which is good," he said.
"It's not some sort of Mickey Mouse type of inquiry. It's a proper inquiry where people will be required to give evidence under oath which is good.
"No-one looks forward to going to court.
"But ... it'll be a welcome relief to be able to get up and tell the story and answer the questions that keep flying around and all the different rumours that keep involving people and destroying reputations."
Mr Bentley says he has nothing to hide.
"All my dealings with the ministers involved was above board," he said.
Former RQL board member and Labor powerbroker Bill Ludwig could also be called to give evidence.
An audit by accountancy firm Deloitte, commissioned by the government, found $150 million worth of contracts were awarded to Contour Consulting Engineers without first going to tender, News Limited reports.
About $60 million worth of work was undertaken before the Newman government froze the spending, $20 million of which was approved by the Bligh government just before the 2012 state election.
Mr Bleijie says 37 contracts were allegedly issued to Contour and only one of those contracts underwent a tender process.
"What I'm concerned about is the contracts, the very generous contracts, and the processes around those and the contracts being awarded to certain companies," he told ABC radio on Monday.
Premier Campbell Newman told reporters ahead of Monday's cabinet meeting the allegations were stacking up.
"There have been too many stories in the media and too many complaints to the government for us to ignore this any longer," Mr Newman said.
Opposition Leader Annastacia Palaszczuk said if the government was going to launch an inquiry it needed to stop making prejudicial comments about former Labor MPs.
"I'm quite sure whoever is called will give full and frank explanations to the questions," she told reporters in Cairns.
"It is not for the government of the day to draw up its political witch-hunt list."
TIME FOR TONY HANMER TO ANSWER SOME TOUGH QUESTIONS ABOUT PRODUCTCO
‘HAVING followed the politics of racing in Queensland from the days when Sir Gordon Chalk was the Treasurer responsible for the industry, to the rough and tumble times of big Russ Hinze and then on to some Labor luminaries in Bob Gibbs, Merri Rose, Rob Schwarten and Tim Mulherin, there are some points I would like to raise.
In the Hinze era the Queensland Turf Club ran racing but it was my way or the highway with the Minister for Everything. Gibbs took over and dismantled the QTC, which some felt was overdue and appointed what was supposed to be a more democratic body to run racing.
Unfortunately it has been political influence ever since and Labor grew too close to those running racing. Bob Bentley was there for too long. The links between racing and the Government have been too close since Peter Beattie was Premier and Bob Gibbs forced that awful TAB privatization deal on the industry that basically destroyed the financial viability of racing in Queensland.
Bentley seemed to become even closer to Government once Labor heavyweight Bill Ludwig joined the Board. Some concerning allegations have emanated from stories in The Australian in particular (which had no agenda) and The Courier-Mail (which did during the Bart Sinclair era as Racing Editor).
These need to be fully investigated and another inquiry is justified providing the cost is covered by the Government and not the industry. Someone has to pay the price – and not a political scapegoat – if contracts were illegally awarded or if racing was doing the bidding of the Government in some financial areas close to the last election.
There is also a finer point that needs to be made a lot clearer than it has been in media reports and that focuses on the involvement of ProductCo, which was the RQ arm responsible for dealing with Tattersalls and the TAB.
I believe the chairman of this body was one Tony Hanmer, the deputy RQ chairman to Bentley, who had to disqualify himself from TAB dealings because of his directorship of Tatts. Those of us who have had dealings with Hanmer soon realized how little he knew about racing.
But the fact remains that he was still put there – as he was in questionable circumstances on a body involved with the running of the Deagon Training Centre which became an area of some controversial questions during a previous inquiry involving Minister Merri Rose.
Sacked Board members Bill Andrews and Michael Lambert – both much more highly respected in the eyes of the industry than Hanmer ever was – questioned and warned against the failure to collect almost $100 million in fees from TattsBet.
The time has come for Hanmer, more noted as a motivational speaker than a racing purist, to step up to the witness box and do some explaining of what was happening on ProductCo and why the industry didn’t get the tens of millions that it was entitled to and could have helped boost desperately needed prizemoney increases.
Perhaps at this inquiry Hanmer won’t be able to sweet talk his way around the awkward questions and someone with some knowledge of the subject might be able to do a ‘Perry Mason’ style cross-examination on what actually happened and get some answers as to whether there was any interference in the ProductCo arrangement with the TAB.’ – Albert Williams, Redcliffe.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I had plenty of forgettable dealings with this gentleman when I was working at RQ and agree with the majority in the industry that he was out of his depth in racing. His strength might be ‘motivational speaking’ but it was never going to win most of those in racing over. They regarded him as an interloper and a non-event. He even managed to fall out with fellow Board member Bill Andrews – one of the nice guys of racing in Queensland. It probably comes as no surprise that Hanmer gained the support of Merri Rose when she was Racing Minister but I know for a fact that Bob Bentley had no raps on the bloke but he still managed to climb the ladder. Perhaps it was the old ‘surround yourself with …. syndrome’ where Bob the Builder was concerned. It will be interesting to see (a) if Hanmer makes it to the witness box as Chairman of ProductCo and (2) if the questions he is asked this time around at a Racing Inquiry are less than the Dorothy Dix’s he got over his involvement with the Training Centre when the Daubney-Rafter Inquiry was held.
SUNSHINE COAST SEEMS TO BE AT THE CENTRE OF ‘EVERYTHING BAD’ IN QLD RACING
‘RACING on the Sunshine Coast seems to be at the centre of everything bad being aimed at the former Bentley Board.
First there were the allegations concerning Contour Constructions allegedly getting multi-million dollar contracts that didn’t go to tender and apparently employing two of the loyal bosses from RQ after they walked away from racing with ‘golden handshakes.’
Now, according to newspaper reports, we have allegations that a company linked to a former director of the Sunshine Coast Turf Club in Tom Blacklaw has been drawn into the tender controversy.
Thank God for the inquiry that has been launched and full marks to the Racing Minister Steve Dickson for being prepared to support it fully when there could be some dirty linen aired in his own electorate.
The word is strong that racing in Queensland has developed into a power struggle politically behind the scenes between the RQ Chairman Kevin Dixon (with the support of his mate Treasurer Tim Nicholls) and the Racing Minister Steve Dickson (a great supporter of Premier Campbell Newman).
It is time that someone told the RQ Chairman that the 12 months when ‘he’ was running the show have ended and now it is ‘us’ – a new Board, new faces, some not so supportive, others that are – where decisions need to be democratically made in the interests of all involved in the industry, not just a select few.’ – Len Griffin, Sunshine Coast.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I don’t want to enter into the racing debate of who’s got the ‘biggest you know what’ between the RQ Chairman and the Racing Minister but here’s a story on the latest contract controversy by MICHAEL McKENNA from THE AUSTRALIAN:
THE investigation into the former Labor-aligned board of Racing Queensland has widened, with new allegations that a company linked to a veteran turf club official secured work without contracts going to tender and received unauthorized payments.
Forensic auditors, probing more than $158 million in contracts for the statewide upgrade of tracks and facilities, have slammed the "procurement and contracting procedures" relating to work carried out by the Sunshine Coast-based Blacklaw Civil Contractors.
It is the second company named in the probe, ordered last year by the Newman government, which initially focused on another Sunshine Coast firm, Contour Consulting Engineers, that was appointed to co-ordinate and/or design much of the capital works program through 37 contracts, with just one going to tender.
Blacklaw is understood to have secured more than $10 million in work, including construction of the new track at the Sunshine Coast Turf Club's Corbould Park Racecourse, which it won without the project going to tender.
The company was founded by Tom Blacklaw, who, according to documents, was on the board of the Sunshine Coast Turf Club when the first payments for the new synthetic track at Corbould Park were made to the civil construction company in 2007.
"There was a relationship between Mr Thomas Maxwell Blacklaw and the Sunshine Coast Turf Club," Deloittes said in its audit report, now with the Newman government.
"Mr Blacklaw is a director, secretary and shareholder of Blacklaw Civil Contractors Pty Ltd (Blacklaw) and is also on the Board of the Sunshine Coast Turf Club.
"Blacklaw, amongst other projects undertaken for RQL, constructed the stables and cushion track at the Sunshine Coast Turf Club."
Mr Blacklaw last night disputed the auditor's findings.
He said he had sold the company to a partnership a decade ago.
"I have had nothing to do with the company for years, I had nothing to do with any of the work," he said.
The auditors, who have called for an investigation into Racing Queensland's dealings with Contour, said there were "similar gaps" in the paperwork and contracting procedures relating to Blacklaw.
Blacklaw managing partner Colin Gursanscky said Mr Blacklaw had "nothing to do with the company" and that his company had followed proper record-keeping on its works.
FORMER LEADING LIGHT FROM RQ FACING PROBLEMS OUTSIDE OF RACING
THE mail from the Deagon Bunker is strong that a former leading light from Racing Queensland could soon be facing court over a serious non-racing related matter.
The identity is not a former Board member and many are viewing the fact that he has hit a major hurdle and could have to answer a serious charge as quiet justice for those in racing who despise him.
The fact that he could also be embroiled in the Commission of Inquiry into Racing means there are more than the odd sleepless night ahead.
THIS WAS A SNUB THAT THE RACING MINISTER NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF
THE apparent snub shown to a new high profile appointee to the Board at a recent minor code function is a major talking point.
It seems that while officials of a leading club wined and dined the Chairman for Everything in Racing Queensland, this key Board appointee was given the ‘cold shoulder.’
The fact that he was relegated to the back blocks – while those that matter in the sport wined and dined the White Knight of racing did not go overlooked.
It was a disgusting snub and something that the Racing Minister – who most believe is doing a terrific job – needs to be aware of and should deliver a never to happen again declaration to a couple of high rollers in a minor code.
THE PERILS OF DEALING WITH THE MEDIA FOR LICENSEES WHO DARE TO CRITICIZE
THERE’S a lesson to be learnt for any licensed person dealing with the racing media in Queensland – don’t criticize – especially officialdom or the stewards.
Terry Butts, the North Queensland trainer and racing columnist, had to fight a year long legal battle to clear his name when stewards decided to challenge his right to separate both the jobs he chooses to do.
There was a good deal of difference in the Butts situation compared to that of leading Brisbane trainer Robbie Heathcote who was fined $500 this week for bringing the industry into disrepute over comments he made concerning jockey Larry Cassidy in a blog on the Horse Racing Only website.
Butts was reporting on a swab situation and quoting trainer Darryl Hansen, not expressing an opinion of his own – although stewards didn’t differentiate – but wound up with egg on their faces when the Appeals Board gave them a nice spray over failing to recognize their right to deal with a licensee as opposed to a racing journalist.
The bad blood between Heathcote and Cassidy has been simmering for some time. They have traded verbal blows over several on-track incidents involving what basically amounted to questionable riding tactics in the eyes of the trainer.
Stewards have sent a message to Heathcote that they won’t tolerate his public criticism or perceived ‘threats’ – which he insists were misread – to Cassidy. But one suspects they were also a bit miffed because he raised the tactics in a recent race that they saw no need to investigate.
There were murmurs from the punting public over the tactics adopted by Cassidy on Listen Son when he served it up to Buffering when the star of the Heathcote stable made his comeback. Had there not been two stablemates of Listen Son from the Tony Gollan barn in the race it might not have looked so bad.
More to the point had Buffering succumbed to the pressure – and not gone on to win and emerge a legitimate big sprint prospect for the upcoming carnival – all hell would have broken loose from punters who supported the hot favorite.
It is hypothetical now but the fact remains that stewards should have asked Cassidy about his tactics whether he was entitled to pressure for the lead or not. It wasn’t a good look – sound familiar about Brisbane racing?
Instead it was left to Heathcote to raise the issue in the website blog that he writes for nothing but will now dump. Perhaps what he should have done is gone to the stewards and asked why they failed to do their job on the day in question.
The big loser in this drama between two high profile players in racing in Brisbane will be the punting public. As Chief Steward Wade Birch commented: Heathcote has been a ‘great ambassador’ for racing.
In the spur of the moment Robbie announced a ‘media ban’ and we at letsgohorseracing understand how he feels, having been through the Butts situation.
Why waste your time providing valuable information for the punting public as an aid to an industry that gives you a backhander for speaking your mind?
Time will probably mend Robbie’s feelings. Here’s hoping in the interim he restricts his ban to ‘Queensland only’ and continues to talk to the Melbourne racing media where he is a great favorite and has proved a real friend of the punters when tipping stable winners.
A little tip Robbie – next time you want to objectively criticize the stewards or officialdom in racing in Queensland – just give us a call and we’ll do the job for you independently. They can’t haul us before an inquiry and we will continue to bag the job they do whenever it is warranted whether they or their biggest supporter likes it or not.
WATERHOUSE MIGHT EMERGE THE VICTOR BUT ‘SINGO’ WINS IN COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION
THE mainstream media is keen to paint the First Lady of Australian Racing, Gai Waterhouse, as the victim in the More Joyous inquiry. But the court of public opinion – the punters – may not be as sympathetic.
The majority of those who have a bet on a weekly basis and watch racing from afar identify more readily with the John Singleton’s of racing than the Waterhouse family. Some regard this soap opera a remake of that old Marx Brothers favorite but have renamed it ‘A Day at the Zoo.’
Singelton may have gone off ‘half cocked’ as ‘Hoss’ Bentley, the Walter Kronkite of Australian racing reported from his perch high in Lady Gai Gai’s hat, but most believe whether the ‘old drunk as he has been labeled’ should have gone to the stewards with his concerns about More Joyous instead of angrily confronting Gai Waterhouse and trumpeting his feelings to the media.
Unfortunately the stories ‘Singo’ heard were only half-right, embellished by Andrew Johns – described as a rugby league ‘immortal’ – who by his own admission had a drink or three too many beforehand.
Then there were those, not keen to come forward at the inquiry, who wanted to let ‘Singo’ know they had the ‘inside mail’ about his favorite mare and that included the ‘mouth that roared’ – Allan Robinson, described by Waterhouse as a ‘little trumped up jockey’ – and Eddie Hayson, the big punter who operates the high class brothel Stiletto that is said to be a regular haunt of a Who’s Who of the racing world.
Johns has quickly emerged as the ready-made ‘scapegoat’ for this inquiry. But despite all the veterinary and staff ‘yes men and women’ that she have provided supportive evidence, the fact remains that Waterhouse treated a horse that was favorite for a Group One race and failed to register this in her treatment book or more importantly to notify the stewards, who, in turn, could have advised the punting public.
She will no doubt get a slap over the wrist or will be relieved of a few thousand dollars which will mean nothing to her. Many believe a suspension would be more appropriate but the way Racing NSW operates don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
As for ‘Singo,’ well he will probably retreat into the background for a while – get drunk with his legion of mates – and spend more of his spare time watching replays of Tara Reid, the actress he fawned over when she visited the Gold Coast for a Magic Millions carnival.
And those who saw her in American Pie then American Pie Reunion or more up front and personal in that tight fitting Cowboy outfit at the MM Sales could hardly blame him. We are reliably informed that visit Down Under was indeed a ‘More Joyous’ occasion for the Hugh Hefner of Australian racing.
ALARMING TREND IN BETTING ON WATERHOUSE HORSES THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED
AT the very heart of the More Joyous saga – despite all the fiery clashes that have made great fodder for the media – is the arguably unhealthy relationship within the Waterhouse family when it comes to racing.
Gai can swear on a stack of Bibles as high as the new Randwick grandstand but she will struggle to convince the average ‘Joe Punter’ that she does not discuss her horses in some way with bookmaking husband Robbie and son Tom. It’s the human nature of the punting beast to suspect she does.
That will never change and it isn’t a good look when one examines the statistics – produced recently in the DAILY TELEGRAPH – the newspaper that has been a great supporter of Waterhouse.
IT revealed that the sensational flop of More Joyous continued a worrying trend of Waterhouse runners challenging for early favoritism, only to ease in betting and then lose.
More Joyous blew from $2.50 to $3 prior to her seventh in the All Aged Stakes. The Telegraph reported that the bookies crystal ball had amazingly got it right (betting ring wobblers traditionally lose) every time when it has come to the Waterhouse stable at a Sydney metropolitan meeting since Golden Slipper Day.
The report revealed that the last 20 Waterhouse horses that drifted on-course had all failed to triumph. The bigger concern was the number of those runners who started the day at short odds. It’s an amazing statistic and should be of great concern for the Racing NSW stewards.
More interestingly, Waterhouse has trained five winners since Slipper Day, with stable followers loading up on all five occasions. It seems when that confidence is there, punters can bet up.
CONTROVERSY ISN’T RESTRICTED JUST TO RACING IN SYDNEY AS THE AGE REPORTS
CONTROVERSY isn’t just restricted to racing in Sydney as MICHAEL LYNCH reported in this COMMENT piece in the MELBOURNE AGE which we felt was worth reproducing:
GAI Waterhouse in (alleged) cahoots with her bookmaker son, Tom.
John Singleton blueing live on television with Gai over her preparation of his star horse, a row which led to all and sundry having to face the stewards in Sydney on Monday.
One high-profile jockey - Damien Oliver - sprung for betting against a galloper he was riding in a race, another (Danny Nikolic) outed for threatening stewards. That all happened in the spring, so if you've forgotten it's probably not surprising given the speed with which racing's shocks and scandals have unravelled.
Trainers Con and Tony Karakatsanis and Nathan Schofield banned for illegally dosing up horses, and more revelations in The Sunday Age that local handlers - including at least one well-known trainer not named for legal reasons - were either using or contemplating using peptides on their horses - the latest drug du jour to make such a splash in the footy worlds.
If anyone was in any doubt that racing doesn't still deserve the adjective ''colorful'' and the catch-all descriptor ''identity'' for its participants, then illusions have been shattered by events over the past nine months.
And that's before we even take into account the doings overseas, where the world's most powerful owner, Godolphin's Sheikh Mohammed, is reeling over revelations that one of his trainers, Mahmood Al Zarooni, was illegally injecting his horses with anabolic steroids before they raced in Britain.
Those who believe there's no such thing as bad publicity will not be able to contain themselves at the headlines the sport is generating.
Those who believe it's possible to be colorful to the point where the brand begins to be colored in the wrong hue, will be concerned its image could be tarnished.
The Sheikh reportedly came over all sniffy at the weekend when, after his brilliant young galloper Dawn Approach won the English 2000 Guineas, the media mainly wanted to talk about the drug cheating of Al Zarooni and how much he knew about it.
For all the Gai and Singo ‘he said/she said’' row, and as bad as the Oliver and Nikolic cases are, their malfeasance is overshadowed by allegations of drug use.
The Godolphin episode has opened up a global can of worms about what is legal and illegal in racing jurisdictions.
Few may have know that anabolic steroids were legal in Australia before the British Horseracing Authority collared Al Zarooni and English trainers began to question how much assistance Australian horses plundering the prizes at Royal Ascot might have had.
Peter Moody, the trainer of Black Caviar, reacted angrily to any suggestion that she might have had some help along the way, pointing out she was always a big, bulky horse and that she had never returned as much as a blip when tested in Britain before her win at Ascot last year. But that's the thing about drugs in sport. They are insidious, and tar everyone with suspicion.
How many people look at cycling these days and wonder how many of them are ‘on the juice’? But for those who don't follow the sport, it's a stretch to believe an activity so tainted can be fixed so quickly.
Racing is not in that predicament yet. But the drugs issue is one that will not go away.
Community standards and expectations have changed: a nudge and a wink and the tacit understanding that the odd rort can take place as long as you don't make it too obvious no longer plays.
For all sport, drugs are a problem. For racing, they could become an existential one. And in that case, not all publicity is good publicity.
NO SURPRISE THAT RACING NSW DOESN’T WANT A JUDICIAL INQUIRY
WHEN it comes to ‘keeping the bastards honest’ in racing, calls by Senator Nick Xenaphon for a judicial inquiry has been welcomed by punters but not surprisingly ignored by officialdom.
Over a week ago Racing NSW CEO Peter V’landys described the Xenaphon suggestion in relation to the More Joyous inquiry as ‘an over-reaction and attention seeking’ which was a bit rich coming from him.
One wonders how many feel that way now with the number of ‘no shows’ at the inquiry, especially as most were considered ‘key’ witnesses. Let’s face it the stewards lack the powers of a judicial inquiry and that is what was needed.
Senator Xenaphon has had the corporate bookmakers and their plundering of Australian racing resources firmly in his sights for some time. He has been especially focused on the activities of one of the biggest overseas operators in Bet365 and has not been afraid to bag them mercilessly.
He is obviously not a big fan of Tom Waterhouse when it comes to his involvement in sports, particularly rugby league betting and wants him to front a gambling inquiry citing his refusal of ‘being too busy during the carnival racing’ as ‘unacceptable and lame.’
The majority of fair thinking people who follow racing have had a gutful of the perception that there is a conflict of interest within the Waterhouse family between training and bookmaking.
If the industry is not prepared to do anything about it then the time has come for the Government – or at least someone with the balls like Nick Xenaphon – to step up to the plate as he has and full marks to him for doing so, even if it falls on deaf ears.
EDITOR’S NOTE: HERE’S a story on the above issue by HEATH ASTON from the MELBOURNE AGE:
TOM Waterhouse could be forced to front a parliamentary inquiry into the promotion of gambling in sport, despite having sidestepped a previous invitation.
As Opposition Leader Tony Abbott put the television industry ''on notice'' that a coalition government would pass laws to protect children from live odds in televised sport, a renewed push to get Mr Waterhouse to Canberra emerged.
The joint select committee on gambling reform, which has the power to compel witnesses, invited the bookmaker in March but he declined, instead tendering a two-page written submission in which he insisted he had ''no intention of targeting children through advertising'' and his TV appearances complied with the industry code of conduct.
The committee, chaired by the anti-gambling independent Andrew Wilkie, will decide when it meets on Thursday whether to compel Mr Waterhouse to appear. Mr Wilkie said his personal opinion was the committee should insist on his attendance but, as chairman, he must allow a vote.
''I understand it is the desire of some members … to try again to have Tom Waterhouse front the current inquiry,'' he said. ''But ultimately this will be a matter for the whole committee to decide.''
Greens Senator Richard Di Natale said it was imperative that Mr Waterhouse appear. ''It would serve the public interest to have him express his views publicly as to why the government should not regulate,'' he said.
Committee member Nick Xenophon said Mr Waterhouse's reason for not attending - that he was too busy with the autumn racing carnival - was ''lame''. ''He needs to appear,'' Senator Xenophon said.
Mr Waterhouse through a spokesman said he had no comment. Fairfax Media understands that some members of the committee will argue that chasing Mr Waterhouse will delay the May 16 deadline to report and hamper any chance of bringing legislative change in the final five sitting weeks of Parliament.
The committee is expected to call for changes that would ban gambling advertising on TV during G-rated slots and, possibly before 9pm. It may also call for a tighter code around live odds.
PUNTER ‘BILL’ HAS 40,000 REASONS TO BE DIRTY ON FIRST LADY OF RACING
THERE were winners and losers out of the More Joyous failures – plenty of those in the know like John Singleton decided not to bet – but thousands of punters it would seem lost their hard-earned without arguably having any chance of winning.
Here is one such hard luck story by CRAIG COOK from the ADELAIDE ADVERTISER:
SOUTH Australian punter Bill Tirimacco has 40,000 reasons to be interested in (the) stewards’ inquiry in Sydney into the John Singleton, Gai Waterhouse controversy.
The TAB regular is backing the former advertising guru in the sensational stoush, saying he hopes Waterhouse, one of the nation's leading horse trainers, gets "everything she deserves."
Tirimacco had $16,300 from a winning all-up bet riding on the Singleton owned More Joyous at Randwick 10 days ago.
Tirimacco, who is "60-something", watched in horror as the mare ran the worst race of her life to finish seventh.
Straight after the race, Singleton accused Waterhouse of telling her son, leading bookmaker Tom Waterhouse, More Joyous had received treatment during the week.
He was outraged the champion trainer had not told him or stewards More Joyous had heat in her neck and been prescribed antibiotics.
Singleton immediately ended his 35-year association with Waterhouse over the incident.
"I'm pretty upset that she (Waterhouse) appears to have run the horse when it was injured or not right," Tirimacco, who is semi-retired, said.
"Singleton told her before the race that he'd heard all wasn't well with More Joyous and he was proved dead right.
"Even if it had been scratched on the day or even at the gates I would have still won $16,300 for a $100 bet. As it was my money went around with no chance of winning."
Tirimacco placed his four horse all-up bet with the SA TAB (owned by TattsBet) four days before the race and had no opportunity to cancel the bet as the first two legs won on Anzac Day and the third leg on the Saturday.
He backed Unchain My Heart ($5.50) and Oregon Spirit ($3.80) at Flemington on Anzac Day and Maybe Discreet ($7) at Morphettville two days later.
He was in the Moonta Hotel to watch his money go around on More Joyous.
"The whole pub knew about my bet and I'd already promised to shout the bar," he added.
"Once the horse drifted to $3.80 I thought there might be an issue as I backed her at $2.50 but I couldn't cancel then."
Tirimacco said, "It's hard enough to get a winner without starting with a handicap."
THE SPAT BETWEEN CHRIS MURPHY AND THE WATERHOUSE FAMILY CONTINUES
THERE is obviously no love lost between respected Sydney lawyer, Chris Murphy, a good mate of John Singleton, and the Waterhouse family.
That’s certainly the impression that he gives on Twitter when commenting on the More Joyous inquiry. It will be tested to the full when the More Joyous inquiry resumes next Monday and former jockey Allan Robinson appears as a witness for Singleton.
The cross-examination of the Waterhouse clan by Murphy, who is Robinson’s lawyer, promises to be priceless.
For legal reasons we aren’t prepared to print his ‘glass house’ description of Gai Waterhouse and her family on Twitter but those who follow his Tweets can always log in and read it for themselves.
PERHAPS THE E-MAIL THAT MADE THE MOST SENSE OF THE MORE JOYOUS SAGA
OF all the e-mails we received on the More Joyous inquiry, perhaps the one that made the most sense came from one of our favorite contributors, Jim Carlton, of Greenbank. It read:
‘I daresay that many will be giving their interpretations of how the events between Waterhouse and Singleton should transpire.
Let it be said from my point of view as a secondary teacher, over the years, I faced feuding female students and my solution was to ask them to go outside and talk over the dispute without the hangers on to whom they would ordinarily have to save face.
Invariably, this was most successful as I was of the opinion the more people that became involved the more difficult it became to resolve the problem which had the potential of escalating even beyond the school boundaries. I would give John and Gai the opportunity to mediate privately.
There may be deeper issues here but it should be defused instead of it ballooning into a media circus, in which the media is fuelling the public’s gossiping insatiability since the principal player’s egos are relishing the limelight.
May Murrihy be Solomon as a proportion of evidence is hearsay and will be open to challenge in higher jurisdictions.
I would be careful of forcing people into corners from which even rats will fight.’
IS ‘SHERLOCK’ OR ‘DR WATSON’ RUNNING THE INTERGRITY SHOW IN NSW?
‘WHEN it comes to the integrity of racing in NSW, one could pose the question of who is actually running the show.
It must be getting right up the nose of the media savvy ‘Marshall’ Ray Murrihy that the annoying Racing NSW CEO Peter V’landys is stealing much of his thunder.
When it comes to news emanating from the More Joyous investigation, the scene has been reminiscent of an episode of Elementary with V’landys doing his impression of Sherlock Holmes and Murrihy the ‘male version’ of side-kick Dr Joan Watson.
It has been well publicized that the John Singleton – Waterhouse family stoush clashed with Murrihy’s planned sojourn at the Warrnambool Grand Annual carnival. But as they say ‘while the rat’s away the mice will play.’
V’landys made the most of the Chief Stipe’s absence issuing plenty of statements to the media that would lead the casual racing observer to conclude that he was actually running the inquiry.
First came his ball-tearer that ‘stewards were scrutinizing betting records of the race from all wagering operators.’ This was followed up on the eve of the inquiry with a warning from that any person directed by stewards to attend that failed to do so ‘could be warned off.’
Now hold on a second. We thought integrity of racing was supposed to be removed from the administrative side. V’landys likes to have his finger in as many pies as possible but it is time where the stewards are concerned that he was told to ‘butt out.’
From those of us who wish this guy had stayed at harness racing or moved on to rugby league small doses of him at the coalface in racing is more than we can handle.’ – Graham Anderson, Sydney.
EDITOR’S NOTE: PETER V’landys is obviously concerned about the image of racing in NSW, or particularly Sydney which is on the nose with punters. Here are excerpts from a story by CHRIS ROOTS in the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD quoting V’landys leading up to the More Joyous inquiry:
RACING NSW chief executive Peter V'landys has warned that any person directed by stewards to attend Monday's More Joyous inquiry who doesn't could be warned off.
“The integrity of racing is much more important than any individual,” V’landys said. “There is a reason why people have been asked to attend and we would expect to be there.
“They have nothing to fear as long as they have nothing to hide. We will let the inquiry run its course before we make any decisions on any individuals who fail to attend.”
HAS ‘SHERIFF’ SCHRECK MELLOWED WHEN IT COMES TO TRANSPARENCY?
‘IT would seem that the once tough John Schreck, former Sheriff of everything racing in NSW, has mellowed in his old age.
I couldn’t believe his comment on ABC Radio in relation to the More Joyous inquiry that: ‘Everybody think horse racing is crook anyway, and when you get something like this it just reinforces in their minds that view.’
But then for Schreck to suggest that the inquiry should start behind closed doors only raises the question: ‘What then have they got to hide?’
It is inconceivable to hear these words coming from the highly respected steward who masterminded the Fine Cotton inquiry. He should be the first to advocate transparency in racing.
No-one doubts his suggestion that: “It will be a circus.” But it was hard to understand his suggestion: “One of the first things I would do is to have it in camera in the inquisitorial stages.”
Punters invest millions of dollars in racing every Saturday. With all due respects to his comments that ‘everyone thinks racing is crook anyway,’ the image of racing in Sydney has been on the nose for some time.
The racing public deserves to hear the hard questions asked of the parties involved. This started in the media when John Singleton went public about his concerns over the fitness of More Joyous who went like a hobbled duck. It should end there as well.
Punters deserve to know why Gai Waterhouse didn’t inform stewards of the problem with More Joyous. They deserve to know what Singleton meant when he said this was the third time he had been left out when one of his fancied runners had been beaten. And most of all there needs to be some clarification on statements actually made by Tom Waterhouse with witnesses required ‘under oath’ to give evidence of what they heard and when.’ – Glen Slattery, Sydney.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I have always had the utmost respect for John Schreck but have to disagree with him on the ‘closing of the inquiry’ suggestion. Here is a story on the topic by CHRIS ROOTS from the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD:
THE racing lawman who ran the Fine Cotton and ''Jockey Tapes'' inquiries, John Schreck, believes the inquiry concerning John Singleton and Gai Waterhouse's public stoush should start behind closed doors on Monday.
''It will be a circus,'' Mr Schreck told Fairfax Media's Max Presnell on ABC NewsRadio's Hoof On The Till. ''So one of the first things I would do … is to have it in-camera in the inquisitorial stages. If and when charges are laid, the media people could come in … The most important thing is the sport, and the sport has to be the first priority in everybody's mind at all times in an issue such as this [one].''
Racing NSW stewards, led by Ray Murrihy, will continue their inquiry into the poor performance of Singleton-owned More Joyous in the All Aged Stakes at Randwick on April 27. It led to Mr Singleton sacking trainer Waterhouse immediately and raising allegations her son, bookmaker Tom Waterhouse, had told friends of Mr Singleton that More Joyous ''couldn't win''.
Mr Schreck said the intense media coverage of the relationships in the Waterhouse family, with Gai being a leading trainer and her husband Robbie and son Tom being bookmakers, must be addressed. ''Now that this in the public arena and the perception is as it is, and it has been talked about this conflict of interest thing, it is potentially a very big deal,'' he said.
''Everybody thinks horse racing is crook anyway, and when you get something like this it just reinforces in their minds that view.''
Mr Singleton's discovery through friends that More Joyous supposedly ''couldn't win'' has been traced in the media in the past week. Former jockey Allan Robinson said he had phoned Singleton on race day about the condition of the mare. Former rugby league player Andrew Johns has said he had told brothel owner and punter Eddie Hayson of a conversation he had with Tom Waterhouse at an Anzac Day NRL game.
Mr Schreck believed all the people involved need to be protected.
''An inquiry is held in many stages,'' he said. The first part was the inquisitorial stage, ''and that's when you ask questions and you don't know what kind of answers you might get''.
''Things are said that incriminate people or might sully peoples' reputations. Also, the reputations of innocent persons have to be considered and also the reputation of Mrs Waterhouse, Mr Singleton and so on, because you are just not sure what will be said. I know it will suit the media, because there would be a headline a minute.''
The inquiry began with the poor performance of More Joyous in the All Aged Stakes and that will be the first thing stewards will inquire into on Monday. They will question Waterhouse vet Leanne Begg, Mr Singleton's vet John Peatfield and Waterhouse staff about the mare's health in the lead-up to the race.
It has already been put on the record in the inquiry that the horse was treated with an antibiotic on the Thursday before the race.
Mr Singleton's racing manager Duncan Grimley will be asked to reveal when he became aware of any problem with the mare.
Waterhouse faces the possibility of being charged with not informing stewards of a problem with the horse leading into the race.
The second part of the inquiry will concern betting on the race, where Robbie and Tom Waterhouse will be the focus. That is when Robinson, Johns and Hayson, who are believed to have given statements and who have been asked to attend, will be questioned. If they not available to be cross-examined, they could be warned off racecourses by Racing NSW.
SURELY CHRIS WALLER WASN’T TRIALING THE SUPPLEMENT THAT CAUSED POSITIVES
INTERESTING item in the widely read Racing Bitch column out of Hong Kong makes reference to the recent Chris Waller swab farce in Sydney racing.
It reads:
‘The trainers who were whingeing at Randwick last Saturday about the outcome of the stewards’ inquiry into three of Chris Waller’s horses returning positives to Ibuprofen, will be even more agitated if the reported statement attributed to the feed manufacturer Agricure’s Director Ray Biffin is correct.
Quoted on the Breeding and Racing website, Mr Biffin stated: “Agricure would like to advise all users of Mitavite feeds that this contamination apparently appeared in a feed supplement that was being trialed by Chris Waller Racing under our instructions and guidance.
This supplement was manufactured in Agricure’s own facility and is in no way connected with the manufacture of Mitavite feeds.”
The ambiguity in the statement will certainly send the hairs on the back of Waller’s neck skywards. It is so poorly written it beggars belief.
Surely the feed supplement which had the Ibuprofen was not being trialed by Chris Waller with his knowledge and consent?
Agricure has an obligation to clarify their statement and put a full stop to any rumor and innuendo though, Alice, it’s all getting so curiouser and curiouser, it would even blow The Mad Hatter’s mind.’
SORE LOSING ‘POMS’ DESPERATE TO FIND A REASON FOR BLACK CAVIAR BRILLIANCE
IT didn’t take the sore losing Poms long to try and involve Black Caviar in the steroid scandal that has rocked racing in Britain but it was good to see Peter Moody fire back in true Aussie fashion.
The verbal fracas started when The Guardian newspaper reported that it had asked the British Racehorse Authority to reveal whether Peter Moody had advised that the champion mare had been treated with anabolic steroids (which is legal in Australia, although they must not be present in a horse's system on race day) before she raced at Royal Ascot last year.
The mare was widely reported to have been carrying an injury and won by the narrowest margin of her illustrious career in the Group One Diamond Jubilee Stakes last year.
But the BHA refused to release documentation, adding fuel to the fire that has been raging since the disclosure that Mahmood Al Zarooni, one of Godolphin's trainers, had been using anabolic steroids in the preparation of his horses at Newmarket.
Some British trainers have concerns over allowing Australian runners into Britain, The Guardian reported, as they believe the benefits of steroid use can last much longer than the drug itself.
Trainers of overseas runners in Britain have to complete a form confirming the horse has never been given anabolic steroids or outlining the occasions on which such drugs were given. Runners are subject to routine testing.
MOODY FIRES BACK AND QUESTIONS ‘LILYWHITE’ BRIISH TRAINERS ON LASIX USE
PETER MOODY was quick to launch a fierce defense at home and abroad to the British accusations that Black Caviar’s success at Royal Ascot and elsewhere were sullied by the use of steroids.
Asked if Black Caviar had ever been given steriods, Moody replied: “Nil. Steroids increase bulk. Black Caviar was a huge mare, from the day she was born. It would have been absolutely counter-productive.”
Moody added that Black Caviar had been tested on arrival in Britain last summer and three days before her heart-stopping win in the Diamond Jubilee Stakes.
Moody went on to question the views of the ‘lilywhite’ British trainers on race day medication, citing the use of Lasix in the United States as evidence.
“They bang on about steroids but they are the first to use Lasix when they campaign horses in the U.S.,” he said.
“Maybe the Poms might start looking at themselves rather than looking at us.”
Moody's strong views were echoed by trainer Lee Freedman, who saddled Miss Andretti to win the 2007 King's Stand Stakes.
“Some Brits need to pipe down re Aussie horses at Ascot and not tar all. My Ascot winner was never given steroids,” Freedman wrote on Twitter.
COMEDY SKIT ON SOME RACEHORSE NAMES THAT WERE UNACCEPTABLE
ON a lighter note the GRAHAM NORTON SHOW recently did a comedy skit on overseas horse names – some that got through and others that were rejected.
These included: Ben Timover, Neil Anblomee, Oil Beef Hooked, Anita Hanjaab and Arfur Foulksake.
The Show also provided footage of a race in America where the winner stormed home with the commentator declaring ‘and roaring down the outside is HOOF HEARTED’.
THE TAB FIXED ODDS SERVICE PROVIDED BY TATTSBET DESCRIBED AS ‘TERRIBLE’
‘I do most of my betting on fixed odds markets and am rather puzzled that you have not received any whinges about the terrible service offered on Brisbane races by Tattsbet.
I use the internet to check prices on other corporates and almost invariably ever other bookmaker is betting before Tattsbet.
What is the reason for this?
In the past week I am told there were markets on Sportsbet and Bet365 on the day before Ipswich (*Editor’s note, I believe the e-mailer might mean the main meeting at the Gold Coast) on Saturday.
Tattsbet were conspicuous by their absence and put up prices 15 minutes prior to every race.
The service is disgraceful and it is to be hoped the new license will be given to one of the other bookies who will show some ‘guts’ and give us a chance to bet early.
They must be costing the Queensland industry a fortune by offering such a bad service.
Can Mr Dixon (I guess he means either Racing Minister Steve Dickson or RQ Chairman Kevin Dixon) do something about it?’ – Peter Roy, Caboolture.
EDITOR’S NOTE: For some time Peter we regularly ran complaints about the Fixed Odds service provided by TattsBet. Every couple of weeks the same complaint arrives and we decided there was no point in being repetitive but have run yours because of the call on the new powers that be to look further afield when the new TAB deal is done. I understand that TattsBet adopts the approach to Fixed Odds that prices are posted much later than their rivals because there is less risk and they are in the business of making profits. If that is the case perhaps they should be running a bordello rather than a betting agency. My advice is open an account with the bigger TABs in Sydney or Melbourne where the prices are far more competitive and you can get on a lot earlier. They are prepared to take the risks and are reaping the rewards most weeks. The other alternative is to go with a corporate agency which provides a similar service, if not better, but the profits go overseas and not back into the local racing industry.
GOOD LUCK TRYING TO FOLLOW THE DARLEY HORSES AT HAWKESBURY STAND-ALONE
‘SOME mates and I from the local watering hole decided to take advantage of a major Saturday race meeting in our own backyard and headed to Hawkesbury last Saturday.
One of our group follows the punt more closely than the rest and suggested the way to go was to follow the stable of Peter Snowden and assured us we would finish in front.
What a disaster that advice proved to be despite the fact that he was not wrong in his assessment. The problem for us was that we decided to back what appeared to be the stable’s best chances.
We pooled our punting resources and put a small part of our bank on the Snowden-trined Chiaroscuro in the first only to see it finish second to stablemate Petrify.
Little more damage was done until the fourth when we had a small each-way wager on Quidnunc which was backed at good odds. Unfortunately one from the stable at better odds in Aerobatics duly saluted.
Adding salt to our wounds we bet up big on Complicate in the Guineas only to see it tired badly from the turn while stablemate Limes charged home to win.
Rather than follow the Kerrin McEvoy mount in the last we decided to learn from past mistakes and got the good odds the stablemate Babel in the last. He firmed from $10 to $5 and we thought we were home only to be beaten in a photo.
Next year they can shove the Hawkesbury meeting and we are back to the local. But one thing’s for sure when we pool are betting bank it will be going on the lesser of the Snowden fancies. We learn quickly from our mistakes.’ – Michael Hanley, Hawkesbury.
EDITOR’S NOTE: THE Hawkesbury meeting was hailed a great success story but little mention was made in the mainstream racing media about the lesser lights beating the more favored Darley runners. Just another nail in the NSW racing coffin as far as punters’ confidence goes. This unacceptable situation with multiple runners from big stables and the fancied one performing the worst continues to occur. Not sure what the stewards can do about it except inquire into the reasons for the disappointing effort of the beaten fancy. But there’s always a big excuse book when that occurs and the punters not only are none the wiser but also continue to part with their hard-earned on a regular basis.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in the above e-mails should not be interpreted as those of JOHN LINGARD, the owner-editor of the letsgohorseracing web-site. That is why he has added an ‘EDITOR’S NOTE’. Every endeavor is made to verify the authenticity of contributors. We welcome any reasonable and constructive responses from parties or individuals.