Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
16 Oct 11
19:25
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
By Cornelius Lysaght
BBC horse racing correspondent
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/horse_racing/default.stm
Timeform's allegations come at a bad time for the British Horseracing Authority
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) is failing to crack down on "non-triers", according to a leading analyst of the sport.
Timeform's Chasers & Hurdlers annual claims cheating is rife in jump racing, with stewards "blind" to the practice in which jockeys deliberately limit their horses' chances.
Sources within the BHA said it was "disappointed" by the allegations.
It comes after a week of controversy surrounding rules on whip use.
Every horse which ran under National Hunt rules during the 2010-11 season receives a report and rating in the guide - its latest edition running to 1,112 pages.
While saying the latest season "produced a group of outstanding champions" including "tip-top young chaser" Long Run, Timeform's verdict on some other performances is more damning.
It declines to name names, but says: "The rules requiring horses to be ridden on their merits are regularly flouted, and transgressions in the jumping game... are arguably as widespread now as they have been for a long time.
"Non-triers are rarely picked up by the racecourse stewards... who seem blind to such things.
"The main responsibility for seeing that punters are not short-changed rests with the stewards, who must be seen to be imposing the rules with firmness and consistency.
"At times nowadays, at some of the more far-flung outposts of jump racing, it seems as if they are hardly imposing them at all."
The BHA is racing's regulator and is already facing a series of crises, most recently over the use of the whip, but also regarding its funding and the yet-to-be-published 2012 fixture list.
Starting this week four jockeys and one ex-professional rider face hearings for alleged corrupt practices, but all are from Flat racing, and not the jumping world at the centre of the allegations.
A spokesman for the BHA said it could not immediately comment.
BBC horse racing correspondent
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/horse_racing/default.stm
Timeform's allegations come at a bad time for the British Horseracing Authority
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) is failing to crack down on "non-triers", according to a leading analyst of the sport.
Timeform's Chasers & Hurdlers annual claims cheating is rife in jump racing, with stewards "blind" to the practice in which jockeys deliberately limit their horses' chances.
Sources within the BHA said it was "disappointed" by the allegations.
It comes after a week of controversy surrounding rules on whip use.
Every horse which ran under National Hunt rules during the 2010-11 season receives a report and rating in the guide - its latest edition running to 1,112 pages.
While saying the latest season "produced a group of outstanding champions" including "tip-top young chaser" Long Run, Timeform's verdict on some other performances is more damning.
It declines to name names, but says: "The rules requiring horses to be ridden on their merits are regularly flouted, and transgressions in the jumping game... are arguably as widespread now as they have been for a long time.
"Non-triers are rarely picked up by the racecourse stewards... who seem blind to such things.
"The main responsibility for seeing that punters are not short-changed rests with the stewards, who must be seen to be imposing the rules with firmness and consistency.
"At times nowadays, at some of the more far-flung outposts of jump racing, it seems as if they are hardly imposing them at all."
The BHA is racing's regulator and is already facing a series of crises, most recently over the use of the whip, but also regarding its funding and the yet-to-be-published 2012 fixture list.
Starting this week four jockeys and one ex-professional rider face hearings for alleged corrupt practices, but all are from Flat racing, and not the jumping world at the centre of the allegations.
A spokesman for the BHA said it could not immediately comment.
Show More
The BHA would obviously not want it out in the open.It's all about "public perception" i'd say.
The BHA needs as much new money coming into the game as possible,and in a sport where the average owner gets little more than 20% of his investment returned,it is only right that any wrongdoings are swept quickly under the carpet.
You only have to look at the "punishments" handed out to Chemical Nicky to understand what the BHA's agenda is.
The BHA needs as much new money coming into the game as possible,and in a sport where the average owner gets little more than 20% of his investment returned,it is only right that any wrongdoings are swept quickly under the carpet.
You only have to look at the "punishments" handed out to Chemical Nicky to understand what the BHA's agenda is.
"more far-flung outposts of jump racing" - now that is a broad hint .......
They are TAUNTing the BHA with that little morsel,crepello.
They shouldn't just pick on NH racing though.
A large chunk of the flat race programme is geared towards horses that have had 3 quiet runs as a 2yo.
A large chunk of the flat race programme is geared towards horses that have had 3 quiet runs as a 2yo.
You are a troublemaker Charnier. Don`t bother applying to The Jockey Club unless you want black balls.
Do Betfair own Timeform? If so they should know is someone is laying these 'non-jiggers'
I am indeed an agent provocateur,ss.
...and why not.
Those at the BHA and the Jockey Club all require a damn good thrashing IMO.
Gravy train riding halfwits,all of them.
...and why not.
Those at the BHA and the Jockey Club all require a damn good thrashing IMO.
Gravy train riding halfwits,all of them.
too much back scratching going on in racing. good of someone to speak their mind!
"Non-triers are rarely picked up by the racecourse stewards... who seem blind to such things.
"The main responsibility for seeing that punters are not short-changed rests with the stewards.
----------------------------------------
Take that ARCHAIC requirement AWAY from them (the Stewards)
Unlike most of us - who watch practically EVERY race EVERY day -
The Stewards may well/probablyONLY watch Racing when they are actively Stewarding --- and perhaps, a few top races 'on the telly' on a Saturday.
NO WONDER that they are, "blind to such things."
They don't know what they are looking for -
- compared to the 'Sharp Minds' regular punters - who ARE looking for such 'irregularities' ALL the time - and, indeed, often anticipate them ...
... witness some of the threads that get started PRE-race on here - not to mention, afterwards.
-------------------------------------------------------
The whole NON-TRIER issue should be TAKEN AWAY from the responsibilities of the RACE DAY Stewards. ...
and be MONITORED - continuously, race by race by a Panel ELSEWHERE solely just watching the racing, and replaying them to their hearts content.
If WE can spot 'Non-Triers' with just ONE viewing of a race - plus the occasional replay ...
Then surely such a Panel could have a Field Day - with numerous replays available to them - and NO other Race Day Stewarding requirements to distract them.
The days of - "Would the trainer Harry Stitchem, or his representative, please come to the Weighing Room" -
- belong in a episode of Jeeves & Wooster.
The BHA are to blame as much, if not more, than the Stewards, for NOT grasping the nettle and taking away the Non-Trier obligation from Race Day Stewards.
They can always contact the trainer at a later date, if necessary, for an explanation.
I could run this game better with one hand tied behind my back, than the myopic mob at the BHA do.
"The main responsibility for seeing that punters are not short-changed rests with the stewards.
----------------------------------------
Take that ARCHAIC requirement AWAY from them (the Stewards)
Unlike most of us - who watch practically EVERY race EVERY day -
The Stewards may well/probablyONLY watch Racing when they are actively Stewarding --- and perhaps, a few top races 'on the telly' on a Saturday.
NO WONDER that they are, "blind to such things."
They don't know what they are looking for -
- compared to the 'Sharp Minds' regular punters - who ARE looking for such 'irregularities' ALL the time - and, indeed, often anticipate them ...
... witness some of the threads that get started PRE-race on here - not to mention, afterwards.
-------------------------------------------------------
The whole NON-TRIER issue should be TAKEN AWAY from the responsibilities of the RACE DAY Stewards. ...
and be MONITORED - continuously, race by race by a Panel ELSEWHERE solely just watching the racing, and replaying them to their hearts content.
If WE can spot 'Non-Triers' with just ONE viewing of a race - plus the occasional replay ...
Then surely such a Panel could have a Field Day - with numerous replays available to them - and NO other Race Day Stewarding requirements to distract them.
The days of - "Would the trainer Harry Stitchem, or his representative, please come to the Weighing Room" -
- belong in a episode of Jeeves & Wooster.
The BHA are to blame as much, if not more, than the Stewards, for NOT grasping the nettle and taking away the Non-Trier obligation from Race Day Stewards.
They can always contact the trainer at a later date, if necessary, for an explanation.
I could run this game better with one hand tied behind my back, than the myopic mob at the BHA do.
About time someone mentioned NH racing, instead of just blaming AW racing.
I honestly think the sport is beyond help at this stage.
The game will be dead in a generation.
The game will be dead in a generation.
Starting to kick off in twitterland
SiClareSimon Clare To Cornelius Lysaght 'Talk about kicking an organisation when its down!'
Peter Scudamore to Cornelius Lysaght 'Analyst is wrong to make such a generalization name names'
SiClareSimon Clare To Cornelius Lysaght 'Talk about kicking an organisation when its down!'
Peter Scudamore to Cornelius Lysaght 'Analyst is wrong to make such a generalization name names'
didnt take long for gravy train riders to knock the 'analyst'
"Sources within the BHA said it was "disappointed" by the allegations"
I hope their official denial will be something rather stronger than that!
I hope their official denial will be something rather stronger than that!
The best thing is they can start looking at all the maiden hurdles over the years and they will find a good few there then work their way up to handicaps and they will find a lot more there.
Lydia Hislop to Peter Scu and Cornelius Lysaght 'If they name names, they'd be sued. Surely you can't be suggesting non-trying doesn't take place?'
Everyone knows it goes on. Everyone even the stewards unless they really are as thick as s***. Their problem is proving it, someone really should show them how to use that technology are their disposal..it's wasted. And it's rich hearing a trainer on about the new whip rules saying 'the jockeys need a kick up the ****' Wonder what he has to say about the same jockeys on Non-Jiggers.
Unless Timeform can name names, at least on a confidential basis, they are just another set of pocket-talking mug punters.
Imo, Timeform/btfr and the BHA probably all know what's going on.
Everyone knows whats going on for God sake. They can't name names, if the stewards say they're no non-triers then they are opened to slander claims. Tho if they really want people to know who are the non-jiggers all they have to do is put squiggles beside the horses names and we'll know who they mean 
If this is in their Annual which is out tomorrow then they can hardly be blamed for kicking them while theyre down. BHA create their own problems.
A lot more ways on the flat to get horses beaten than over the jumps, which is why it goes on more on the flat. I would also call not trying your best for a place cheating by a jockey. This is a lot more evident on the the flat. But to think it doesn't go on on the jumps as well would be naive. The sport is losing more and more punters everyday because of cheating yet the BHA keep trying their best to punish those who try, while doing nothing to those who don't.
put a double squiggle in but no reference to what it means.Punters will know.
didnt need TIMEFORM to tell us JUST LOOK AT SOME PLACE MARKETS ON HERE IN RELATION TO THE WIN MARKET
that greedy they have the lot or so it seems.
that greedy they have the lot or so it seems.
patsy, as long as one pays the higher rate PC all is well[;)]
"hands in the cookie jar" I think is the term used on ATR.
It was indeed - when Fluke Harvey and the Weaver Shark welcomed back Robbie Fitzpatrick - WITH OPEN ARMS - following his BAN.
"Great to see Robbie back." - they said.
Says everything about how rancid racing is... or should I say - Racing's 'Inner Circle'.
They are so absorbed in massaging each other's organs - that they simply do not know what tawts they are making of themselves.
An utterly disgraceful performance by the pair that night, that brought shame on racing's image.
"CAUGHT WITH HIS HAND IN THE COOKIE JAR."
HANG YOUR HEAD IN SHAME - HARVEY.
"Great to see Robbie back." - they said.
Says everything about how rancid racing is... or should I say - Racing's 'Inner Circle'.
They are so absorbed in massaging each other's organs - that they simply do not know what tawts they are making of themselves.
An utterly disgraceful performance by the pair that night, that brought shame on racing's image.
"CAUGHT WITH HIS HAND IN THE COOKIE JAR."
HANG YOUR HEAD IN SHAME - HARVEY.
Well done Timeform - about time an established organisation started pointing the finger at the guys who scratch each others' backs to the detriment of punters.
http://freebird.incrediblebargainstore.com
http://freebird.incrediblebargainstore.com
Couldn't agree more with Onlooker's two posts. Central stewarding the only way forward. As for Dumb and Dumber they also suggested that night on ATR that being banned for corruption 'could be the making of a jockey' - no wonder racing is in decline with people like that in the media - hang their heads in shame indeed...
p.s. Well done Timeform, dissension on the gravy train and not before time.
p.s. Well done Timeform, dissension on the gravy train and not before time.
Novice Hurdles have been a joke for a long time now. In any race where they bet a million bar three you really do need to tread carefully.
The only time I feel comfortable going to war in such races is when the market is pretty much the same as my own tissue.
THEY love writing their own results.
Totally agree with central stewarding too.
The only time I feel comfortable going to war in such races is when the market is pretty much the same as my own tissue.
THEY love writing their own results.
Totally agree with central stewarding too.
great fan of scu, but should keep quiet. "Non-triers" can be found in his own yard, maybe he doesn't understand the definition of the word in terms of punter or form speak?
stewards are so busy watching out for triers to punish under the new whip rules that they don't have time to look out for non triers as well.
I would say that at least two out of three very large NH stables from the "far-flung" area of the country regularly have people from their stable laying their own horses on the exchanges.It doesn't necessarily mean that the holder of the trainer's licence doesn't knows what is going on......perhaps.
certain stables (flat and jumps) always have and always will give some horses an "easy" race now and again.
the problem with punters watching out for it is that pocket talking regularly takes over from common sense and so almost every loser becomes a non trier.
I'm sure racing integrity could afford to have an anonymous paid panel (could be up to 10 people or more all over the country to cover holidays etc) to view all races on TV.
they wouldn't even need an office as they could work from home, each one viewing races independently and contacting a supervisor by phone or email if they spot something that they think should be looked at.
all the BHA would need, would be to pay them a wage and pay for ATR and RUK, and they would have every race covered by professional race watchers.
that would free up racecourse stewards to sit and count whip strokes.
the problem with punters watching out for it is that pocket talking regularly takes over from common sense and so almost every loser becomes a non trier.
I'm sure racing integrity could afford to have an anonymous paid panel (could be up to 10 people or more all over the country to cover holidays etc) to view all races on TV.
they wouldn't even need an office as they could work from home, each one viewing races independently and contacting a supervisor by phone or email if they spot something that they think should be looked at.
all the BHA would need, would be to pay them a wage and pay for ATR and RUK, and they would have every race covered by professional race watchers.
that would free up racecourse stewards to sit and count whip strokes.
Sorry to say it, but you guys appear perjhaps not to fully understand horse racing for the vast majority of owners and trainers, who aren't lucky enough to be the Abdullas and and Magniers of this world. Probably 95% of horses that are bought at auction will never be anything more than handicapping class, and therefore, it is not crooked, but sound business sense to try to start them off with a workable handicap mark. The owners pay all the bills, and the trainers first duty is towards them.------------a horses entire career can be ruined by a couple of over exuberant early races (happened to me )------ofcourse, if the owner and trainer are only interested in breeding and prestige, they can "go for it" at every opportunity to build a horses reputation and value------but for everyone else ( like me often)--it's all about buying a horse for 20/30k and trying to plot a path that gives those involved some fun, and a chance of some return.-----------now you may not like that thought, but take it from me, that's how it all works----come to terms with that fact, and it may help your punting-------good luck all !
95% of horses that are bought at auction will never be anything more than handicapping class, and therefore, it is not crooked, but sound business sense to try to start them off with a workable handicap mark.
That's the point, to the connections it is not "crooked", just how it's always been done.
To the man on the street, it's not much short of race-fixing
Even Mark Johnston calls it cheating, and accepts you make the best of the current handicapping system you can
That's the point, to the connections it is not "crooked", just how it's always been done.
To the man on the street, it's not much short of race-fixing
Even Mark Johnston calls it cheating, and accepts you make the best of the current handicapping system you can
Running a horse in a race,or races it can't win is one thing,wrong trip ground etc,pulling a horse in a race that it could win,because today is not the day,is a totally different matter.
Spotting a horse that may have got in lightly is part of the study of horse racing. Having one bolt up because its had it's teeth pulled out for several runs in races of similar standing is something else
Spotting a horse that may have got in lightly is part of the study of horse racing. Having one bolt up because its had it's teeth pulled out for several runs in races of similar standing is something else
Probably 95% of horses that are bought at auction will never be anything more than handicapping class, and therefore, it is not crooked, but sound business sense to try to start them off with a workable handicap mark.
It may be 'sound business sense' but that doesn't mean it isn't crooked. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.
Unless of course you get found out, at which point is ceases to be sound business sense. But what are the chances of that.
It may be 'sound business sense' but that doesn't mean it isn't crooked. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.
Unless of course you get found out, at which point is ceases to be sound business sense. But what are the chances of that.
regulation doesn't work,
you have to think of a system that has natural checks and balances
I can't think of one except to say that punters should probably accept non-triers as being part of the puzzle i.e. every race still has a winner and several losers
That is the existing situation and has been for quite a lot of years so, by virtue of evolution, it's probably about right
you have to think of a system that has natural checks and balances
I can't think of one except to say that punters should probably accept non-triers as being part of the puzzle i.e. every race still has a winner and several losers
That is the existing situation and has been for quite a lot of years so, by virtue of evolution, it's probably about right
In many cases, it is not the getting horses handicapped that annoys people, it is the blatant way in which it is done and the belief that the stewards are not doing their job properly. Novice hurdles where there are 50 lengths between first and last after a couple of flights with more than half the field under a stranglehold make a mockery of the term "racing".
Well done to the boys from Sleepy Hollow (can't remember the last time I said that). Totally agree with onlooker about central stewarding. There was talk within the BHA that this would soon be a reality but that was years back and they obviously thought they couldn't possibly introduce a good idea.
Can't disagree chaps----but the way the whole system is set up outside the Pattern , makes it an imperative to just "survive" against all the odds stacked against them for most trainers and jockeys who have to work in the bargain basement---------not saying its right, just the way it definitely is.------You have to start your potential c.70 rated novice horse somewhere------but every maiden race has runners from powerful stables and, you just daren't get too close, else you are knackered from day one !
Many years ago , I had a horse run first time out as a two year old at Newmarket, where it was being trained, and "disasterously" it finished 2nd to a Makthoum owned horse( obviously a field full of non-triers, and my trainer was dead straight)---------we had to put it in the next Tatt sale, because it would be anchored with a rating of about 88 straight away, and we knew that was way out----only good side was that we got a fair price ---but the horse never won again, I don't think-----so my advice, for what it's worth, would be to try to think like a trainer, when assessing a novice race---what would you be doing etc ?
Many years ago , I had a horse run first time out as a two year old at Newmarket, where it was being trained, and "disasterously" it finished 2nd to a Makthoum owned horse( obviously a field full of non-triers, and my trainer was dead straight)---------we had to put it in the next Tatt sale, because it would be anchored with a rating of about 88 straight away, and we knew that was way out----only good side was that we got a fair price ---but the horse never won again, I don't think-----so my advice, for what it's worth, would be to try to think like a trainer, when assessing a novice race---what would you be doing etc ?
I have just tripped over my copy of Chasers and Hurdlers on the doorstep. In which essay are these remarks contained please ?
richgit, you are absolutely right about your 88 rated 2yo. That is the total fault of the handicappers who rate horses based on whether they finished 1 length behind Frankel rather than the speed figure recorded in a slow run race.
The handicappers overrate 95% of horses, probably on the basis that everyone is "cheating" and they don't like anyone to have a winner score by a wide margin in a handicap
The handicappers overrate 95% of horses, probably on the basis that everyone is "cheating" and they don't like anyone to have a winner score by a wide margin in a handicap
salmon
No idea as I haven't purchased C&H (haven't purchased one for about 10 years now) but personally I'd start with the essay on Get Me Out Of Here....
No idea as I haven't purchased C&H (haven't purchased one for about 10 years now) but personally I'd start with the essay on Get Me Out Of Here....
Why dont the trainers use the Jonjo approach very rarely needs the jocks to pull em/give a non jigging ride(Get Me Out Of Here unfortunately was to fit on the day hence tony needed to take action(or not as the case was)
The job of not performing on the day is downb to the trainer not the jock to mask.
Never find Sir mark pulled in for running a back end 2yr old who had hardly had a gallop in its life & probably never seen a set of starting stalls.
The job of not performing on the day is downb to the trainer not the jock to mask.
Never find Sir mark pulled in for running a back end 2yr old who had hardly had a gallop in its life & probably never seen a set of starting stalls.
20th Sept 2004 - debut of Spectait in a Chepstow 2yo 1m maiden ridden by a future champion jockey
One of the worst instances of a horse being stopped I have ever seen - and I backed the lucky winner.
One of the worst instances of a horse being stopped I have ever seen - and I backed the lucky winner.
Timeform,along other racing media,have been quite reserved in their criticism of apparent non-triers down the years,so when they do make a statement as strong and as cogent as this one people should take note.This would have been big news a few years back(haven't bought RP today,how much space was given to this story please ?),but sadly,it is a sign of the times that very little will be done about the ongoing corruption which is a shame really,because the organisation are still an important voice in the industry IMO,and should be listened to.The ship has been steered into unsafe waters by the BHA these past few years,and after hitting the rocks,is now slowly sinking.
Horse racing appears to be in an irreversible downward spiral.
Horse racing appears to be in an irreversible downward spiral.
think of it from the other angle
a race where every horse is "trying" to do their very best to win the race
completely unrealistic
a race where every horse is "trying" to do their very best to win the race
completely unrealistic
Another myth in racing its only the little guys that are at it, a certain prolific owner who sports green and yellow silks is one of the worst offenders, another rancid mob are the Coolmore outfit, Fame and Glory could hardly lift his legs in the Irish St Leger, get me out of here....
Every owner should be forced to have a grand e/w on their runner at betfair SP. That way if they're not trying or running over the wrong trip/going or aren't fit it will at least cost them. Zero sum game for owners in the long run and also solves the prize money issue.
now that sounds a good idea Feck
I like it because it doesn't call for monitoring and judgement by the stewards
I like it because it doesn't call for monitoring and judgement by the stewards
TAUNTON and EXETER ain't far flung but a certain trainer and his dad who train(ed) in between the two have been able to bend the rules to suit themselves at these two tracks. GRANDS CRUS gor beaten at Taunton at 66-1 last year
jocked you not suggesting the pipes didnt run 1 on its merits are you?
Buena Vista does Sweet F.A until Cheltenham Festival
Buena Vista does Sweet F.A until Cheltenham Festival
One that was quite extraordinary was THEREALBANDIT, beaten 64 lengths on his debut by stablemate Our Vic.
Went on to win four at Cheltenham and over £170k.
And the guy from the Post had a bet with me that day at Taunton that he would never win a race.
Went on to win four at Cheltenham and over £170k.
And the guy from the Post had a bet with me that day at Taunton that he would never win a race.
Pipey does as he likes.
....and why not ?
He is very well connected.
....and why not ?
He is very well connected.
There`s no doubt that it`s always gone on to an extent.In the 60s nobody expected the chasers of a lot of top trainers to be anything like fit the first time out: there was a flat trainer called Eric Cousins who pulled off a lot of handicap coups,which basically meant the horses had run 6 stinkers in a row in lesser races before apparently acquiring jet propulsion in the big one.Then there was Ryan Price and the Schweppes.
I WAS going to say that this sort of thing was generally accepted but in fact when Hill House won in 1966 the booing started when the horse took up the running and continued with great vehemence into the winners` enclosure. Poor Josh Gifford looked even more like a scared weasel than normal. With some justification as it didn`t look beyond the bounds of possibility he was going to get dragged off the horse. I suppose these days too small a percentage of racegoers would have a clue as to what had transpired to make such a scene.
I WAS going to say that this sort of thing was generally accepted but in fact when Hill House won in 1966 the booing started when the horse took up the running and continued with great vehemence into the winners` enclosure. Poor Josh Gifford looked even more like a scared weasel than normal. With some justification as it didn`t look beyond the bounds of possibility he was going to get dragged off the horse. I suppose these days too small a percentage of racegoers would have a clue as to what had transpired to make such a scene.
The BHA live in mortal fear of the legal challenge, horses can't talk but if they could?, how else would someone like Curley thrive so barefaced?.
Speaking of Pipe wasn't Make A Stand beaten 69L on his hurdling debut at Exeter at odds of 15/8?.
Speaking of Pipe wasn't Make A Stand beaten 69L on his hurdling debut at Exeter at odds of 15/8?.
we could all strike for a day, demand heads roll at incompetent towers...
betting on Jumps Racing can't be taken seriously when they only have to have the adertised distances correct to within 220 yards, and you have horses beaten in photo finishes. Till they sort that out I'm happy I have declared myself out of Jumps racing a while. Hard enough just keeping up with the bendy Flat stuff...
Salmon Spray
The comments are in the essay on Peddlers Cross.
The comments are in the essay on Peddlers Cross.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539