Did i miss the dylan kitts controversy debate on the opening show itv this morning

Yes it was on.

Was it not even mentioned?

like 15 min debate and what was said

missed first half hour why im asking

The main point which emerged was that the owner has had horses with many owners and is known for that. For what that's worth. He also, reputedly, has claimed that he did not insist that Kitts rode the horse which is contrary to the trainer's assertion. Very little else was added to the current debate.

thanks, its all a cozy set up they dare not step out of line or they will be gone, who would want a job with no credibility that you were forced to not speak the truth of what you thought, thats just so wrong but if they are happy to take the money in a job like that good luck to them

Know All, you missed the conversation as you say but still want to critisice the presenters, what on earth can they say without any proof of wrong doing, there are laws of slander you know. The trainer to his credit told the owner to take his horses away and the presenters just inferred that the owner had had quite a few trainers for his few horses, there's nothing more they could say is there.

Stewarts did they show the ride and give their thoughts?

To be fair just seen it on catch up. Matt Chapman told it like it is. Said doesn't matter what the instructions are you can't ride a horse like that. Also no one in horse racing thinks thats an acceptable effort. Also mentioned about on the exchanges the horse never went low odds given how well it was travelling.

Gave a very honest opinion without going too far and landing himself in hot water.

Kitts should get a free pass,he’s between a rock and a hard place,he’s trying to build contacts to get rides,wants to please the owners,what can he do,he isn’t in a position to tell the owners no.

We say the customer is always right,so how can you balance this with his duty and his obligation.

BHA,should ask him,if you come clean to instructions,you’ll get let off,

Perhaps when registering a horse,all owners must sign an agreement to never ask jockeys to not ride for best possible position.

Morning Line did show the finishing of the race. And, Chapman said Kitts would be looking at a long suspension.

I think the suspension for Kitts is a given, will the owner suffer the same fate? The owner has had many trainers. I believe the new trainer of these two horses will be watched like a hawk by the bookies and BHA the minute the horses are declared for a race in the future, assuming the present status of its owner is unchanged for this blatant effort to cheat.

What happened at Worcester was bad for everyone esp horseracing. We saw it in Ireland eg Noble Emperor, and that horse of O'Brien (2nd string but backed) and gifted the race; O'Brien also had the odds-on fav in the same race.

I agree comingupthehill.  I believe he has been warned of dire retribution should he not comply.
There are some very, very nasty people around.

I wouldn’t go that far,he just wanted to please the owners to get future rides,hardly think they threatened to knee cap him.

Showing as owner F A Clegg only owned Hillsin since 21 June 2023. Interesting Clegg said he never requested Kitts to ride. Imagine this could get quite murky and take a while to sort out.

Agree 100% Stewarts, I thought the presenters covered it as best they could considering it's still early stages  of an investigation, nobody is going to be so daft as to slander anyone on live TV.

There are 2 simple questions that need answering. Why did the horse drift from 2s to 11s. And then WHY was he given the "ride" he was...

...
..
Morning show on TV they said the owner insisted kits would ride.??

  This could get messy as you say.

* Kitts

I cannot agree with comingupthehill for the free pass idea....
But yes he should get a reduced sentence for helping the BHA.

for the betting pattern what kind of money would it take to move it from 2's to 11's in a krappy race at Worcester?
Mightn't be much to go on especially if its been laid by the 2 associates that were mentioned in the insisting on Kitts getting the ride.

ITV did alright, not there usual on-the-fence non-journalistic rubbish

Its unfortunate for the jockey but they need to make an example of him, ban him for the 6 months or year on a suspended sentence.
It would keep him honest knowing that the next time he is caught then he's fcuked.

Glasgow racing post quoted trainer as saying owner decision as per below:

https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/hillsin-trainer-reveals-death-threats-over-controversial-worcester-ride-aMjYd4v6SFsW/

It was the first time Kitts had ridden for the stable and Honour said it was the owner's decision to use him.

Then another article on racing post:

https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/ive-done-nothing-wrong-hillsin-owner-affirms-innocence-as-investigation-into-worcester-storm-continues-aTVlc0d9g0vX/

Alan Clegg, 79, also said he had not insisted on Dylan Kitts taking the ride, as it emerged the conditional jockey would not be permitted to compete in races or attend racecourses while the investigation into Wednesday’s race continued.

as ive said earlier..if kitts had no intention of winning by wotever means,why thr fck was he so close up way out?

no one is saying he is a competent cheat.

In running lows and amount traded - quite a lot traded, relatively, given the in running price

Bensini            1.01    39275.63
Eaton Lady    2.1    33198.7
Hillsin            13    9275.45
Champagne Gift    5    8656.88
Marley Head    2.98    6751.19
Orange Gina    9    4866.28
Edinburgh Rock    8    4470.48
Hash....syet    10.5    3279.27
Champ Royal    18    1830.85
Jina            14.5    1686.02
Deer Hunter    20    1470.35
Flintstone    26    1306.21

Didn't read the original thread about the ride as i don't like to berate young 7lb claimers who will generally riding to instructions. I was concentrating on the fav in the race and also noticed the eventual winner travelling well and put up a thread regarding the winners improvement after being quite well backed into 13/2, didn't take much notice of this Hillsin ride during race so didn't wish to comment.
Have watched the race this morning and hard to argue the ride did look awful towards the end after travelling really well throughout the race, made ground effortlessly to get near leaders in back straight, rider appeared not to want to get to the front and let horse drop back a little whilst still travelling easily, just waiting to presumably push it out to win on run in, but as everyone says did nothing.
My feeling is that the horse is a bridle ponce, reviewed it's previous 2 races when  PU over C/D and 3rd at Exeter, travelled well behind leaders at Exeter and came to join leader 2 out, Kitts started to push the horse and hit it with the whip which made horse veer to the left, tried to ride out a bit more vigorously but horse found no more dropping to 3rd, probably his best run so far. At Worcester nto held up but travelled well before stumbling at 5th, Kitts started to push him and horse did make ground for a few strides but quickly dropped out of the picture at home turn(couldn't see how vigorously or not horse was ridden as fell back), was pulled up a couple of hurdles out when back in view.
I'm sure Kitts rode to Chris Honours' instructions but clearly didn't know what to do after the last, if he'd ridden him more vigorously or whipped him would the horse have gone on i'm not sure and we'll never know, at least until he is ridden more vigorously. Look at all his previous form going back since with a very good trainer in Gavin Cromwell and Claire Harris, some of the IR comments:

  Always towards rear, cajoled along before 4th, outpaced and pushed along 7th, well behind from 3 out, tailed off
  Held up in rear, some headway after 6th, pushed along and lost ground after 8th, got well behind before 3 out, tailed off
  Midfield, ridden 2 out (usual 3 out), weakened last (usual 2 out)
  Chased leaders, midfield when not fluent 4 out, soon ridden, weakened after 3 out, beaten when hit 2 out
  Pressed leaders, pushed along and weakened quickly before 4 out, pulled up before 2 out

If Cromwell couldn't get a race out of it, a horse that clearly has ability even when they backed it at Limerick twice when backed into 11/2 and last race at 5/1 after being huge prices on most of it's runs tells you something.

  My opinion is horse doesn't like being pushed or ridden to any degree, and throws in the towel quickly, a bridle ponce. Of course it looked bad and horse may well hack up nto but years ago a stable i had horse with had a similar horse which made absolute fools of us.

as ive said earlier..if kitts had no intention of winning by wotever means,why thr fck was he so close up way out?

he did nothing to make the horse run any faster rico.  what you saw was the horse just galloping round the racetrack.  fact it was going so well was kitts problem. very similar to Purcell’s ride on Laetitia where CB had told him not to win but the horse was travelling that well there was a danger it was just going to win anyway.

hold it up at rear on rails..aint difficult plenty other manage it.

https://twitter.com/itvracing/status/1677599052479844352?t=bd9FSHRp79VFlcObw...

First and only time he got busy on the horse was when he was cemented for 3rd place close home.

stewarts rise:

My opinion is horse doesn't like being pushed or ridden to any degree, and throws in the towel quickly, a bridle ponce. Of course it looked bad and horse may well hack up nto but years ago a stable i had horse with had a similar horse which made absolute fools of us.

Which would explain why the new trainer's punters might have eagerly punted the horse overnight; and why those who knew the horse of old might have seen the price collapse and duly laid it.

I'm purely guessing here. I have no idea what really happened.

Based on this ,it should have won then,has it wasn’t pushed or ridden,think that’s the point.

wd.

comingupthehill: The point about bridle ponces is that it doesn't matter whether you ride them vigorously or sit there doing nothing. Either way, they won't put their heads in front.

I don't want to go overboard on this, because the ride, and more particularly the betting, looked awful. But it might help explain why some people chose this particular horse as a vehicle to lay at any price.

One scenario that's happened many times ( i've been involved myself ) is that the plans have changed due to someone with a big mouth and someone else in the " gang " not getting his price , so consequently the plan goes in reverse gear hence the initial punt followed by the big drift.

Rico makes a fair point though , if you're going to pull a horse settle it further back and either never get in race or look down as if something amiss and pull it up , nonsensical to appear with a winning chances close home and draw all this attention.

Doesn't make sense if none of the above.

haydey conquers wiv reeko..sense at last.

The horse had run 17 times,14 of those times it was beat by 19L or bigger,8 of them by 50L or bigger.

Dosent look like a shrewd purchase by the owner.

It’s best run was 2 back,it came third,the 2nd won next time out,so maybe connections or punters got giddy,believing it to be the next harchibald.

Given honour has distanced himself from the race,and it being its first run for him,how did they know it had settled in its new stable,

Given it’s the last race at Worcester on a Wednesday,I doubt there was not much money involved in affecting the price.

Maybe when punters looked at the form,which is pretty dour,they believed the price was too low.

It’s was pulled up lot,same jockey,so maybe it’s not the first time he’s tried to please the owners.

He’s a claimed,don’t think he should be pilloried,

He surely and clearly did not ride to win; he'd have tried harder, but he did not despite travelling the best just before the finishing line.

I do not believe Kitts has been pilloried. He may be a claimer, but he's also a professional. Not long ago he was banned for 14 days for a similar offence in the eyes of the authority.

A professional jockey - claimer or not - must do their utmost riding to win. In this case it was evidently clear he did not. He might have been riding to instruction nevertheless, if the instruction is unscrupulous he still ought to put professionalism ie ride to win or achieve the best position possible over the order of the owner or trainer.

The trainer Mr Honour was not happy with Kitts effort at the finish either so much so he asked the owner to take his horses away, and he was not part of "this".

When i watched this i was immediately reminded of a Gary Carter one i backed 20 ago. Left the bookies wondering how on earth it didn't win. Just looked it up. The horse was Dodona. It was beaten a SH and the RP comment ended 'not run on at finish'

If you watch the whole race he gave ground all round the outside and also at the start.
Can't believe it never traded at less than 13 given the way it was travelling in 4th round the home turn is my opinion. The jockey originally was trying to settle it at the back of the race.

Agree with hayden the only time he got active was when the win was out of the question and 3rd was booked right at the finish.

You can't really use the bridle horse argument as he never asked it the question when it had a chance of winning and to be fair it seemed to be making ground when ridden.

To be honest given the way the horse has been positioned during the race I would say the trainer has had him absolutely spot on and the horse was well in... something the trainer or punting connections might have taken advantage of pre race hence it being backed strongly originally. As Hayden also says maybe someone missed out on the price and plans changed.

comingupthehill = dylan kitts

FACT.

Kitts was not riding Little Bay. If so, he'd have received some sympathy if Little Bay had down tool if Kitts had tried.

Of all the issues in racing,the industry chooses to spend all its focus on a young claiming jokey,in the last race at Worcester on a Wednesday.

The op,most controversial race in last 5 years,everyone going over the top ,
If it would have been a top jockey or trainer,it would be nothing to see here,move on.

My son,sorry,Dylan kitts dosent deserve the pile on.

I’m sure his mum has sent him to his room,without any tea.

I agree cominupthehill there is loads of top jockeys doinf the same though perhaps disguising it better and for some reason the stewards over look it.

What is your view on the actual ride in question though? 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Do you think Dylan Kitts rode the horse to achieve the best possible placing?

I’ve no opinion really,just let justice take its course,if they find he didn’t ride out,then punish him accordingly.

He’s a young jockey,hopefully he ll learn and move on.

you have the ride plus someone was offering 13s or more to anyone who wanted to bet a horse that visually looked to have a very good chance in the closing stages.

If you'd be given a 14 day non trier ban in May, you'd think that while you might get a whip ban for trying too hard, you wouldn't want to  be accused of non trying two months later.

With the obvious lack of effort,he’s more clumsy than corrupt.if he was pressured into  not trying,waiting for another day,he’s not very good at it.

Perhaps it’s easier to just ride out and try.

But it is his 2nd offence ,so maybe it’s not for him.

Chapman would have had no problem "telling it how it is" with a young virtually unknown jockey but had it have been a senior jockey I doubt anything like it would have been heard.

Unless I've missed summat, surely it could be organised easily enough to find out exactly who kept the in running price so high when he was and swinging along on the snaff?

13.0 , I mean come on, that seriously needs investigating.

Nearly everyone agrees its not good optics for racing....

What will be even more interesting will be what the BHA do now.

How much do they suspend him for? I'm not too sure what the guide is, but someone one here must have a rough idea of what he's expecting to get. Presumably at least 14 days.

Or will they have the balls to do nothing and say it was an inexperienced jockey who is learning his trade and banning him again will serve no purpose because he didn't learn from the previous ban>?

Leaving aside that the lad did not try, and actually made a mess of not trying. There are several reasons why he was not trying, none of them honest imo but... I think the key here is that the horse was NOT laid at less than a remarkable 13, which to state the effin obvious, means that EVERY in-running bet was matched at 13 or more. And matched by persons, who despite how the horse was running, were certain that the horse could not or would not win. Given the appetite, it should be easy to work out who was laying and any connections with the owners or otherwise. Will they bother??

Of course the GC has the power to prosecute anyone who "interferes with the process of gambling". So no doubt they are gathering information right now, to launch their second prosecution for this offence in their 17 years of existence.

Slippy - I agree and you used less words!

I think these are still the rules under which Mr Kitts and his owner and trainer will be judged. I will post the penalties page as soon as I can find it.

Rule 155
i. Every horse which runs in a race shall be run on its merits.

ii. It shall be the duty of a Trainer to ensure that adequate instructions to achieve the objective contained in Sub-Rule (i) above are given to the Rider of any horse in his care. No Owner, Registered Agent of a Recognised Company, or Trainer shall give any instructions to the Rider of any horse which if obeyed could or would prevent the horse from winning a race or of obtaining the best possible placing, neither shall they, its Rider or any other person prevent or try to prevent in any way any horse from winning a race or of obtaining the best possible placing.

iii. Where any Rider is found in breach of Rule 157 or 158 the Trainer of the horse in question shall be deemed to be in breach of Sub-Rule (ii) and guilty of an offence, unless the Trainer satisfies the Stewards or the Stewards of the Jockey Club that the Rider failed to comply with the instructions given to him under Sub-Rule (ii) of this Rule which, if followed, should have enabled the Rider to have obtained the best possible placing and in this event the Trainer shall be found not to have been in breach of Sub-Rule(ii).

Rule 156 – Where, in the opinion of the Stewards or the Stewards of the Jockey Club, a horse has not achieved its best possible placing because one of the circumstances detailed below arose by reason of an error of judgement on the part of its Rider, the Rider shall be deemed in breach of this Rule and guilty of an offence.

The said circumstances are:-
i. failing to ride out approaching the finish by dropping hands;
ii. mistaking the race distance and either riding a finish too early or failing to ride a finish;
iii. taking the wrong course.

Rule 157 – Where, in the opinion of the Stewards or the Stewards of the Jockey Club, a Rider has failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures throughout the race to ensure that his horse is given a full opportunity to win or of obtaining the best possible placing with the intention of concealing the true ability of the horse or affecting the result of the race the Rider shall be deemed in breach of this Rule and guilty of an offence.

Rule 158 – Where, in the opinion of the Stewards or the Stewards of the Jockey Club, a Rider has failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures throughout the race to ensure that his horse is given a full opportunity to win or of obtaining the best possible placing but the Stewards or the Stewards of the Jockey Club are not satisfied the circumstances specified in Rule 156 or 157 apply the Rider shall be deemed in breach of this Rule and guilty of an offence.

You're being a bit unfair on the BHA at this stage. They've immediately banned Kitts from taking any more rides until further notice, which I think is unprecedented. He might have already missed a winner, with the BHA banning him from riding O'Faolains lad at Newton Abbot yesterday. Beaten a length, and probably would have won with Kitts taking 7 lb off.

He's not even allowed on a racecourse. They do appear to mean business here.

which seems to indicate that they have significant betting info imo.

Screaming - I am not sure who you are addressing here. I cannot see anything on here from anyone that impugns the BHA at this stage. Unless you count claims that they will do bu66er all. Remember the penalties for related infringements can be counted in years.

Jul 8, 2023 -- 8:52PM, screaming from beneaththewaves wrote:

He's not even allowed on a racecourse. They do appear to mean business here.

they are only doing it cause of the jockeys status.
If this was Moore or Buick no questions asked...

Buick falls out the stalls in a G1 today giving lengths away and is beaten less than these lengths at the finish and nothing is asked?

nothing is asked?

well obviously and if you can't work out why....

cause the rules don't apply to the big boys(?)...

Ireland is worse in my opinion. Local stewards banned the jockey for 30 days, but rescinded on appeal possibly ownership and pending Cheltenham related. Another obvious one was 2 participants from an O'Brien stable. The outsider was backed and gifted a start; odds-on fav drifted before the off and comprehensively beaten. No enquiry or question asked by stewards or Irish Racing Board.

There was a race last night at Bellewstown -or was it Thursday - that had a well backed winner tear off in front and establish a large enuf lead - horse in 2nd was the well touted fav and stablemate  Bringsty who made very little effort to get after the "tearaway" who won as he liked - was bet from 18s on course to 7s and briefly mentioned by rtv b4 the off

THEY KNEW .......and they always know how to do it and its not the 1st time its happened wiv this outfit - ok not as bad as Kitts bollux but just further evidence it goes on daily

The worst I ever saw was at Ponte when I was young. 4 runner race one trainer had two runners , the odds on fav :(1/4) and a no hoper.  (33/1) Coming round into the straight the no hoper was driven in front of his stablemate and boxed him in on the rail. As the fav checked he was then pulled around his stablemate whose rider pulled his reins sideways and  bumped him off course. The race was won by one of the others and the no hoper finished 3rd. The fav was second but you can't object to a horse that is placed behind you! I always wonder if the trainer knew a few bookies .

Yeah - "they"re going to pull one in a Gp 1.   
Classic nonsense.  Still laughing.

Jul 9, 2023 -- 12:48PM, LoyalHoncho wrote:

Yeah - "they"re going to pull one in a Gp 1.

They do
  Adelaide River was tenderly ridden last week.