Guaranteed to be overturned as backed the second to win and cashed out to reduce liability. I'm used to the great celestial boot giving me a good kicking!
Guaranteed to be overturned as backed the second to win and cashed out to reduce liability. I'm used to the great celestial boot giving me a good kicking!
sounds like you think the 2nd will get it to me Mr.Hunt.
Rico-Dangleflaps Joined: 07 Sep 18if the winner wasnt there would the 2nd have went same way?not imo.---------------------------------------------------------------sounds like you think the 2nd will get it to me Mr.Hunt.
so if FPTP wasn't there the 2nd wouldn't have drifted...
so the FPTP caused the 2nd to drift over and lose ground...
but you don't think the 2nd past the post will get it...?
so if FPTP wasn't there the 2nd wouldn't have drifted...so the FPTP caused the 2nd to drift over and lose ground...but you don't think the 2nd past the post will get it...?
sounds like you think the 2nd will get it to me Mr.Hunt.
correct hibs..wd rico.
HappyHibby 13 Oct 23 17:56 Rico-Dangleflaps Joined: 07 Sep 18if the winner wasnt there would the 2nd have went same way?not imo.---------------------------------------------------------------sounds like you think the 2nd will get it to me Mr.Hunt.co
isleham 13 Oct 23 18:01 thats ridiculous never touched the second and dont even think it was intimidation just followed the bend
seen plenty with clear gap between them disq..stewards say its intimidation that cost the 2nd ground.. harsh today imo
isleham 13 Oct 23 18:01 thats ridiculous never touched the second and dont even think it was intimidation just followed the bendseen plenty with clear gap between them disq..stewards say its intimidation that cost the 2nd ground.. harsh today imo
Mr.Hunt says the original 2nd would have not gone 8 yards to the left if the original winner hadn't went that way itself...
then says it's harsh for the original winner to be chucked...
Mr.Hunt says the original 2nd would have not gone 8 yards to the left if the original winner hadn't went that way itself...then says it's harsh for the original winner to be chucked...
crazy reversal, so now any horse that drifts one way, if it is subsequently followed by another the default is to assume that the secondary horse influenced the first
crazy reversal, so now any horse that drifts one way, if it is subsequently followed by another the default is to assume that the secondary horse influenced the first
By the standards of that decision whenever a steward's is called the winner has to get chucked out. Zero interference - zero intimidation. Probably the worst decision I have ever seen.
By the standards of that decision whenever a steward's is called the winner has to get chucked out. Zero interference - zero intimidation. Probably the worst decision I have ever seen.
By the standards of that decision whenever a steward's is called the winner has to get chucked out. Zero interference - zero intimidation. Probably the worst decision I have ever seen.
By the standards of that decision whenever a steward's is called the winner has to get chucked out. Zero interference - zero intimidation. Probably the worst decision I have ever seen.
if you don't know by now there is no consistency then i have no idea what you've been watching all these years tbh.
Yes, I've often thought that you'd had no idea
HappyHibby 13 Oct 23 18:20 duffy...if you don't know by now there is no consistency then i have no idea what you've been watching all these years tbh.Yes, I've often thought that you'd had no idea
I had the eventual winner and laid it off like a nutter, there seemed nothing in it. Oh well, In USA I would have been more confident for sure, here i the UK it is a lottery for sure
I had the eventual winner and laid it off like a nutter, there seemed nothing in it. Oh well, In USA I would have been more confident for sure, here i the UK it is a lottery for sure
An enquiry was held to consider the placings in this race after interference inside the final furlong when the winner, OSO RAPIDO (IRE), ridden by Andrew Breslin, interfered with THUNDER ROAR, placed second, ridden by Billy Loughnane. The Stewards considered that the interference had improved OSO RAPIDO (IRE)’s placing as OSO RAPIDO (IRE) had carried THUNDER ROAR off its intended line for a considerable distance and by several horses’s widths. The Stewards were satisfied that considering the official winning margin of a nose, had the interference not occurred THUNDER ROAR would have finished in front of OSO RAPIDO (IRE) and revised the placings as follows: First: THUNDER ROAR, Second: OSO RAPIDO (IRE), Third: ELDRICKJONES (IRE), Fourth: CRAVEN. Breslin was suspended for 2 days for careless riding as he allowed his mount to drift left-handed for a considerable distance without timely correction intimidating THUNDER ROAR notably off its intended line.
An enquiry was held to consider the placings in this race after interference inside the final furlong when the winner, OSO RAPIDO (IRE), ridden by Andrew Breslin, interfered with THUNDER ROAR, placed second, ridden by Billy Loughnane. The Stewards co
the original 2nd wanted to run in a straight line but couldn't coz the original winner was moving to the left (8 yards according to you)...
they have no idea if the original 2nd was going to run in a straight line or not...
they are just guessing...
just like we all are.
it's clear what they are saying Mr.Hunt...the original 2nd wanted to run in a straight line but couldn't coz the original winner was moving to the left (8 yards according to you)...they have no idea if the original 2nd was going to run in a straight
BUT the stewards have clearly come to the conclusion that the original 2nd was going to run in a straight line but COULD NOT due to the original winner going left by 8 yards (according to you)...
they are BLAMING the original winner for the original 2nd going 8 yards to the left (according to you)...
i have no idea who is to blame...
i put it in the 'i wouldn't be surprised what they did' category...
as i said they are just guessing...
like we all are.
BUT the stewards have clearly come to the conclusion that the original 2nd was going to run in a straight line but COULD NOT due to the original winner going left by 8 yards (according to you)...they are BLAMING the original winner for the original 2