High Flying Harry

[Trotslover]

6 hours ago, Happy Sunrise said:

From a punting perspective, he lost the race at the start, he should have come out from behind Martin John and gone to the front as he had an easy opportunity to do so. Martin John has been going poorly so being behind it was a bad choice when he had options. 

Sam Ottley completely out drove him which is the best scenario out of the race I can find for him.

Yes completely agree the way fire fox won he had to get in front b4 Sam and park her to win 

[Happy Sunrise]

On 12/30/2021 at 8:51 PM, karrotsishere said:

Here is the report. Wow nothing, not even a 1 race day holiday. Go figure. 

Westport TC - Sunday, 26th December 2021
Race 10 - IT@WORK MOBILE PACE
Junior driver K Newman (HIGH FLYING HARRY) assisted by J Dunn defended a charge alleging that he failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure his runner was given full opportunity to win the race when electing not to shift his horse outwards between the 600 metres and 300 metres when an opportunity existed resulting in HIGH FLYING HARRY becoming held up behind a weakening runner leaving the final bend. After viewing the replays and hearing evidence from all parties, the Adjudicative Committee dismissed the charge.

So the indiscretions for the coast circuit have been put up on the RIB site but no sight of this ' charge' yet.

If it is a charge it must be written up and posted, surely.

I'm sure it is a hefty document requiring multiple typewriters so I will wait a bit longer.

[karrotsishere]

On 1/4/2022 at 9:45 PM, Happy Sunrise said:

I will wait a bit longer.

Here you go.

https://racingintegrityboard.org.nz/decisions/westport-tc-26-december-2021-r10-heard-30-december-2021-at-reefton-korbyn-newman/

[Happy Sunrise]

9 hours ago, karrotsishere said:

Here you go.

https://racingintegrityboard.org.nz/decisions/westport-tc-26-december-2021-r10-heard-30-december-2021-at-reefton-korbyn-newman/

I will read it a few times before saying what I think.

However, from reading these things over the years the language, tone and reasoning seems very different from the last. 

[karrotsishere]

1 hour ago, Happy Sunrise said:

I will read it a few times before saying what I think.

However, from reading these things over the years the language, tone and reasoning seems very different from the last. 

Just took a brief read over it.

For those that haven’t read it, in short its basically saying Dunn says that he instructed the horse to be driven like a trotter as can sometimes over-race, wears an anti-choker. Dunn also said the track was in best condition on inside. And he had not cleared a wheel. (This was when a gap appeared). Therefore he would of had to pull horse back slightly & lose momentum & the turn is tight. He was presented with another option - to stay on rail & wait for passing lane. As 2 options were present & it was a matter of choice & no hindsight, as he was not to know horse infront of him would not get him to passing lane. So they decided not to charge based off that. As both options were somewhat reasonable had he chosen either. 

They used this case as an example

It is well established that the Stewards do not need to prove that there was a deliberate act by the Driver to disadvantage the horse, however, there must be some degree of carelessness or incompetence in order to find the Driver’s actions blameworthy. As stated in HRNZ v W Higgs (2005):

***The betting and racing public are entitled to have confidence that the horse upon which they have bet is being driven in a manner which gives it the best opportunity to race to the best of its ability and, hopefully, win.

The betting and racing public are not, however, entitled to perfection from Drivers, though it is an aspirational goal.  That much is confirmed by the use of the qualifier “reasonable” in the Rule. 

The Driver does not have the benefit of hindsight, multiple video angles or the pause button. The Rule recognises this reality and does not hold a Driver to the standard of perfection***

[karrotsishere]

On 1/7/2022 at 6:47 AM, Happy Sunrise said:

I will read it a few times before saying what I think.

However, from reading these things over the years the language, tone and reasoning seems very different from the last. 

Look forward to your thoughts. Profit seems to have a theory on it. If you take a peak at his latest article. 

[Happy Sunrise]

32 minutes ago, karrotsishere said:

Look forward to your thoughts. Profit seems to have a theory on it. If you take a peak at his latest article. 

Do you subscribe to him?

If I come up with the same theory as him I don't know what I want done to me.

[Addington]

57 minutes ago, karrotsishere said:

Profit seems to have a theory on it.

Would not get involved with him or any of his theories Karrots. JMO

[karrotsishere]

43 minutes ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Do you subscribe to him?

If I come up with the same theory as him I don't know what I want done to me.

Nope, just you said you would give feedback on race, so just convo really. (Take a peak every other day to see what the latest headlines are). 

Cant really get much involved with the A-Z of past horses. So just trying to get some convo going on other topics e.g. racing coming up Alex P Fri, 2yo 1st race of season, recent workouts/trials form, Lamb moved to Aus, your feedback on this. But no one seems interested much in discussing present stuff ATM. 

Edited January 18, 2022 by karrotsishere

[Happy Sunrise]

2 minutes ago, karrotsishere said:

But no one seems interested much in discussing present stuff ATM. 

This is post Xmas / New Year revival week after being bombarded with meetings left right and centre and 2 day meetings at that. For me, the rush period ended at Blenheim.

Some posters are probably in therapy recovering from suddenly realising how much money they lost or those like myself who didn't get a run over consecutive meetings. Blenheim had so many unlucky runners it was unusual.

My gambling therapist told me yesterday life is like a race so to reduce anxiety I should imagine I am a horse and just relax 3 back on the fence and wait for a good run which will eventually come in life. I yelled back that is where all my bloody problems start and they looked blankly at me when I screamed 'who do you think I am...High Flying Harry'!

 

 

[Happy Sunrise]

17 minutes ago, karrotsishere said:

Nope, just you said you would give feedback on race,

It is coming. 

[karrotsishere]

Well anyway quickly off subject, Self Assured gets a run, but Akuta isn't in Alex Fri. 

2yo race, Seve has prob been the best performer at workouts, but copes the worst draw. Stablemate filly in 1, has had nice workout/trials. A horse Iv noticed same age called Merlin 2yo has been eye-catching (but not in Fri). But after the Nicolas Cage eye-catcher workout/trials then kind of didn't live up to expectations come race day 2, weary now with workout form. 

Hehe I just love talking about the horses. Gotta log off for day now anyway. 

See y'all tomorrow. 

[Field Commander]

2 hours ago, karrotsishere said:

Look forward to your thoughts. Profit seems to have a theory on it. If you take a peak at his latest article. 

The claim that Olivia Jarvis is the girlfriend/partner of Kerry Cook is accurate and something she disclosed when taking up her role.

[Happy Sunrise]

14 minutes ago, Field Commander said:

Kerry Cook

This Kerry Cook?

Alford’s lawyer, Kerry Cook, asked for a disqualification of four years. Alford briefly addressed the committee, saying he was “very remorseful”, and the disqualification would have a “massive impact” on his life and his family.

Cook said Alford was entitled to credit for his guilty pleas, remorse, previous good record, the harm he would suffer and his previous good character.

“Any disqualification is serious. It removes the ability of any involvement in something which provides him with an income and much pleasure.”

[Field Commander]

22 minutes ago, Happy Sunrise said:

This Kerry Cook?

That is him.

[Happy Sunrise]

29 minutes ago, Field Commander said:

That is him.

Sorry, Karrots. I can't be bothered analysing the decision by stewards about High Flying Harry and comparing it to Ross Cameron etc 

Instead, I am going to watch a comedy.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Happy Sunrise

[Happy Sunrise]

 

4 hours ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Alford’s lawyer, Kerry Cook, asked for a disqualification of four years. Alford briefly addressed the committee, saying he was “very remorseful”, and the disqualification would have a “massive impact” on his life and his family.

Cook said Alford was entitled to credit for his guilty pleas, remorse, previous good record, the harm he would suffer and his previous good character.

“Any disqualification is serious. It removes the ability of any involvement in something which provides him with an income and much pleasure.”

What a guy he seems to be.

So this lawyer says harness racing gives Alford much pleasure?

Tell that to the horse(s) he injected with formalin. Do you think the horse felt pleasure having that done to it? Where is any pleasure in that for Alford or the horse or anyone?

Harness racing is insidious at times.

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by Happy Sunrise

[Happy Sunrise]

Karrots, I will comment even though I said wouldn't. It is interesting to read this decision and Ross Cameron's one, along with Tim Williams suspension from 6 odd years ago (which is relevant since the stipes go back years)

I think the stipes have shot themselves in the foot but due to the fact if I was a driver who was charged in the future I would always refer to Newman's decision as a defence as it now supersedes another case a few years ago involving Tim Williams at Auckland.

On 1/7/2022 at 8:19 AM, karrotsishere said:

HRNZ v W Higgs (2005)

This seems to be the litmus test for all cases like this. 

There are some interesting comparisons to be made between the cases but it is too difficult to make definitive comments because they pick and choose from the Higgs case want they want.

From the Cameron decision:

Mr Ydgren referred the Committee to an extract from the Judicial Committee in the Higgs case which is authoritative, having been cited in many subsequent cases under the Rule. It states that “the test is an objective one and an alleged breach of the Rule falls to be considered by objective standards and not by the subjective reactions of the Driver”.

[14] The application of the objective test is well put by the pragmatic approach of The Hon Justice Haylen, in an Australian case, when he said, in the context of a case under the corresponding Rule, “a reasonable and knowledgeable harness racing spectator” might well have asked, referring to Mr Cameron’s drive, “What on earth is he doing?” or “My goodness, look at that!” That is the objective test.

Well, there were plenty of people saying things about Newman's drive but according to the adjudicator we are wrong but this guidance wasn't used in the Newman case.

But, anyway.

Ross Cameron, in his defence, said about the health of Saginaw's club foot and the covid restrictions Canterbury had just come out of and how it had affected the access to treat Saginaw's heel. The vet supported Cameron's claim as well. Anybody who has ever followed Saginaw knows what a wild thing he can be.  Whereas John Dunn used the state of the track, the tightness of the bend and the difficulty of driving High Flying Harry who he said was like a trotter. It would seem these are not that important anymore unless it is clearly visible in the race.

The simple key seems to be this:

Race situations arise where a Driver is presented with two reasonable and permissible options. Failure to implement one of these options could not merely in and of itself equate to a breach. 

Newman gets off because he had 2 reasonable options to take, though many would have preferred to have him attempt to get off the rails at any point in the race rather than stay 3 back the fact he stayed on the rails is permissible. This in my opinion sets a poor example because it allows drivers to be very negative and still say they had a viable option staying in the position they did.

This is also in stark contrast to one of my biggest bugbears in harness racing which was the Tim Williams suspension for his drive on Have Faith In Me.

Video and decision are here.

https://harness.hrnz.co.nz/gws/ws/r/infohorsews/wsd06x?Arg=hrnzg-Ptype&Arg=RaceVideo&Arg=hrnzg-RacehdrID&Arg=218966&Arg=hrnzg-rSite&Arg=TRUE

http://jca.org.nz/race-days/auckland-tc-harness-racing-11-12-2015/auckland-tc-11-december-2015-r-10-chair-mr-b-scott/?query={"racingtype": "harness-racing", "start": {"query": ["12/11/2015", "12/11/2015"], "range": "minmax"}, "portal_type": ["OldSiteHearing", "Hearing", "NonRaceDayHearing", "ProtestHearingDecision", "RequestRulingHearing"], "SearchableText": ""}

The charge for Tim Williams was not moving out to be parked from 3 back between the 1400 and 1100m mark. That is a long way from home! The horse did not get a clear run in the straight but he was still charged for a driving decision that was nowhere near the finish line. If they had applied the logic shown here then Newman would have found guilty too.

Following the running of THE CULLEN BREEDING SUMMER CUP MOBILE PACE an Information was lodged by Stipendiary Steward Mr S Mulcay against Licensed Horseman Mr T Williams (the Driver of HAVE FAITH IN ME) alleging that Mr Williams was in breach of Rule 868(2) in that he failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures between the 1400 metres and 1100 metres mark to ensure that HAVE FAITH IN ME was given full opportunity to win the Race or to obtain the best possible position and/or finishing place by failing to shift out from the Marker Line before being covered by BETTOR DREAM.

Now, after the Newman decision, it would seem to me the stipes cannot play 'driver' from the stand anymore as long as a driver doesn't move into a 'negative' position which would decrease a horse's chances (eg Ross Cameron)  and because of the '2 reasonable and permissible options' from the Newman decision.

Hence, I don't think a driver can be easily convicted of this offence as there are always 2 options available. Certainly ones that can be put forward.

The RIB have written the defence of every driver charged with this in the future. An exemplar really of what to say and what to challenge.

Mere errors of tactics are in and of themselves not sufficient to found liability for a breach of this Rule.  Given the nature of Harness Racing, at any one point in a race a Driver may have a number of options available to him or her. The decisions made by the Driver are required to be made in a mere instant during the race with multiple uncontrollable variables.  A Driver must, relying upon his or her experience and expertise, balance up a number of competing factors and chose one.  The Driver does not have the benefit of hindsight, multiple video angles or the pause button. The Rule recognises this reality and does not hold a Driver to the standard of perfection.

Was Korbyn Newman guilty? No, not after the justifications put forward by the adjudicator. Also saved by supposedly not being clear of another horses wheel which is debatable but not provable.

Was Ross Cameron guilty? Yes, as he moved into a position which reduced his chances. Outside influences such as the heel issue don't count.

How do they compare to the flawed Williams case? Newman is guilty and Cameron is suspended for life 😂

It is extremely difficult to put down firm markers in these cases for the future as they are all judged as single cases and I may be way off beam because of the complexities involved with what I have written but as I said before, if I was a driver, I would use the Newman case as a defence reference.

Just my thoughts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[karrotsishere]

Wow Happy excellent analysis. Yes in future this is not going to set a good example & drivers can refer to this drive & its verdict of not guilty by the adjudicator - whom is the partner of the lawyer who represented Alford. Alford horses went to C Jones when Alford got done. Newman drove for Jones in his last race with Bensons Mate. All seemingly friends. And again the trainer witness that allegedly pulled the statement re that other case was spotting by someone, who told me they saw them having a drink together not long ago & after Jonny N's forced scratching. So again friends. Which is fine to be friends. People can be friends with whomever they want.

However for this particular case, your earlier pic re TV Comedy Show (All in the family). Its quite the comedy show isn't it. 

 

[karrotsishere]

On 1/18/2022 at 2:23 PM, Addington said:

Would not get involved with him or any of his theories Karrots. JMO

Hear you, however this 1 seems like he was on the money as, FC pointed out. 

He is def out there as per twitter pic - (which he could easily delete that pic). But when it comes to his work, won't base his work from that. The thing I think is wrong is when he writes rumours. Or gets stuck on someone/something & won't leave it alone, then it turns out to be wrong e.g. Always B Miki.

On the plus side

Prefer someone like him writing about things (when they are facts) as it doesn't go mainstream. He needs to stick to facts & re-build his credibility. 

This latest info he has re stem cells is very interesting. 

[karrotsishere]

On 1/18/2022 at 3:06 PM, karrotsishere said:

2yo race

Off topic but a Lincoln Farms article if anyone is interested on how Greens thinks his 3 - 2yos will go tomorrow.

https://www.lincolnfarms.co.nz/stories/rocknroll-has-the-beaudiene-winning-stamp-and-our-mervs-bought-a-piece-of-him/

[Happy Sunrise]

No mucking around today.

 

[Happy Sunrise]

Another positive drive for his 50th. I will leave it there.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Happy Sunrise

[Lightning Blue]

1 hour ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Another positive drive for his 50th. I will leave it there.

Amazing !! looping the field twice within 2 hours with 'Harry' and 'Smiffy' , 'Miracle' Newman.

This fine driver fully aware Happy has the peepers on him, so hope Happy had the tenner on him as well lol......

40-1 by 4 lengths !!!  Go you big flying 'Harry' !!!, wish he was in Sunday as would of been on for sure in picking Comp lol.

[Happy Sunrise]

Hope Johnny Dunn got on. He should get a job at the TAB, might as well since they are one big happy family.

HIGH FLYING HARRY - driver K Newman advised he did not activate the removable deafeners due to having the field covered. When questioned regarding the apparent improved performance stable representative J Dunn advised that he considered the gelding to be well over the odds in tonight's event given that it had been racing consistently apart from its last start when breaking over the early stages and losing ground as a result.