Darren Weir - Trainer - Racehorse TALK harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Darren Weir - Trainer - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Darren Weir  (Read 10706 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12193
« 2015-Nov-05, 07:33 PM Reply #25 »
I'll concede B grade Wily, but that's my assessment. He certainly proved me wrong last Tuesday  :tomatoes:

 

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25543
« 2015-Nov-05, 08:05 PM Reply #26 »
B seems right to me but it will be interesting to see how he progresses next prep

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 20286
« 2016-Feb-11, 01:00 AM Reply #27 »
From Racenet.

Ibuprofen positive confirmed for Signoff


Stewards have confirmed the Darren Weir-trained Signoff tested positive to Ibuprofen after his first-up win in the Listed Lord Stakes (1700m) on Boxing Day.

Stewards informed Weir of an irregularity in his initial urine test in January before advising the trainer of the confirmed findings this week.

Signoff is one of a rash of horses that have tested positive to Ibuprofen weeks or months after the substance has been used on horses in the treatment of tendon injuries.

Caulfield trainer Clinton McDonald has endured similar troubles with his comeback galloper Rib Eye, who has tested positive after three runs back from undergoing the same tendon rehabilitation program.

The trainers have said Ibuprofen has been released from the horse’s systems only when burning fat during gallops, while the horses have produced clear urine samples when idle.


Link to full article:

https://www.racenet.com.au/news/119883/Ibuprofen-positive-confirmed-for-Signoff

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15101
« 2018-Jul-28, 09:36 PM Reply #28 »
Darren Weir had a day out today stable winning 9 races Caulfield Morphetville and Mildura.... Nature strip blitzed them in the feature race.  :king:


Giddy Up  :beer:

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15101
« 2018-Sep-19, 07:42 PM Reply #29 »
Weir fined $5000 for incorrect horse identification
Andrew Eddy@fastisheddy   6:15pm

Leading trainer Darren Weir has been fined $5000 after pleading guilty to a charge of making a false or misleading statement or declaration relating to a Ballarat jump-out last month.
Weir was charged under AR 175 (gg) that stipulates stewards may penalise:

‘’Any person who makes any false or misleading statement or declaration in respect of  any matter in connection with the administration or control of racing.’’

The particulars of the charge we

‘’On August 3, Mr Weir did, via email from stable staff to the Ballarat Turf Club, falsely and misleadingly declare the name of seven horses, those being Spicer, Pelonomena, Kragle, Bindabooberri, French Fry, Ancient Echoes and Mio Nipotina, as having jumped out at Ballarat on 1 August in specific heats.

‘’As a result, the jump out information provided to the public for these heats was incorrect.

‘’Mr Weir’s actions, as listed above, constitutes a false and misleading declaration under AR175(gg).


‘’During the inquiry it was established that the correct horse identities were as follows:

Horse listed as Spicer in Heat 1 was Imperial Edition
Horse listed as Pelonomena in Heat 1 was Diamond Diva
Horse listed as Kragle in Heat 3 was Masterbrax
Horse listed as Bindabooberri in Heat 3 was Rewarding Girl
Horse listed as French Fry in Heat 7 was Holy Freeze
Horse listed as Ancient Echoes in Heat 7 was Buck Bay
Horse listed as Mio Nipotina in Heat 11 was Vogue Empress
‘’Mr Weir plead guilty to the charge and Stewards acting under LR 6C(2A) fined him the sum of $5000.

‘’In assessing the matter, stewards took into account Mr Weir’s guilty plea, evidence during the inquiry, that an initial email to the Ballarat Turf Club gave weight to the evidence that the offence was not premeditated, the circumstances surrounding the incident and the fact that the incident has the ability to erode the confidence of the industry.

‘’Stewards further wish to remind trainers that as of Monday, October 1, they must ensure that any horse nominated in jump outs which are listed in the Inside Racing publication must be correctly named and identified.ENDS

Stewards report that this communication was not premeditated but  their report contains no elaboration on the explanation that they would have sought from the trainer please explain.

Giddy Up :beer:


Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 20286
« 2018-Oct-02, 12:15 PM Reply #30 »
Bump.

In case anyone was looking for the thread to post conspiracy theories about Darren Weir and why he is so successful.

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12193
« 2018-Oct-02, 04:42 PM Reply #31 »
I was going to start a 'Weir Watch' thread PP but this one is as good as any.

Stable is flying and has a hat full of chances in many of the up coming features. Racked up a lazy 5 winners & 3 2nds last Sunday  8-)

All aboard I say  :clap2:

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4331
« 2018-Oct-02, 10:02 PM Reply #32 »


'All aboard' .......in the absence of bracketing

................it is unfortunately a riddle for punters with multiple runners from the Weir and Waller stables.

Both trainers present as entirely above board but presumably not telling all ahead of the day unfolding.

In the US their multiple runners would be bracketed -- as one runner.

'Bracketing' has been rejected in Australia but, historically, in relation to only two or, rarely, three acceptors.

These days when these trainers are likely to have multiple acceptors in many races, even in black-type events, it is likely to be more fair that any more than two runners be all bracketed, especially in black-type events.


Offline arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2550
« 2018-Oct-03, 08:39 AM Reply #33 »
You can bracket them yourself by backing all or some of the stable runners . . if you are so insecure

You will get the same price as you would if somebody else bracketed them for you

Not 'rocket-surgery'

Plus . .


There are lots of good arguments against compulsory bracketing . .

Online Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 7731
« 2018-Oct-03, 10:16 AM Reply #34 »

Plus . .


There are lots of good arguments against compulsory bracketing . .

One being exotics are a nightmare, what happens when two or three horses in a bracket fill the places in any exotic, Take trifecta for example, does the horses finishing fourth or fifth move up into the placings if one stable's horses run first , second and third ?
TAB computer cannot cope with fields overseas with more than 24 starts, the mind boggles how it would cope with brackets.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25543
« 2018-Oct-03, 12:53 PM Reply #35 »
You can bracket them yourself by backing all or some of the stable runners . . if you are so insecure

You will get the same price as you would if somebody else bracketed them for you

Not 'rocket-surgery'


 :bulb:

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12193
« 2018-Oct-03, 03:02 PM Reply #36 »

'All aboard' .......in the absence of bracketing

................it is unfortunately a riddle for punters with multiple runners from the Weir and Waller stables.


Come on Pete, it's not that hard  :/

You can bracket them yourself by backing all or some of the stable runners . . if you are so insecure

You will get the same price as you would if somebody else bracketed them for you

Not 'rocket-surgery'



  emthup   emthup

Even if you only want to bet one out, follow the money  ;)

Racenet have a niffty little 'odds comparison' which shows whether a horse has firmed since markets have opened and another whether it's shortened on race day.

It's not fool proof but gees we've never had it better with the information at our finger tips  :yes: 

Case in point race 4 at Ballarat today, open up the odds comparison and have a look at the firmers  :bulb: 

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25543
« 2018-Oct-03, 06:53 PM Reply #37 »
Come on Gin, Pete told us that those firmers are all a rort for the insiders

Online Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 7731
« 2018-Oct-03, 07:12 PM Reply #38 »
Come on Gin, Pete told us that those firmers are all a rort for the insiders
All I know I would loved to have got on at some of those overnight odds, but I have been banned.

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12193
« 2018-Oct-03, 08:59 PM Reply #39 »
All I know I would loved to have got on at some of those overnight odds, but I have been banned.

I've had my odds boost cut back by Ladbrokes because 'I don't play in the spirit' or whatever that means  :rant: and reckon I'm on thin ice with the SB account  :sweat:

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 20286
« 2018-Oct-04, 12:10 AM Reply #40 »
I think the fun days are over for promotions.

My odds boosts on corporates has dropped significantly.

Not sure if this is directed Gin or if it is across the board.

William Hill had to go and they had that ridiculous offer of money back if your horse ran in the first half of the field. I'm sure that got everyone in the WH marketing department very excited for a while but it was not sustainable like a lot of corporate bonuses have been.

We are seeing an extreme consolidation of the corporate bookmaker market in Australia that will probably end up being an oligopoly just like the airlines, telcos and grocery stores.

Think TAB, Sportsbet and Ladbrokes appear to be the big survivors.

Offline arthur

  • Group 2
  • User 446
  • Posts: 2550
« 2018-Oct-04, 07:16 AM Reply #41 »
I've had my odds boost cut back by Ladbrokes because 'I don't play in the spirit' or whatever that means  :rant: and reckon I'm on thin ice with the SB account  :sweat:

S-B will let you know when you are on the nose by chopping your prices when you try to place a bet . .


The corps bet 'even-money' Winx, and ditto hot favourites in footy matches and get upset when people take the odds . .

I got 'poo-poohed' here for saying that such promotions were bad business practice, but I still hold that opinion

POC also has to have an effect


I have also noticed that on smaller markets like non-metro, that corp's closing % seem to be a bit higher now come jump time . . but that may just be on particular occasions

Offline Jeunes

  • VIP Club
  • Group 2
  • User 296
  • Posts: 2386
« 2018-Oct-21, 01:08 PM Reply #42 »
I don't understand what this means i.e. stabling at another trainer unless the stewards think something nefarious is happening so any clarity on this matter will be enlightening.

 https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/racing/controversy-as-stable-error-sees-fools-scratched-20181020-p50ax5.html

Controversy as stable error sees Fools scratched

By Peter Ryan
20 October 2018 — 2:21pm

Trainer Jarrod McLean will face an inquiry after stewards withdrew his horse Trap For Fools from the group 3 Coongy Cup when they found the horse had been stabled at Darren Weir's Warrnambool stables.

Trainers are only allowed to train at premises where they are licensed to train and the stewards will allege that McLean, who is licensed to train nearby at Yangery but also works as Weir's foreman, breached that condition when Trap For Fools was housed at Weir's stables.

The stewards directed the five-year-old gelding, who bravely led the Turnbull Stakes a fortnight ago before finishing fifth, be withdrawn and adjourned the inquiry to a date to be determined.

Weir defended McLean and played down the issue.

"It's absolutely disappointing for Jarrod. It's only just the horse in the wrong stable," Weir said.

Offline Gintara

  • Group 1
  • User 16
  • Posts: 12193
« 2018-Oct-21, 02:11 PM Reply #43 »
It does seem an over reaction to scratch the horse for what seems a minor infraction :what:

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31128
« 2018-Oct-21, 04:10 PM Reply #44 »
These two do have a history ?

The benefit of the doubt does not fall in their favour.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25543
« 2018-Oct-21, 04:53 PM Reply #45 »
Even so, what is the crime here ?

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31128
« 2018-Oct-21, 04:58 PM Reply #46 »
Seriously ?

Offline ratsack

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 327
  • Posts: 10291
« 2018-Oct-21, 07:47 PM Reply #47 »
Even so, what is the crime here ?

he broke the rules 

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 25543
« 2018-Oct-22, 10:06 AM Reply #48 »
Seriously ?


Of course. As juenes said

"I don't understand what this means i.e. stabling at another trainer unless the stewards think something nefarious is happening so any clarity on this matter will be enlightening"

Offline nemisis

  • Group3
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 814
« 2018-Oct-22, 11:30 AM Reply #49 »
Wily a few years ago the stewards turned up to do some pre-race testing at D Weir's stables where the horses that were racing that day were supposed to be stabled.

All of the horses that were racing were in fact at another stable many miles away.

'Clerical error and nothing to see here' said Darren.....the stewards scratched all of the horses.

Jarrod McLean certainly has a tubing history.
« Last Edit: 2018-Oct-22, 11:38 AM by nemisis »


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap