Farnan Farce..what was that? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK

Farnan Farce..what was that? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Farnan Farce..what was that?  (Read 3875 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online fours

  • Group 1
  • User 704
  • Posts: 8100
« 2020-Sep-22, 12:46 AM Reply #25 »

There was a 3rd divdend iin actual fact.... if you created one.

If Ole Kirk finished 3rd the trifecta would have paid less - say $280 rather than the $390 for VICTAB. Taking ten dollars out of a 100 place bet for ten combos for a saver tri ( arguable you could have done it for 4 to 6 combos ). You end up with $280 for your hundred overall bet.

Instead you got second so got 90x $12.00 or $1,080.

Beats looking on in my view.

ps my figures are conservative above.

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1193
« 2020-Sep-22, 03:57 AM Reply #26 »
Atreus have you ever even patted a horse? You lack any common "Horse sense" You cannot turn horses on and off like a light,
Whether it was a good ride or a bad ride has Zero Relevance, a "bad" ride is NOT against any rule in racing even if you were right and you are WRONG!!
The price of a horse has no relevance either, are you saying it is OK to slaughter a horse so long as it isn't a favourite? What sort of convoluted logic is that? Or did you mean so long as you didn't lose money on it?
The Stewards quizzed the tactics of Louise Day and she wasn't on a fav but a 50/1 shot, they said she erred in her judgement in following a favoured horse and hoping it would take her into the race, she should have pulled out 4 wide to get around another roughie and make a run from the 600, bloody ridiculous, Louise was 110% right to do what she did, regardless of the result
One of the biggest mistakes Jockeys make on leaders is the midrace slow down, once you establish a lead to give that advantage away would be stupid, No doubt he went fast but at that point he didn't know the result anymore than Nash and J Mac did in the later race
With Hindsight he went too fast....but so did Nash on Sweet Deal...why pick on Hughie and Louise and not Nash and JMac??
The Stewards do not have a mandate to decide (with the benefit of hindsight) what tactics a Jockey should have used unless they believe it was with the intent of getting the horse beat, either they charge him with hooking the horse  or they let it go
But then again I am NOT a sore loser!
If every one lost 3 weeks pay for every mistake they made at work there would be anarchy in the streets....and Jockeys make split second decisions, they never get a second chance once a decision is made, they do not have an eraser or a delete button
Get off your High horse and learn something about the racing Industry and punting
There is NO doubt he will get off this ridiculous charge, Dom Bierne and most of the people who know are on side

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1688
« 2020-Sep-22, 07:10 AM Reply #27 »
The Sydney Stewards would be in complete dereliction of their duty if the didn't ask Bowman the very question Jim Byrne seem to ask Bowman 200 metres after the start "what the f##k are you doing"?
Welcome to Sydney racing Jim.
It was a question that surely nearly everyone was asking straight after the race ......Rob Heathcote, Darren Flindell included.......even the timing and title of this thread is an indication of something untoward had just occurred.
For Rob Waterhouse to blame Darren Flindell for creating some hysteria around Bowman's ride, with his call of the race is too silly for words.

I'll be very surprised if Bowman's appeal is successful, but Chris Murphy's line of defence will be interesting.
I wouldn't be giving Chris advice but I'm not sure I'd be taking Rob Waterhouse or the owners of Farnan (Aquis or Phoenix) along as character references for Bowman.

The big late bets on North Pacific and the fact that Bowman the world class jockey, he is supposed to be, didn't even attempt to take a hold of Farnan to leave something for the long run home up the Randwick straight makes it all look highly suss.
The ride wouldn't even pass muster in a 955 m scamper around Moonee Valley on a Friday night!

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 23289
« 2020-Sep-22, 11:29 AM Reply #28 »
I only watched the race twice so took another look


Jim makes him work a little early and one could argue this very subtle move won him the race.

Would Farnan have won if he ran a slower first 600m? I don't think so. The best hose won he race IMO.

That is what is so fascinating about 3yo racing. The babies return from a spell a little bit older and the very best race against their peers at set weights.

I think we have seen the best of Farnan. He probably gets one more chance and if he fails wouldn't surprise if he is off to stud.

And perhaps Anders (don't forget how good he has looked) and Rothfire have comeback better horses.

And don't forget his wins as a 2yo all came on wet tracks.

Hughie? Yeah could have been a bit better in his judgement. He took a risk and it didn't pay off.

The race was the most anticipated so far this season and was "very watched". I cannot buy into the theories that he pulled it deliberately. Silly nonsense. Goes more to rider's judgement.

Offline ratsack

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 327
  • Posts: 11594
« 2020-Sep-24, 06:35 PM Reply #29 »
Bowman gets off
Rightly so in opinion

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17641
« 2020-Sep-25, 08:19 AM Reply #30 »
Bowman wins appeal over Farnan ride
Bowman wins appeal over Farnan ride
Hugh Bowman had a lengthy ban quashed on appeal on Thursday. Pictu AAP
Matt Jones
Article Author
Matt Jones
6:57PM24 September 2020

Champion jockey Hugh Bowman sensationally had his 20-day suspension for his Run To The Rose ride on Farnan upheld on appeal on Thursday following a marathon eight-hour hearing.

Bowman was suspended for failing to give Farnan every reasonable and permissible chance to win the Run To The Rose at fortnight ago after he had the Golden Slipper winner out in front by five lengths and setting a cracking speed.

Farnan eventually faded in the straight to run fifth to Rothfire.

The Racing NSW Appeals Panel found that Bowman made an error in not riding Farnan more conservatively from the 500m to 350m after using up plenty of petrol in the earlier stages of the race. However it was “not a serious error”.


“Riders like all sportsmen make mistakes and errors. The error shouldn’t be punished unless it’s a bad one or too many riders would be suspended,” Richard Beasley of the Racing NSW Appeal Panel said.

They also agreed with his argument that he didn’t do anything wrong in the middle stages of the race when Racing NSW stewards said he could have restrained Farnan more.

It was a majority decision that to ride Farnan very aggressively in the opening stages was an error but not culpable.

Farnan finished well back first-up in the Run To The Rose after getting out to a big lead. Pictu Getty Images

Bowman explained to the appeals panel that had he tried to restrain Farnan further in the middle stages that it would have resulted in the colt overracing even more.

“I would expect the horse to run faster in the process of changing my hands (to grab further hold),” he said. “The energy spent is irreparable. Once you break that rhythm and stride you affect the horse’s performance.

“If I put enough pressure on that horse’s mouth its head would’ve gone up and once that happens it’s game over. The horse’s rhythm is the most important ingredient in winning any race at any distance and at any level.”

Former jockey Mark de Montfort was called to give evidence on behalf of Bowman and he agreed with the Hall of Famer’s actions from start to finish.

He said he had to push Farnan forward early to avoid the possibility of Kerrin McEvoy kicking up on Peltzer and trapping him three wide.

And once the three-year-old reacted and raced keenly Bowman did the right thing.

“The first thing I would tell a kid is not to release the reins and take another hold,” de Montfort said.

Bowman has said on numerous occasions that he goes into almost all his races “with an open mind” and that’s how he rode Farnan.

“Instinct is an influence,” he said. “It’s served me well through a long career. Instinct doesn’t come about by weighing up options.”

Bowman also argued if he tried to ride Farnan more conservatory between the 500m and 350m, like the stewards said he should have, the horse would have recorded a worse result.

“He would have run out of energy sooner,” Bowman said.

Racing NSW steward Wade Birch said Bowman’s aggression on Farnan was evident on paper and that it cost the Gai Waterhouse and Adrian Bott-trained runner the race.

“It’s by far the fastest he’s ever run (to the 400m),” Birch said.

“It was obvious the horse was going to fail to finish off the race. There needed to be a greater effort to bring the horse back in the middle stages.”


Racing NSW Appeals Panel decision not yet up on RNSW site have to make do with the Racenet resume.

I'm not surprised at the decision to uphold his appeal..... it's " the not blameworthy explanation aka excuse" as dreamed up by legendary barrister Tom Hughes many moons ago ..... I opined in the first place I expected he wouldn't be charged ...turned out I was wrong....but the Appeal panel agreed.

Giddy Up :beer:

Offline Maximus

  • Open
  • User 2900
  • Posts: 125
« 2020-Sep-25, 10:48 AM Reply #31 »

“It’s by far the fastest he’s ever run (to the 400m),” Birch said.

That's a very concerning comment by the steward.

The horse had only had three previous starts on Sydney metro tracks and they were all on soft tracks.  :what:

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1688
« 2020-Sep-25, 03:38 PM Reply #32 »
Very poor decision IMO
Bowman's original defence of his ride that  Farnan "took charge" now has become letting the horse have his "rhythm" and Bowman's "instinct" :what:
The only redeeming feature of the ride was Bowman hit Farnan once with the stick.......one time too many for mine because prior to that the horse has answered all of questions asked of him by the jockey.......the horse was asked to go.....so go he did!
What is the point of stewards laying any handling charge when it can so easily be overturned and then labeled an "error" but not a serious one by another panel.....short of running your horse into dead ends......horse races are so easily manipulated by pace.

Looked bad to the eye then and must surely erode what little confidence people with an ounce of respect for money have in this caper.
No sensible person would say Farnan was a good thing beaten, but he did carry a lot of money and was denied his best opportunity by the jock's actions.
And for the record I spent $20 on the race......$10 win Rothfire @ $5, with 2 /$5 exactas Rothfire into Farnan and Nth Pacific.....so no bad loser!

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 28491
« 2020-Sep-25, 06:09 PM Reply #33 »
Sorry Nem, I’m the opposite

Congrats to Hughie  :clap2:

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1688
« 2020-Sep-26, 09:08 AM Reply #34 »
What are you applauding 'Hughie' for Wily?......the quality of the ride, that he achieved his aim or had his handling charge reduced to the 'not worthy of punishment' level?

Jim Byrne is the one deserving of congratulations for not being sucked into anything that would have jeopardised his own mount's chances......that was the very good 'split second' decision from that race.

Will be interesting, if and when we see Farnan on the racetrack again, the headgear the trainers will now have to use on this headstrong colt who supposedly took charge of 'Hughie'  :lol:  

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 17641
« 2020-Sep-28, 08:46 PM Reply #35 »
Racing NSW appeals panel decision by Richard Beasley SC principal member appeal allowed, finding of breach of R129 (2) set aside penalty of 20 days suspension set aside but appeal deposit forfeited.


"A majority of the Panel have found that Mr Bowman has not breached AR129(2) for his ride on Farnan on 12 September 2020. The appeal must therefore be allowed, and the penalty set aside. It should be noted though that all members of the Panel, as well as the Stewards, felt that Mr Bowman erred to some degree in relation to particulars 1 and 3. Mrs Foley and the Stewards considered the error they found in relation to particular 1 was a culpable error under the rule. Mr Tuck and I consider the view of Mrs Foley and the Stewards to be entirely rational, and based on the evidence.Our only disagreement is that we do not think the error should be considered a culpable one under the rule."

It was a fairly close go IMO reading between the lines .....the Munce case resurfaced with the not blameworthy or culpable reasons raised and forever to be sited from the mind of the legendary barrister the late Tom Hughes QC.

Giddy Up :beer: