Home » Racing & Sport » Draws – Owner Calls For Fair Play

Draws – Owner Calls For Fair Play

Initial draw should never be worse!

A longstanding KZN owner feels that the principle of supplementary entries coming in ‘through the back door’ and possibly prejudicing provisional barrier draws of conventional first entries is manifestly unsporting and needs revisiting.

Terry Young approached the Sporting Post earlier this week after his Devon Air Stakes contender Mai Tai, a reserve runner in last month’s Gr1 Allan Robertson, drew gate 5 in the field of ten for Saturday’s feature.

Mai Tai wins her first start under Warren Kennedy (Pic – Candiese Marnewick)

The daughter of Vercingetorix had originally been allocated a provisional 4 gate at the time of first entries for the Devon Air Stakes, which closed on 27 May.

It appears that Lezeanne Forbes’ supplementary entry Mary O (draw 3), brought in at a cost of R1380 by second deadline of 31 May, got slotted into the pack of first entries and the draws were then rehashed – resulting in Mai Tai landing up one gate outside of what was originally shown on the entry list.

“Black type is what every owner of a well-bred filly aims at and while this may only be a listed feature, I’d like to believe that my filly is given every chance to attain her best end position. Not that we weren’t already aware of it, but Mike de Kock and Sean Tarry have also been quite vocal about the vital importance of barrier gates at Greyville this season. So while I am ‘only’ one gate wider out than I should have been at worst case initially, it’s a matter of principle to me that a late entry can usurp the position of an entry that met the initial deadline.”

For 2 year-olds
No Apprentice Allowance
1 5 Mai Tai 60 0 A L Hewitson Wayne Badenhorst
2 3 Mary O 60 0 A M Khan Lezeanne Forbes
3 4 What You Are 60 0 A C Orffer Tobie Spies
4 6 Cantata Choir 58 0 A S Veale Gavin van Zyl
5 9 Centre Stage 58 0 BA S Moodley Michael Miller
6 7 Dancing Feather 58 0 A W Kennedy Gavin van Zyl
7 8 Innogen 58 0 A R Fourie Justin Snaith
8 10 Royal Splurge 58 0 A *A Arries Michael Miller
9 1 Sapphire Rock 58 0 BA S Randolph Tobie Spies
10 2 Trip To Freedom 58 0 A M Yeni Duncan Howells
Same Trainer – Not Coupled on Tote
(3,9) (4,6) (5,8)

Mr Young went on to add that he wasn’t satisfied with the explanation tendered by officialdom – ‘that’s unfortunately the way the system works’ – or the suggestion that Tobie Spies’ Sapphire Rock, who drew pole position, and ran third in a Flamingo Park maiden on Monday, ‘could possibly not run’.

The Sporting Post was provided with the relevant racing operators condition by Gold Circle Racing Executive, Raf Sheik.


If, after the barrier draw has been effected;

a horse is omitted from the list of entries / declarations for any reason and is subsequently included;

entries are re-opened for a race and a horse is subsequently included;

a horse is subsequently included for any other reason;then a draw shall be randomly allocated in respect of the horse so included and all other horses drawn the same as and outside (higher than) the randomly allocated draw, shall be adjusted outwards (higher).

Is it fair? Please tell us what you think!

Have Your Say

Comments Policy
The Sporting Post encourages everyone to feel free to comment in the spirit of enlightening the topic being discussed, to add opinions or correct errors. All posts are accepted on the condition that The Sporting Post can at any time alter, correct or remove comments, either partially or entirely.

All posters are required to post under their real and verified names, you can adjust your display name on your account page or to send corrections privately to the Editor. The Sporting Post will not publish comments submitted anonymously or under pseudonyms.

The views of any individuals that are published are NOT necessarily the views of The Sporting Post.

12 comments on “Draws – Owner Calls For Fair Play

  1. Avril says:

    I must agree with the aggrieved owner. I’ve queried this very practice several times. Makes no sense that original draws are prejudiced by supplementary entries.

  2. Head Scratcher says:

    I really do not understand the logic of Why is the late entry deemed to be at an advantage to the earlier entry? Why are the existing entries moved outwards? I would think it would be the opposite to be fair. Perhaps I miss something but would love an explanation.

  3. Joe says:

    This happened to me as well. I was given the same story. ‘its the way the system works’.
    pathetic. The computer programmer needs to make a small logic change. Ive been in IT all my life.
    its really simple.

  4. Head Scratcher says:

    It cannot be a computer coding error Joe because it is codified in written rules per Surely the code is just following the logic in the written rules. Or heaven forbid, someone wrote a computer program and they used the programmer’s logic to write the rules! Given the lunacy we see daily that may be it!

  5. The Hawk says:

    As has been mentioned, the practice of drawing a random number for supplementary entries has been with us ever since supplementary entries were introduced. Perhaps the logical solution is to only produce the barrier draws after the published date for supplementary entries, ie once ALL entries have been received. This has been suggested before but trainers were not in favour.

  6. Terry Young says:

    Thank you EDITOR we all love competition.
    Down a straight not as crucial but Barrier Draws on the bend like this event 1400 heaven forbid, jockeys select their rides based on many aspects, draws being one of them ,you cant stand in the Q in front at the Durban View room for a meal then be told to go to the back because a important person in someone else’s eyes has arrived or throw in your hand at a game of poker and then all of a sudden and outsider wants to try and scoop the pool , again and again we only want fairness.

  7. Jay August says:

    Hawk, your suggestion makes some sense, but supplementary entries can be seen as informed speculation. where the entrant’s connections first look to see what is opposing them before entering, while those entering first have no such advantage. I can see why trainers would be against that practice.

  8. The Hawk says:

    Just for the record it was also trainers who requested the introduction of supplementary entries for Feature races in the first place, so I guess the Operators would be happy to consider any suggested changes that trainers may put forward to improve the current modus operandi.

  9. Leon Lotz says:

    Draws should only be given after supplementry entries is final

  10. tonyr says:

    Supplementary entries were primarily introduced to protect the owner in the event that a trainer forgot to enter for a feature race.. Secondly, once entries are published, it may become apparent to the trainer that his horse would get a run and be competitive in the race; either due to paucity of entries, lack of depth or even the horse winning or improving at a faster rate than expected post first stage. . Supplementary entries for feature races are practiced in most first world racing jurisdictions. The favourite for the recently run Investec Derby, among others, was supplemented at the last supplementary stage at huge expense to the connections. Late entries carry a hefty financial fee to the participants for having this modality available to them. Barrier draws for all races are done randomly by a computer program and therefore no disadvantage is experienced by the connections of the initial entrants. It would surely not be fair to the later entrants if they were not only saddled with the additional cost of late entries, but were then subjected to their horses being inserted at the highest end of the draw scale. This would surely prejudice them and deter anyone from entering post first stage. To avoid the perception of unfairness associated with barrier draws being randomly inserted, draws could be effected post the final entry stage.

  11. Terry says:

    Sorry Tonyr,

    Cant agree, if the trainer forgets to enter timeously maybe a hour leeway , traffic,horse sickness etc then make contact with the authorities concerned, and be roasted by his/her owner and pay the penalty of a non runner. The problem with some trainers are that they are so involved in other activities, associated with NHA, Racing Circles, Racing Clubs, Training centres they take on more than they can chew, one being greed………….. a trainer one should only be aloud to be involved with the activities associated with their profession and not be distracted with on course commentaries and the like..

  12. Brucie Bonus says:

    Justice !!
    That’s what you get for “Forgetting to Enter” – what a Pathetic excuse !!
    Now the result of “Forgetting to Enter” and making a late entry supplementary is the loss of the Higher Entry Fee and a Non Runner to add insult to injury, this is the reward for Not having a Diary !!
    Weak excuse and no excuse !!
    You can bet the trainer won’t Forget next time !!
    Ouch !!

Leave a Comment

‹ Previous

Vaal – Bad For Racing

Next ›

Phumelela Respond To Vaal False Rail Unhappiness

Popular Posts