The Young Master

Bachelors Hall

Bachelors Hall

Conditional
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
763
I remember watching him in his first two starts over hurdles when he was beaten by combined 111 lengths in a Ludlow seller and a Plumpton claimer after a four race flat career devoid of promise. A flat bred horse whose only pretension to a jumps career lay with him being bred 5/2 with Triumph winner Scolardy. If one was asked in late 2012 for the head-in-chest 2014 Badger Ales winner, you could have named over a thousand horses before guessing The Young Master.

What a remarkable story and a shining endorsement of the talents of Neil Mulholland.

Isn't jumps racing brilliant?
 
As I was on Court By Surprise I'd be interested to know if they'll pay out on the win part now?

If the alleged mistake was known beforehand why did they still allow that horse to race?
 
Last edited:
Any chance he'll be thrown out?

Young Adam Wedge on Alfie Spinner will be hoping not as he was far from in full drive mode trying to hold on for second.
 
42.5 A Novice or Juvenile may run


42.5.1 in a Class 1 or 2 Handicap steeple chase only if


42.5.1.1 it has run at least three times in a steeple chase in any of Great
Britain, Ireland and/or France, or


42.5.1.2 in the case of a Class 2 Handicap steeple chase, it has run in at
least two steeple chases in any of those countries and, on each occasion,
has been placed in the first four;
 
Cheers CL

Emma Lavelle has already said she won't object so fair play to her.

What I find remarkable is that the entries were there for five days yet nobody raised the matter until it was too late.

Also, if he is disqualified, will that render him illegible for the Hennessey?
 
Can see how it happened, horse ran on the AW at Kempton on February 19th this year in a race called BetBright Chase Day 22.02.14 Handicap (Div I). Someone misread it I reckon as a chase.
 
That's a good point Detective. When I was looking at the form it was only the going description (standard) that made it clear it wasn't in fact a chase. That and Kempton's aversion to jmp racing I suppose ;)
 
Even if The Young Master gets disqualified, and it probably will be, that won't mean that those who backed Court By Surprise will be any the richer, as the result stands for betting purposes, of course.

Got to feel for the owner losing the prize money though.
 
viking said:
Fair play indeed but I'd probably be a bit miffed if I'd backed Court Surprise and The BHA don't disqualify the winner
Click to expand...

Why?

If you had a losing bet on the race, you did so knowing there was a five year old in the field who was improving at a phenomenal rate.

If you had misgivings about a non qualified horse in the race, you'd avoid said contest.

If you're miffed because your selection wasn't the best horse on the day, then you're too immature to be gambling since the majority of one's bets will be losing ones in the long run... Even for profitable punters.

If one wants to take advantage of a technicality after the race has been run then one is petty and opportunistic.
 
I preferred you as the Kotkijet troll, BH, you were never as pompous as you are now.
 
Bachelors Hall said:
Why?

If you had a losing bet on the race, you did so knowing there was a five year old in the field who was improving at a phenomenal rate.

If you had misgivings about a non qualified horse in the race, you'd avoid said contest.

If you're miffed because your selection wasn't the best horse on the day, then you're too immature to be gambling since the majority of one's bets will be losing ones in the long run... Even for profitable punters.

If one wants to take advantage of a technicality after the race has been run then one is petty and opportunistic.
Click to expand...

The ethics of the punt I took on Court Of Surprise before the race are not up for debate.

As a punter who backed the second I'd like to know whether I am entitled to get paid out, simple as that.

Not a life and death affair ( for me anyway), a good friend backed the winner so he has no complaints.
 
Last edited:
marble said:
The ethics of the punt I took on Court Of Surprise before the race are not up for debate.

As a punter who backed the second I'd like to know whether I am entitled to get paid out, simple as that.

Not a life and death affair ( for me anyway), a good friend backed the winner so he has no complaints.
Click to expand...

I made the post in question whilst I was waiting at a bus stop so I can see how it came across as somewhat obtuse but in retrospect, I can't see how I would alter my sentiments.

The post was a response to the notion that one could feel aggrieved had one backed the runner up. (and not necessarily to the poser of the notion whom, incidentally, I find a polite, erudite and generally solid contributor to the forum)

The scenario you raise wasn't necessarily one I was responding to but is covered in my fourth "if", the opportunistic one. Whether or not one believes rank opportunism is allowed to comfortably permeate within one's personal moral or ethical alignment is strictly down to the individual.

I do agree though that a single bet on a single race is, in the face of the thousands of bets a punter will place in a lifetime, very far from a life and death affair. Which is probably why I find myself befuddled when I witness the (mock?) outrage that accompanies periodic racing anomalies such as this one.

Besides, I only started this thread to revel in the awesomeness of today's spectacle at face value. I mean, what is this sport without the naive innocence of wonderment?
 
My view on this is it is up to the BHA to manage/police entries before the event not afterwards. Imagine if this was a National or a Gold Cup. The mistake is more the responsibility of the BHA than it is Neil Mulholland and the result should stand.
 
I agree with Maruco and to go pack to the opening post, a great display from a novice hacking up to win a listed race on only his 3rd chase. Neil Mulholland's having in a stellar season (39 winner @ 21% strike rate & LSP of £69) and this was another great advert for him
 
Apparently the owner will consider legal action if the race is taken away.
I imagine he'll change his mind very quickly.
 
viking said:
Fair play indeed but I'd probably be a bit miffed if I'd backed Court Surprise and The BHA don't disqualify the winner
Click to expand...

I merely meant that I would be miffed at the incompetence of the BHA if I'd backed the first horse home who was actually qualified to run.
The rule that would disqualify TYM is presumably there to protect young inexperienced horses being pitched in against tough handicappers too soon.
From the BHA statement it sounds like they'll take action only if there's an objection anyway
 
I think the right decision would be to disqualify the winner officially but that bets should be settled as per the result on the day.

Anyone who buys/reads the Weekender will know that often enough if a horse is not qualified to run in a race it will be listed as 'nq' at the bottom of the entries. Connections of those horses are not penalised for entering the horse. It would seem therefore that the BHA ultimately decides whether the horse runs. The have taken their eye off the ball in this instance and should own up to it.

I would be sympathetic to the view that consideration should maybe be given to compensating connections of TYM for the horse having had to exert itself in circumstances that should never have happened. At the same time, an experienced trainer (or his racing secretary) should know for which races they can or cannot enter the horse. Knowing it was a novice, they should really have checked its eligibility for such a big race.

As mentioned elsewhere, one issue that immediately sprang to my mind on hearing the breaking news yesterday was what does the handicapper do? Obviously if the result is allowed to stand, a hike upwards of 10lbs for TYM wouldn't be unreasonable given the ease and style of victory. But if he is disqualified, should the run be taken into consideration? My own view is that it cannot but the horse would be odds-on next time out. That [the next time out scenario] isn't really the BHA's problem although I can imagine the more cynical might fear a short-priced non-trier or one that might be laid heavily on the exchanges.

It's definitely a story, though, and it will be interesting to see how they handle it.

As an aside, it was yet another big Saturday handicap win for Geraghty. Expect plenty more of them in the coming weeks.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top