R Te Aroha 11 November 2025 – R1- LOS SANTOS

Evidence

This is a protest arising from the running of Race 1.

An Information was filed Instigating a Protest per Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Class A Rider Mr M Cartwright alleged that horse No. 8 (LOS SANTOS) placed equal 3rd by the Judge, interfered with the chances of horse No. 12 (SAVINA) placed equal 3rd by the Judge.

The interference was alleged to have occurred over the concluding stages in the final straight.

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st   REGAL WINGS (M Hashizume)

2nd  WHY DADDY (S McNab)

3rd = LOS SANTOS (C Grylls)

3rd = SAVINA (M Cartwright)

The official margin was short head, long head and a deadheat for 3rd place.

Rule 642(1) provides:

“If a placed horse or its rider causes interference within the meaning of this rule 642 to another placed horse, and the Adjudicative Committee is of the opinion that the horse so interfered with would have finished ahead of the first mentioned horse had such interference not occurred, they may place the first mentioned horse immediately after the horse interfered with”.

Interference is defined as:

• a horse crossing another horse without being at least its own length and one other clear length in front of such other horse at the time of crossing.
• a horse jostling with another horse, unless it is proved that such jostling was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider jostled with was partly at fault; or
• a horse itself, or its Rider, in any way interfering with another horse or the Rider of another horse in a Race, unless it is proved that such interference was caused by the fault of some other horse or Rider or that the horse or Rider interfered with was partly at fault.

Submissions for Decision

Prior to hearing submissions from the respective parties, the Adjudicative Committee asked that Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr Dooley show all available race films of the alleged interference and identify the runners.

Using the available race films, the Applicant Mr Cartwright said that his mount (SAVINA) was making “great ground to the winning post.” He said that near the post, he received a bump from the inside horse (LOS SANTOS) ridden by Mr Grylls. He said, “the bump stopped my momentum,” otherwise he would have finished ahead of LOS SANTOS.

Mr A Tomkinson, representing the Trainer of SAVINA, said that he agreed with Mr Cartwright’s assessment.

Mr Grylls, the Rider of LOS SANTOS, said his mount was wandering around when in front, approaching the winning post. He agreed that SAVINA was making ground, when his mount shifted out. He said that the horse on the outside of SAVINA, the race winner REGAL WINGS ridden by Mr M Hashizume, shifted inwards and contacted SAVINA.

Mr S McKay, the co-trainer of LOS SANTOS, said that his horse was “looking at the winning post”, when Mr Hashizume’s horse rolled in on to SAVINA.

Mr Dooley outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the incident. He said that post race, it was established that LOS SANTOS had shied at the winning post. He said that nearing the 100 metres, there was a run available for SAVINA. He pointed out that LOS SANTOS moved out and contacted SAVINA, and two strides before the line, REGAL WINGS also shifted ground inwards. Mr Dooley added that given the margin was a dead heat, the protest had merit.

Reasons for Decision

After considering the submissions and viewing the race films, the Adjudicative Committee determined that LOS SANTOS did shift outwards and interfere with the momentum of SAVINA. There were two bumps, which are attributed to the outward movement of LOS SANTOS. After these initial two bumps, a stride or two prior to the winning post, REGAL WINGS did shift in slightly and it further impaired SAVINA, but ultimately this has no effect as SAVINA has already suffered interference.

It should be pointed out that the outward movement of LOS SANTOS was minimal, but given the dead heat margin, the Adjudicative Committee is firmly of the opinion that any interference would have affected the chances of SAVINA finishing third outright.

Therefore, due to the margin, which the Adjudicative Committee assesses as a determinative factor, and nature of the interference, the Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that, but for the interference, SAVINA would have beaten LOS SANTOS.

Decision

The protest is upheld, SAVINA is now placed third and LOS SANTOS fourth. The Adjudicative Committee authorises the payment of dividends and stake money in accordance with its decision.