NZ Metro TC 28 November 2025 – R5 (heard 12 December 2025 at Addington)- John Versteeg

Following the running of Race 5, Ricoh Mobile Trot, an Information was filed by Stipendiary Steward Shane Renault, against Licensed Open Driver, John Patrick Versteeg, alleging that Mr Versteeg, as the Driver of BULLET in the race, “failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure his gelding was given full opportunity to win or gain the best finishing place by improving three-wide without cover from the 1200 metres after breaking in the score up after losing considerable ground”.

The Information was filed with the Adjudicative Committee on racenight and adjourned. It was heard at the meeting of NZ Metropolitan TC at Addington Raceway on 12 December 2025.

Mr Versteeg had signed the Information form “I DO NOT admit a breach of the rule” and he confirmed this at the hearing.

Rule 868 provides as follows:

(2)     Every driver shall take all reasonable and permissible measures at all times during the race to ensure that his horse is given full opportunity to win the race or to obtain the best possible position and/or finishing place.

EVIDENCE:

Stipendiary Steward Shane Renault, showed a video replay of the race, a 1980 metres mobile start race for non-win trotters. There were eight starters in the race and BULLET had drawn barrier position 7. He pointed out, on the replay, BULLET switch to a pace early in the score-up, resulting in the horse losing considerable ground. He estimated that the horse had lost approximately 50 metres, once it had settled and returned to a trot. In common parlance, the horse had “missed the start” by some margin, the Adjudicative Committee observed.

Mr Renault then showed that BULLET had “chased” the field from the start of the race, and was able to catch the body of the field approaching the 1200 metres. He then showed that, from this point, Mr Versteeg elected to shift to a three-wide position and commenced to improve the horse forward in an attempt to reach the parked position outside the leader.

BULLET was unable to reach the parked position, Mr Renault showed, and was left to race three-wide, without cover, prior to weakening inside the final 500 metres, eventually finishing in 7th placing, 16.1 lengths behind the winner. The overall time for the race was 2.32.7, a mile rate of 2.04.0, with closing sectionals of 61.0 and 29.9, Mr Renault said.

Mr Renault submitted that the driving tactics adopted by Mr Versteeg, from the 1200 metres, were unreasonable in that, after chasing hard, he had shifted to three-wide and continued to place pressure on the horse, rather than allow it some respite, as he ought to have done. It was reasonable and permissible for Mr Versteeg to adopt a “steadying tactic” after the horse had caught the field, after losing so much ground early, he submitted.

A reasonable Driver would have remained at the rear to allow the horse time to recover and save it for one run later in the race, Mr Renault submitted. The tactics adopted by Mr Versteeg fell significantly short of what Rule 868(2) requires, he submitted.

Mr Versteeg said that BULLET is different from other horses. The reason for its poor performance in the race in question is that it had an “off night”, he said. When it is “right”, it can be driven like he drove it. Its previous races showed that the horse can sustain a certain speed, and has enough ability to be driven that way in a maiden trot, but it cannot run a quarter faster than 29.5. In the race in question, the explanation for its performance is that he had shod it two days prior to the race, and had not got the shoeing quite right, he said. Also, he said, it was the horse’s first start racing without half blinds.

Mr Versteeg then showed to the hearing, BULLET’s qualifying trial at Ashburton on 24 April 2024, to demonstrate his argument about the way the horse can be driven.

Mr Versteeg submitted that there was a noticeable decrease in the speed of the race from the 1350 metres to the 1150 metres. Mr Renault agreed, but said that it was not a significant decrease. Finally, Mr Versteeg said that, if BULLET was at its peak, the way he had driven it was the right way to drive it and the right time to do it. That is how the horse races, he said, but it is not his own usual style of driving.

DECISION:

The charge was found proved.

REASONS FOR DECISION:

The test for whether a Driver has taken all reasonable and permissible measures is an objective one. The Adjudicative Committee is required to look at what Mr Versteeg should have done, and not what he thought he was doing – in other words, not what Mr Versteeg thought was reasonable but, rather, what a competent Driver ought to have done.

The Adjudicative Committee has asked itself, would a competent, experienced Driver in the same situation have driven differently? It believes the answer to be, clearly, yes.

The test being not subjective, it does not provide Mr Versteeg a defence to this charge to argue that the manner in which he drove the horse, in the race in question, was the best way, or the only way, it can be driven. His subjective belief does not excuse a drive which fell below the standard of a competent Driver. The Adjudicative Committee finds that Mr Versteeg’s drive, on this occasion, did not meet that standard and he had failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures, as alleged.

SUBMISSIONS FOR PENALTY:

Mr Renault said that Mr Versteeg has had 1230 lifetime drives, 32 this season and 29 last season. The starting point for penalty for a mid-level, first breach of the Rule is a 7-days suspension, and previous cases have resulted in penalties of around 7 days, he said. Stewards saw the breach as being mid-level and, therefore, that would be an appropriate penalty on this occasion, he said.

Mr Versteeg said that he has a notified drive at the meeting of Rangiora HRC on 14 December 2025, but did not require a deferment beyond that date. He does not have a horse eligible to race at the Ashburton TC “Harness 5000” meeting on 21 December 2025. He does not go to the two-day Westport meeting, but may go to Reefton for the meeting on 30 December 2025 and, possibly, the two-day Nelson meeting on 9 and 11 January 2026, he said.

REASONS FOR PENALTY:

Mr Versteeg has failed to take all reasonable and permissible measures to ensure that BULLET was given full opportunity to, if not win the race, then to finish in the highest possible finishing place, by pressing on after losing a large stretch of ground at the start and catching the field with 1200 metres to race, when a reasonable and competent Driver would have allowed the horse some respite after catching the field.

The RIB Harness Racing Penalty Guide (October 2024) provides a starting point for penalty for a first breach of Rule 868(2) of a 7-days suspension. In this case, the Adjudicative Committee sees no relevant aggravating or mitigating factors warranting an uplift or reduction in that starting point.

CONCLUSION:

Open Driver John Versteeg, is suspended from after the close of racing on 14 December 2025, up to and including 11 January 2026 – 7 days. The meetings intended to be encompassed by the period of suspension are Methven TC on 18 December, Banks Peninsula TC on 29 December, Reefton TC on 30 December, Rangiora HRC on 1 January 2026, Timaru HRC on 7 January and Nelson HRC on 9 and 11 January 2026.