Waikato TR 26 April 2025 – R5 – SUPER PHOTON

Evidence

Following the running of Race 5, an Information was filed instigating a Protest pursuant to Rule 642(1). The Applicant, Mr L Kauri (Rider of DUSTY ROAD placed 4th) alleged that horse number 12 (SUPER PHOTON) placed 1st by the Judge, interfered with the chances of his horse DUSTY ROAD.

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

The Judge’s provisional placings were as follows:

1st  No. 12 SUPER PHOTON

1st  No. 8 FIRST FIVE

3rd  No. 6 STONYBRECK

4th  No. 1 DUSTY ROAD

The official margin between 4th and 1st was 0.4 of a length.

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 requested that Stewards show all available race films of the alleged interference and identify the runners. Five camera angles were available and shown, namely head-on, side-on, back straight, rear-on and close up, side on.

The Applicant Mr Kauri, alleged interference at the 300 metre mark when SUPER PHOTON angled out and pushed his horse off stride, with DUSTY ROAD’s hind legs being shifted out and the horse becoming unbalanced. The pressure from SUPER PHOTON on his horse continued for a time and again at the 50 metre mark, SUPER PHOTON had pushed out on his horse. Without that interference, he believed his horse would have finished ahead of SUPER PHOTON.

Mr Cameron (Trainer of DUSTY ROAD) agreed with Mr Kauri’s assessment of the interference.

The Respondent Mr Rooke, said that he had followed DUSTY ROAD, who was 5 off the rail at the 300 metre point and that there was enough of a gap inside DUSTY ROAD for SUPER PHOTON to take. He said DUSTY ROAD was pressing in on his horse and noted Mr Kauri’s had his left elbow out. It was tight, but fair racing in his view. The horses then had a clear run together until the last 50 metres, where they had both moved together. He did not believe the protest should be upheld, as his horse had beaten DUSTY ROAD by 0.4 of a length and established that margin when they were running clear of each other.

Mr A Tomkinson, representing the Trainer Mr Marsh, supported Mr Rooke’s description of the incident.

Senior Stipendiary Steward Mr B Jones, outlined the Stewards’ interpretation of the alleged interference.  He said that SUPER PHOTON attempted to improve into a marginal gap inside DUSTY ROAD passing the 300 metre mark, making contact with DUSTY ROAD, who had contributed by shifting in slightly. As a result, DUSTY ROAD was unbalanced for a distance. There was further contact between SUPER PHOTON and DUSTY ROAD passing the 100 metre mark when both horses shifted ground, before SUPER PHOTON shifted out slightly over the concluding stages. He considered that while there had been some interference, both horses had had a clear run from the initial incident at the 300 metres to the 100 metres and SUPER PHOTON had established a margin on DUSTY ROAD. He also observed that DUSTY ROAD had contributed to the 300 metre contact by moving in slightly and had again, moved in slightly at the 100 metres. In the view of the Stewards, they could not support the protest.

Reasons for Decision

In accordance with the requirements of the Protest Rule, the Adjudicative Committee must firstly establish that interference occurred; and secondly, if interference is established, the horse interfered with would have beaten the other runner, had such interference not occurred.

The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities, which simply means it is the opinion of the Adjudicative Committee that it is ‘more probable or likely than not’, that the horse interfered with would have beaten that runner.

Decision

After hearing submissions and reviewing the video footage, the Adjudicative Committee dismissed the protest and confirmed the Judge’s placings and authorised the payment of dividends in accordance with the decision.

Reasons

The evidence established that nearing the 300 metre mark, SUPER PHOTON improved into a marginal gap inside DUSTY ROAD and in doing so, contact was made with DUSTY ROAD. This did unbalance DUSTY ROAD, however, DUSTY ROAD had shifted in slightly, contributing to the contact. Importantly, the two horses then had a clear run after this initial contact and SUPER PHOTON had established a margin of 0.4 of a length over DUSTY ROAD. There was further contact between SUPER PHOTON and DUSTY ROAD passing the 100 metre mark, when both horses shifted ground and both contributed to this contact, before SUPER PHOTON shifted out slightly over the concluding stages.

In summary, while there was interference, it was not significant and DUSTY ROAD had slightly contributed to the interference by moving inwards.

Therefore, the Adjudicative Committee, after considering all the circumstances and submissions put forward, could not be satisfied that the interference was sufficient to uphold the protest. The protest was therefore dismissed.

Conclusion

The protest is dismissed, and the Adjudicative Committee authorised the payment of dividends and stake money in accordance with its decision.