The Handicapping Appeals Body, Mr David Cleary (Chair), Mr Anthony Byrne and Mr William Flood convened on Friday, 19 July 2024 to consider the Appeal of Jessica Harrington (Trainer) in relation to the handicapping of Gangster Granny following her win in the Ballyduane Stud Maiden at Limerick on 22 June 2024.

The Committee considered the appeal of Mrs Harrington, submissions from Mr Garry O’ Gorman, IHRB Senior Flat Handicapper, and Mrs Harrington’s response to the submissions of the Handicappers.

In lodging the appeal, Mrs Harrington submitted that the handicap mark given to Gangster Granny was excessive based on her performance on the day, beating a once raced horse that was beaten over 17 lengths on its only previous start. She stated that Gangster Granny was allocated an opening mark of 61 following her maiden, and then subsequently dropped 2lbs for her two handicap runs prior to this victory. Mrs Harrington further stated that she does not believe the filly had to perform to the mark of 76 to win this race, which by definition was a race for 3 year old plus horses that have run at least once and have a rating of 70 or less.

In his submissions, Mr O’Gorman explained that Gangster Granny was raised 17lbs as the filly has gone up in distance on each of her four runs this season with her latest run representing a significant improvement on her previous runs. Mr O’Gorman further explained that he believed she ran to a rating of 75 in this race and she was snug at the death, therefore, added an extra pound to reflect this.

Having considered all submissions, the Handicapping Appeals Body issued the following decision:

“The Panel agreed that the view that there was a significant advantage to Gangster Granny and the runner-up Mont St Michel in racing wide at Limerick was not supported by the evidence overall on the day.

While it is arguable that the distance the first two pulled clear was exaggerated in a slowly run race, the Panelfelt on balance that the evidence pointed towards the two horses having done well to do so.

Although this type of modest-grade race is restricted to horses which have run to a performance figure nohigher than 70, this does allow once-raced horses with obvious potential such as Mont St Michel to be qualified. The Panel felt it was right to view his performance as significantly improved from his debut, and that the Handicapper was right to offer other examples of similar horses to run in this type of race assupportive of the view he had taken.

The Panel questioned whether the Handicapper was correct to allow an extra 1lb for ease of victory to beadded to Gangster Granny's mark, while ultimately agreeing to leave the extra 1lb in place.

The Panel discussed the fact that the riders of the first three were all apprentice jockeys, claiming anallowance; the Handicapper himself offered the opinion that the rider of the winner is 'very promising', though later stated that established practice is to accept across the board that riders receive allowances because they need them and therefore the Handicappers make no variation in the mark given to a horse with a verypromising/good-value claimer on board. It might be useful to see whether evidence suggests that this established practice would benefit from being varied occasionally.

The Panel was persuaded by the Handicapper's argument that it is important to ensure that the horses beaten by Gangster Granny have a fair chance against her were they to meet subsequently in a handicap.”

The case was presented by Ms Christine Traynor, IHRB Head of Racing Regulation and Integrity.