exactly! the owner, trainer shouldn't be penalized if the jock's an idiot. penalize the jock, give him incentive to do things right.

I know what you are saying, however in many races many horses don't have an impact in the outcome of the race even before the gate opens, by your reasoning one of these no chancer's could be mugged during the race and no action will be taken by the stewards. In essence if a horse can't win a race, they can never be fouled? This makes absolutely no sense.

The horse was going to win, I think we all know he was on the best horse this race. It was unnecessary for him to take the chance he took, let me ask you if the stewards sided on a DQ and you had a bet on him, I bet you would not be so complimentary of him then. He got away with one, okay it's a good ride. This time.

The the victim in this race was not going to win, the case could be made that she might have had a better placing had she not been hit. "Outcome" doesn't just refer to the top spot.

No kidding the outcome doesn't just refer to the top spot - and the horse who finished 4th was the one that was fouled and she finished 7 full lengths behind the 3rd place finisher.

No halfway rational person could even attempt to argue that the foul cost her more than 2.5 lengths tops - let alone 7 full lengths.

Had another horse passed her for 4th ... than a DQ could be justified because there was superfecta wagering on the race and 4th money is still 4th money.

Love the chart call of this race:

"clobbered, knocking rival 3 paths sideways, angled out impatiently despite opening on rail"

Funny stuff.

That's why chart callers are useless. Now suckers will bet the 7 back without looking at video.

http://www.nyra.com/stewards/sar/SC080610.shtml

I agree 100% with the stewards conclusion and decision .. however, unless I'm reading the attatched rule wrong, the horse technically should have been DQ'd.

They've got the rule written as a DISJUNCTION. Sounds as if they meant it to be a CONJUNCTION. The latter is what most horseplayers would want, as well.

put it this way...i cashed my tickets before they could change their minds.....

$2k a month in training bills? It's more like $3.5k-$4k a month at the big tracks when you include the vet bills. Most guys charge $85-$90 a day. The top guys charge $105-$110 a day. At $90 a day, it costs you $2,700 a month not including the vet bill. The vet bill wil be at least $800 a month. So you're usually looking at a minimum of around $3,500 a month at the big tracks.

With regard to the race in question, I didn't see it and I'm too lazy to watch it right now. But in general, I agree with you. I am more of a proponent of fining the jock and giving him days rather than disqualifying the horse in most cases similar to this.

I think you could make the analogy to pass interference in football. If the ball was not catchable, then pass interefence will not be called. Even if you foul the wide receiver, pass interference will not be called if the ball wasn't catchable because the outcome of the play was not affected.

In both horseracing and football I think the argument can be made that the interference is irrelevant if it does not change the outcome. However, I still think the jockeys should get days for reckless moves like this. There obviously needs to be some deterrent to reckless riding.

In the race in question, Bridgmohan got lucky that the horse he fouled held on for 4th. Because if the horse would have run 5th, I think the stewards would have had to disqualify the winner for costing that horse 4th.

Jamie Ness is $50 a day - which comes out to $1,500 a month on day rate - and he's 3rd in the nation in wins behind Asmussen and Pletcher.

If you're spending 3.5 to 4K a month in training bills on a Maiden 20 claimer .. you're hopeless.

I agree with you that it's obviously not profitable to spend $90 a day on a $25k maiden claimer. But on the big circuits like Southern California and New York, you don't have a choice. There aren't any trainers that charge $50 a day. I think you are better off shipping somewhere else. In California, you can send a horse up to Northern California but even up there it's $65 a day. You are better off going to Philly Park or Delaware and spending $50 a day and running for bigger purses. There are trainers that charge $50 a day in New Mexico but the purses aren't as good in New Mexico as they are back east.

the other thing that puzzled me other than the non take down...was the the double payoff after the next race. pelican lake paid 18.20 and sotique paid 25.60...yet the double came back 114 and change..somebody made a big double play on those two horses. i hope it was not the stewards.....lol

Maybe they arranged for that horse to get a clear rail run around the track.:rolleyes: Doesn't win otherwise.

wasn't PL like 5/2 m/l? the bigger question should be how in the hell did he go off at 8-1?

The race in question was in NY and you'd be hard pressed to find a trainer in NY getting only $50/day. If the horse that was hit was prevented from making her best placing, it changed the outcome for them, even if she was not going to WIN.

In this particular case, the incident did not appear to have cost the horse a placing. The horse that was fouled ran 4th and would not have run better than 4th even if the incident did not happen.

As DrugS has repeatedly said, she was 7 lengths behind third. She wasn't finishing any better than 4th. While I disagree with the decision, it didn't cost the 7 a placing.