Green Girl first to last
 

Rules are rules.
http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=44161

“Most of those betting do so through simulcasts or online, and even many if not most of the on-track bettors at Gulfstream watch on screens from the tent, walking ring, etc., and don't see the race directly. None of those had any way to know one horse was given the huge advantage of carrying no weight for such a long time.


I'm not so sure that CC's Mare, Green Girl had a hugh advantage....in fact, I'm thinking that by running off for a bit the mare was actually having to overcome a disadvantage...

What you're saying might be what the GP stewards thought (although you could argue that GG wasn't disadvantaged, she just got a little extra warm up). The real question is how much discretion do track stewards have, or should they have, in interpreting the rules?

Very little, on a matter like this. Good decision.

This seems like a strange rule to me. . . Is this how it is at all tracks?

Yes. She should have not been allowed to run, and would not have if GP's stewards had a clue at all. Then they compounded their first omission of rule application with the embarassing upholding of the finish. They finally got it right.

Just out of curiosity (and this isn't really a non sequitur), how much do stewards get paid?

Some horse who recently won at Thistledown got DQ'd days after the race for not carrying the weight in the pre-race.

It's a lot of nonsense that has no effect on the outcome.

I can't think of another Graded Stake where a horse was DQ'd because of this - but I remember three situations in big races with pre-race complaints about the rider not carrying the weight.

I remember watching a replay of the inagural running of the Arlington Million that John Henry won - Lestor Piggott dismounted his seemingly calm filly and held up the start for a good bit, taking his sweet time while a few horses were in the gate and a few waiting to be loaded.

Pete Axthelm said on the network telecast he thought it was a clever move by an old vet like Piggott trying to gain an edge. He was on some European filly - and I'm sure there is no way in hell they would have DQ'd a filly had she won the Arlington Million.

I remember Coronado's Quest throwing Smith before a Florida Stake at Gulfstream and Lukas throwing a fit about the weight not being up on CQ in the warm-up.

There was also a situation where Bobby Frankel was complaining that Cigar was wearing illegal shoes (turndowns) before the Breeders Cup Classic he won at Belmont. While the riders were up on the other horses getting ready to go to the track - a racing offical was checking Cigar's shoes while Bailey was off - and you can hear riders screaming "get the weight up!"

So what are you saying -- that the rules shouldn't be enforced in this instance because they haven't been on some occasions in the past?

I think it's a dumb rule...

But it's probably just in place and enforced from keeping jockeys from pulling stunts like Piggott appeared to be doing (and surely would have got away with) before the first Arlington Million.

I think that was the the Florida Derby or maybe the Fountain of Youth....seems like Lil's Lad won the race

I've never heard of this before. Seems to me it would make sense to get rid of the silly rule.

Here's a link to the Thistledown DQ from last year.

http://horseracing.sportsline.com/cb...rticleId=19465

Here are two pieces from a story I just found when I googled the Cigar situation - where Frankel insisted Cigar was wearing turndowns.


The morning of the Classic, blacksmith Jim Bayes pulled off the hind shoes and hammered a slight downward angle to the tips, creating what he explained was the same effect as a cleat or a sticker.

"You want to put on a new one?" Mott asked as he inspected the wear on the left plate.

"No," replied Bayes, who also works for Shug McGaughey. "This shoe is perfect."

As far as Bobby Frankel was concerned, though, they looked illegal. The eagled-eyed Hall of Famer caught a glimpse of Cigar’s hind shoes as the favorite walked by the saddling stalls. He then went to an official.

"That horse is wearing turndowns," Frankel said. "Maybe someone should take a look."

Turndowns, now banned in most jurisdictions, were the show of choice for several New York trainers two years ago. With their extreme downward angle at the back of the shoes, they could grip a loose surface and provide better traction than more common off-track plates. They also were found to be more jarring on impact, and heaven help the rider or horse stepped on or grazed by the blade of the turndown.

"Cigar was not wearing turndowns as we define them," said Clinton Pitts, steward for The Jockey Club. "They were more like what is called a ‘trailer.’ They were not specially forged, and there were no wedges building them up. They appeared to be shoes right out of the box."

While Cigar calmly submitted to an inspection from official horse shoer Tom Goettsheim and Bailey stood nearby, the other Classic horses circled under their riders.

"Get the weight up!" cried out Pat Day from atop Unaccounted For, concerned that Cigar was getting a subtle advantage.

The tempest ended. The shoes were okayed.


And...


Frankel was equally glum about Tinners Way.

"He had no shot," Frankel said of the Pacific Classic (gr. I) winner. "He’s got size eight feet, just sliding around out there. You don’t think I would have liked to use turndowns?"

Mott later called Frankel a "crybaby" for questioning Cigar’s shoes.

"Crybaby? He called me that?" Frankel shrieked. "Now it’s war. Hey, I’m only looking out for the interest of my owner. If I say something AFTER the race, then maybe that’s being a crybaby."

poor Green Girl has to retire as a loser :( Maybe they would have raced her one more time if they knew she'd get DQd.

“Anyone can make a mistake, so I accept the initial error by the stewards in failing to scratch Green Girl. But by then upholding themselves in the protest hearing, I think they showed nothing but hubris and arrogance.”

Sounds like the DOUCHEBAG dentist that did some work for me a while back.

is it only during the warm up that this is a concern? i don't see how it could be, since cigar was being checked behind the gate.
the reason i'm asking is that some horses get fractious in the gate, the jock comes off sometimes while they calm the horse. so technically those horses aren't under weight the entire time...that's allowed, but a horse dumping it's rider and taking off isn't?

I think that qualifies as being "at the post"

My understanding of the rule is that if the horse dumps it's rider, they have to bring the horse back (after it's caught) to the spot where the rider "got off," at which point the rider has to get back on.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ory?id=3232693