The Taxi horse cost the Mitchell horse a better placing. I'm a horizontal player. Do I think Taxi' was gunna win anyways? Yes. I care about the winner. I don't care about the other placings. So, we have conflicts of interest going on these days, because the multirace wagering is almost all based on winning. So, they need to take that into account. They have to try to make sure the horse who was best gets the win(if they can.) In this case, it was Taxi. The outcome of this inquiry totally depends on your emphasis(do you want to protect the horses who are cost a chance at 2nd or 3rd place, or do you want to make sure the best horse gets the win?) There is no way you could do both here. He fouled the Mitchell horse. They have no excuse for leaving him up(unless they are trying to make sure the best horse on the day is kept in 1st place.) This is philosophy. The evidence is the horse who won is guilty. Now, in New York, it was a totally different situation. For one thing, there is a shrinking margin of victory. O.K., if you foul(or might have fouled) then don't win with a shrinking margin of victory. That's just not good. It's very difficult to say he didn't cost that 2nd place horse the few inches separating them. Normally, I would say to leave this gray horse up. A lot of people would say he was clear(I have never agreed that you're clear when you swerve into the direct path of another horse.) If TOE wasn't cutting the deficit down(a lot) then I would leave Rocker up. To me, this is the tougher call. The HWD PARK call is easier. He fouled. No doubt about it. Do you take the best horse down? It's tougher to tell the best horse(in the Cigar Mile.) That's a hard call. Comes down to whether that's a foul. I've always thought that what he did is a foul, but I have heard others justify that by saying they were clear.
|