[SCUDSBROTHER]

Well, as always, people close to this game aren't gunna want anything negative to come out about it. It's not in their best immediate interest, and so they try to tell everyone a story. That's what you got here. A story. They needed a story. The trainer put out a story. It didn't work. It usually does work. People close ranks to protect those in the industry. Trainer says the horse won't keep running if hit, but why does he let the jock take a whip with him? People can shill all they want, but the evidence is he took a whip out there. Evidently, the trainer didn't tell the stewards he wasn't gunna be hitting the horse with the whip. What do you expect them to do? Why don't you go by the evidence (instead of going by what you want the evidence to be.) So far, you have a horse who is exhausted in his previous 2 races. If the trainer wants to say he stopped because he was hit, then the stewards didn't buy it. They see a very tired horse. So, he is gunna have a very tough time selling that theory(that the horse stopped in his last 2 due to being hit.) The stewards have collected the evidence, and evidently didn't seem to have any trouble figuring out what had happened. You think they gave him a year if there was even a little question in their minds that he did it? They should let this die, because I doubt this video is the total evidence they used in determining his punishment. So far, you have come up with comments from trainers(some of the best natural salesmen on planet earth.) A trainer put out a story about his horse not wanting to be whipped, but he didn't tell the stewards the horse wasn't gunna be whipped. He let the jock carry a whip on a horse he knew wasn't gunna be whipped. That's your best case scenario. I don't think it's a good scenario at all. There is no good outcome to this. The bettors were deceived no matter how the shills couch this thing. Naturally, they've gotten behind the least damaging theory of what took place.