Imprimis

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by NoLuvForPletch

Yes. The Price Talk takedown was a disgrace. As I said, there is no consistency. That incident was to teach a lesson, not because a horse was cost a placing. If Irad would have just ridden his horse instead of overreacting, he would have finished 2nd and that would have been that. The Sadlers’s Joy takedown probably warranted. Shitty but warranted.

The Price Talk DQ was a disgrace? Please stop. All of these DQs were warranted, including yesterday's, though given the significant win yesterday, I could see leaving it up, but it was nowhere close to either inconsistent or a horrible decision. Yes, not placing Imprimis behind the 6, once you made the call, was indefensible, but that doesn't make the actual takedowns poor.

All takedowns aren't bad, or the worst ever, and painful as some are, they are frequently legitimate.

[NoLuvForPletch]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The Price Talk DQ was a disgrace? Please stop. All of these DQs were warranted, including yesterday's, though given the significant win yesterday, I could see leaving it up, but it was nowhere close to either inconsistent or a horrible decision. Yes, not placing Imprimis behind the 6, once you made the call, was indefensible, but that doesn't make the actual takedowns poor.

All takedowns aren't bad, or the worst ever, and painful as some are, they are frequently legitimate.

I think the point I am making is that the decisions being made are completely arbitrary, like pass interference. Fouls are only declared fouls if they fit some criteria in that moment in time. The actions by the jockey in the Price Talk DQ and Silky Blue non-DQ we’re almost identical. And neither cost anyone a placing. Yet they found the implementation of the DQ not warranted in only one. Why?

I still contend yesterday’s DQ was a poor decision for 2 reasons. 1. It is clear the 4 moved out towards the 1 first. You can not argue that point. 2. The overhead from the WinStar cam, showed me anyhow, that the 1 was clear if not just about clear of the 4 when he shifted in. Again, I bet the 1 so perhaps I am seeing things, but it didn’t even look like the 1 made actual contact with the 4 while the pan view made it look more closer to the action that occurred in the Bowling Green.

A few questions. Do the stewards have access to the overhead? Do the stewards explain their decisions in NY like they do in other states, and if so, where can I find that?

[blackthroatedwind]

The decisions aren't even remotely arbitrary. I'm sorry you got taken down. This one isn't even in the million of bad DQs.

[PeteMugg]

Sorry, but I still don’t see this as the right call. 2, 4, and 6 were all moving out even with right hand urging. At an earlier point the 4 came out on 1 and the 1 accommodated. I guess Jose should have stood his ground and took the bump. Hell, take ‘em all down.

[Dahoss]

I’m not trying to be rude but I feel like I’m watching a different race than some of you. The 4 didn’t come out into the 1.

The 1 shied in when Jose flashed the whip. He hit the 4, who in turn closed the door on the 6 that had to check. The 4 was cost a placing and probably the 6.

Jose knew he messed up because he looked to his left as he did it.

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I’m not trying to be rude but I feel like I’m watching a different race than some of you. The 4 didn’t come out into the 1.

The 1 shied in when Jose flashed the whip. He hit the 4, who in turn closed the door on the 6 that had to check. The 4 was cost a placing and probably the 6.

Jose knew he messed up because he looked to his left as he did it.

It was earlier in the stretch before the inquiry. 4 came out and 1 gave him room. It was no big deal only because Jose gave space.
Poor Irad in the wrong spot again. He would’ve cost a lesser horse than Hieroglyphics the fourth race.