Top Flight at Aqueduct

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Game horses can rally back on.This horse running tomorrow(Tontine Too) looked beat in his last race,and came back on.Spooky Mulder looked beat last week,and came back on.She deserves the chance to rally back.I think the fact that you are close enough to be hit by an opposing jock's whip makes it hard to rule out a re-rally.I saw the race,and was expecting her to battle back.My guess(cuz we will never know) is that M MINT would have lost by a small margin (a half a length to a length.) I wouldn't rule out her re-rallying for the win there.Maybe that's why they made the change.I thought there was an auto DQ on it in New York.

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Game horses can rally back on.This horse running tomorrow(Tontine Too) looked beat in his last race,and came back on.Spooky Mulder looked beat last week,and came back on.She deserves the chance to rally back.I think the fact that you are close enough to be hit by an opposing jock's whip makes it hard to rule out a re-rally.I saw the race,and was expecting her to battle back.My guess(cuz we will never know) is that M MINT would have lost by a small margin (a half a length to a length.) I wouldn't rule out her re-rallying for the win there.Maybe that's why they made the change.I thought there was an auto DQ on it in New York.

Dude, to quote Samuel L jackson that horse was deader than fried chicken.
Superimposing traits that you think a horse had into a dreamworld where reality is altered is not the way to watch and analyze races.
Malibu Mint was done, kaput, finito, dead. She bore out because that whats a lare percentage of tired horses do, and in the process of doing so was struck with the whip.
Why do I care if i didn't have money on it? because tomorrow it could be me or you who gets screwed.
These stewards are dreadful, and I mean incredibly inconsistent and awful.
I'm still stewing over Smockey Glacken being left up two saratoga'a ago after almost putting the Goldberg horse over the rail(i'm not exaggerating here, she almost caused a bad spill and they left her up).
These guys need to come out and explain to EVERYONE exactly what a foul is, and when the issue comes into play of whether or not the fouled horse was losing anyway comes into play.
This dq was a joke.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

"While many believe that a whip to the face is automatic grounds for disqualification, that is not the case. The rules state that a horse should be disqualified "if a jockey willingly strikes another horse or jockey" with the whip. The Aqueduct stewards did not deem Garcia's actions as willful, but they did determine it cost Malibu Mint a chance to win."-DRF


THEY THOUGHT SHE HAD A CHANCE TO COME BACK.I GIVE HER SOME CHANCE TO COME BACK.NOT MUCH,BUT SOME.

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"While many believe that a whip to the face is automatic grounds for disqualification, that is not the case. The rules state that a horse should be disqualified "if a jockey willingly strikes another horse or jockey" with the whip. The Aqueduct stewards did not deem Garcia's actions as willful, but they did determine it cost Malibu Mint a chance to win."-DRF


THEY THOUGHT SHE HAD A CHANCE TO COME BACK.I GIVE HER SOME CHANCE TO COME BACK.NOT MUCH,BUT SOME.

If those guys thought that cost her a chance to win, they had to be watching a different replay than I just did.
She was absolutely done.
This was a disgrace, and tomorrow it could be me or you.

[Danzig]

and it really doesn't matter if the stewards feels the winner would have won regardless. just look at secretariats dq in the hopeful...or was it the champagne?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Coa had stopped her from coming out towards the other filly.I can understand him hitting her if she was moving over quickly at the time(he couldn't have been expected to know that she was gunna be there.)That was not the case.She wasn't moving laterally when she was hit.You should point some anger at the guy who caused this(Garcia.) I think he cost her a small shot to rally back on,but I see other horses cost horses a small chance for a better placing(all the time.)

[Crown@club]

originally posted by Scudsbrother
"While many believe that a whip to the face is automatic grounds for disqualification, that is not the case. The rules state that a horse should be disqualified "if a jockey willingly strikes another horse or jockey" with the whip. The Aqueduct stewards did not deem Garcia's actions as willful, but they did determine it cost Malibu Mint a chance to win."-DRF

originally posted by Scudsbrother
HEY THOUGHT SHE HAD A CHANCE TO COME BACK.I GIVE HER SOME CHANCE TO COME BACK.NOT MUCH,BUT SOME.

Originally Posted by randallscott35
In the News today, it said unequivocally that it is not an automatic DQ.


Originally Posted by randallscott35
"Whip interference is not an automatic reason for disqualification. It is up to the stewards' discretion"

My useless comment:
Catching up on the reading from the weekend.
Man this reminds me so much of Snow Ridge's DQ a few years ago on Derby Day.

[philcski]

Rahy's Appeal's owner has appealed the DQ.
I didn't have a cent on the race, but the bettors who had RA got hosed.

Oh, could you imagine if they over turn this. Boy, I would be in a fit of rage of I had Rahy's Appeal.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by philcski

Rahy's Appeal's owner has appealed the DQ.
I didn't have a cent on the race, but the bettors who had RA got hosed.

Well,it is a foul.She wasn't moving over when he hit her.She had already done that.She was there,and for whetever reason ,he blew it,and whipped her hard.Now,whether she had any chance to come back on(if not hit) is the question.They may find that the stewards were wrong to think she had any shot to rally back on(if she wasn't hit.) The majority on here,think she had no shot to rally back,and so it is odd that 2 out of the 3 stewards would think she had a chance to win the race.I have seen too many horses rally back for me to say she had no shot.It probably didn't have an effect on the outcome of the race,but I don't know if they have to go by probably,or certainty.

[blackthroatedwind]

There is NO rule!

By the way, at least an honorable mention for most hilarious internet post of the year to the poster who claimed getting hit by the whip could cost a horse four lengths.

Even my fish laughed at that one!

I just got in and watched the replays and was puzzled and confused as to this takedown.
This is just awful, and I mean incredibly terrible.
The only reason the inside horse was struck with the whip was because she bore into it.
Its unreasonable to take this horse down, just ridiculous and these stewards are the pits.
A jocky reaches back to hit his horse and the other horse bears into it and its a takedown when the inside horse was obviously done?

One other thing, I watched the replay of the first race and it sure looked to me as if the winner banged and collided with the Paragallo horse. YOu can clearly see contact and a hard bump. I wasn't watching races live today, can anyone tell me if there was an inquiry or objection in that race, and how the hell that horse could stay up and the winner of the feature could come down?

I had absolutely no money riding on either but I just can't understand the logic of dq'ing the winner of the Top Flight at all.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There is NO rule!

By the way, at least an honorable mention for most hilarious internet post of the year to the poster who claimed getting hit by the whip could cost a horse four lengths.

Even my fish laughed at that one!

You have pet fish? Don't most guys grow out of that?