Jockey shenanigans mar BC prep races

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

The game is falling apart yet the people in the industry keep telling us that there is nothing to see here, move along. Not picking on Chuck but racing has an image issue big time to go along with many other issues. Can you imagine if horses were floated to the 7 path on the first turn in every race as just part of race riding. If its such a great tactic why dont we see it done more?

I'm of the opinion that the way 36-1 shots are ridden is low on the list of racings ills. There are bad rides in hundreds of races a week. There have been bad rides for as long as racing has been around. This isnt new. Social media is new.

The way it seems to go now is whatever issue you guys have with racing gets thrown into the "game is falling apart" category, daring anyone in the business to defend it. I will say again when the stewards are being influenced by social media and the status of the horses in question you can really start wondering about image issues.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I'm of the opinion that the way 36-1 shots are ridden is low on the list of racings ills. There are bad rides in hundreds of races a week. There have been bad rides for as long as racing has been around. This isnt new. Social media is new.

The way it seems to go now is whatever issue you guys have with racing gets thrown into the "game is falling apart" category, daring anyone in the business to defend it. I will say again when the stewards are being influenced by social media and the status of the horses in question you can really start wondering about image issues.

I am in the opinion that the betting public has a better platform than they ever have in the past and thats why you actually see some movement when issues are brought to light, albeit at a snails pace in most cases.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

I am in the opinion that the betting public has a better platform than they ever have in the past and thats why you actually see some movement when issues are brought to light, albeit at a snails pace in most cases.

The betting public is a quite diverse population and based on twitter and facebook a very vocal part of it is clueless despite the best efforts of many to try to give them a clue.

Naturally many people wind up following the clueless because what they say might sound good even though it is completely wrong.

It is for that very reason that racing is essentially doomed. Regardless of what racing does and what rules are passed most people are going to believe their preconceived notions anyway. Racing has done a miserable job educating people and even when smart guys like some of the visable public figures go out of their way to try to help educate people they are routinely savaged on social media for taking a stance that may not pan out.

[Cannon Shell]

The real irony is that in speaking to a bunch of trainers, officials, owners and jockeys I have found support for suspending Espinoza and support for not suspending him. Probably close to 50-50.

I can see if there was a pre existing warning, him getting days here. I could see it if the Stewards had been proactive against similar aggressive riding tactics recently.

I think they are simply punishing Espinoza because of grumbling about a popular horse (you know one of those that may "save" racing) and an unpopular trainer who almost benefited.

Stewards are generally bad enough already. If we start letting popularity bleed into the decisions...

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The real irony is that in speaking to a bunch of trainers, officials, owners and jockeys I have found support for suspending Espinoza and support for not suspending him. Probably close to 50-50.

I can see if there was a pre existing warning, him getting days here. I could see it if the Stewards had been proactive against similar aggressive riding tactics recently.

I think they are simply punishing Espinoza because of grumbling about a popular horse (you know one of those that may "save" racing) and an unpopular trainer who almost benefited.

Stewards are generally bad enough already. If we start letting popularity bleed into the decisions...

2 things here. #1, I can understand your concern, because if YOU were held responsible for the rides of Pedro Cotto Jr, you'd have every right to be worried about a lifetime suspension

But more importantly, IMO, literally seconds after the Cali race ended Jerry Bailey called out Victor Espinoza's ride. Now, some may not like Jerry Bailey, but I think it would be difficult to call him clueless about race riding?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by golfer

2 things here. #1, I can understand your concern, because if YOU were held responsible for the rides of Pedro Cotto Jr, you'd have every right to be worried about a lifetime suspension

But more importantly, IMO, literally seconds after the Cali race ended Jerry Bailey called out Victor Espinoza's ride. Now, some may not like Jerry Bailey, but I think it would be difficult to call him clueless about race riding?

No one is saying that it wasnt exactly what it looked like, but the question is does he deserve a suspension because of it? Name another case like this where a jockey got suspended for floating a horse a extra path wide. I cant think of a single one in 30 years. He didnt make contact woth the other horse, he didnt cut him off, he didnt put him in a dangerous sport regardless of what jms says, being wide is not dangerous. It is actually where jockeys who dont like the way their mounts are traveling go.

This idea that the horse was 7 wide or used as a battering ram is exaggerated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZYIKaXPtPU


Denman called him 4 wide in the 1st turn

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No one is saying that it wasnt exactly what it looked like, but the question is does he deserve a suspension because of it? Name another case like this where a jockey got suspended for floating a horse a extra path wide. I cant think of a single one in 30 years. He didnt make contact woth the other horse, he didnt cut him off, he didnt put him in a dangerous sport regardless of what jms says, being wide is not dangerous. It is actually where jockeys who dont like the way their mounts are traveling go.

This idea that the horse was 7 wide or used as a battering ram is exaggerated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZYIKaXPtPU


Denman called him 4 wide in the 1st turn

How about this possible scenario/solution. Do what the NHL does when it comes to supplemental discipline (former players are in charge of the "player safety" position), put former Jockey's in the position to make the determination, as opposed to Stewards, who you quite rightfully don't trust to understand the nuances of what occurred?