|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
08-01-2007, 10:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I think Winning move stables (the owners before the race) are getting screwed. I guess that they didn't mind losing the horse, because that had a good shot of making some purse money. Then they lose him and have absolutely no chance at any purse money. That doesn't seem fair. Isn't being a non starter essentially the same thing as not being in the race. If he was scratched at the gate he would not be able to be claimed, right? The argument would have been the same thing on the other side if (God Forbid) he broke down during the race. How could you claim a horse that is declared a non-starter. You would think that NYRA would have a clear cut rule for this sort of thing.
Levine's KEGGER probably had to wait for the 16 Rolaids he must have popped during the running of that race. Let's just say that there were a few anxious moments. 
|
|
#2
08-02-2007, 06:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So the rule is there to protect the bettors. I guess this type of situation has not come up that often, where the jock falls off the horse because of a gate mishap. Maybe they could amend the rule, for a freak occurrence like this one. I understand that the owners still had the chance to get some purse money, but because of the starter Ramon fell off. Then they lose the horse. Still seems unfair.
|
|
#3
08-02-2007, 08:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here is the rule, from the NYS Racing and Wagering Board website:
THOROUGHBRED Sections 4009.21 and 4115.10 of Title 9E NYCRR are amended to read as follows: 4009.21 Refund -- non-starter. (a) When a horse starts. Every horse shall be considered a starter when the stall gates open on the signal of the starter, unless the stewards declare a horse or horses non-starters because, in their opinion, the horses’ chances were compromised leaving the starting gate. If so, all bets on the non-starters will be refunded unless the horse wins. For placing and program purposes, the non-starters will be considered to have run for purse only. (b) If it be determined by the stewards that a horse is declared a non-starter, the money bet on the horse shall be refunded; if such horse is part of an entry or field, such circumstances shall be treated as a scratch for wagering as provided in section 4009.20 of this Part, notwithstanding the placing of any remaining part of the entry or field.
|
|
#4
08-02-2007, 09:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Contessa is appealing the claim. Who do you guys think should get the horse? I believe that Contessa should keep the horse, for reasons listed in other posts in the thread. But I have a bad feeling that the claim will stand and he will be Levine's.
|
|
#5
08-02-2007, 10:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think the claim should be voided...
|
|
#6
08-02-2007, 10:22 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
IMO, if a horse is declared a non starter,it should be treated like a scratch- all claims voided and no purse money.
|
|
#7
08-02-2007, 10:27 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
08-02-2007, 10:36 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why does the gate crew stay in the gate prior to the start of the race?
After they load the horses they should get out and then the starter opens the gate to start the race. I think there wouldn't be as many problems.
|
|
#9
08-03-2007, 03:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OOPs they did it again. What's with these guys? Do they forget they are supposed to let go of the bridle when the gates open? #5 in the 5th at SAR. And the Stews take No action?
|
|
#10
08-03-2007, 03:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#11
08-03-2007, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
'all bets on the non-starters will be refunded unless the horse wins. For placing and program purposes, the non-starters will be considered to have run for purse only. '
the horse ran, but unless he wins, all bets are refunded. declared a non starter doesn't mean he flat missed the race. the claim should stand. you don't want to lose the horse, don't run him for a tag. had he been injured, you can bet your behind the former owner would be squealing if the claim was voided.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
|
#12
08-03-2007, 07:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If they hold Sumwon at the gate Sunday they are going to have about 50 angry owners charging them.
|
|
#13
08-06-2007, 08:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So it happened again in todays 5th race, is this some kind of joke?
|
|
#14
08-06-2007, 08:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Today's incedent was Johnny V's fault. He reached down to adjust his stirrup and then reached over and held onto the bar on the side of the gate. The gate opened and he was holding the bar. The gateman let go of the horse, JV was holding onto the gate. IMO since the mishap was the fault of the rider NOT the starter, he should not have been declared a non starter. Can you tell I had Stonewood at 5-1 and got paid 7.20?
__________________
RIP Monroe.
|
|
#15
08-15-2007, 04:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Best racing in the country my friends..........gate crew...not so hot
|
|
#17
08-15-2007, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
Hybrid Mode
