Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-23-2010, 11:49 AM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC View Post
I see there was a brief discussion on it, if you watch the replay of the race in this thread and then watch the replay of the 1st yesterday, I'm sure there would be more than a little head scratching going on with this decision. I didn't have a bet on the race, but considering there was no contact with the 3rd horse and that maybe he was 50/50 to get up anyway, I don't agree with the call. To me the #4 would have won regardless. I'm sure someone will argue that it may have affected the 2nd place finish, yes I may agree there; however from what I have noticed not only in N.Y but in So Cal, they rarely seem to take exacta and tri bettors into account, I can recall a Bejarano horse staying up on an obvious foul because the horse that was interfered with was apparantly falling back even though his horse caused a chain reaction on the 2nd place horse that was gaining, there was no regard for the horse that was fouled when indeed he may have figured into the tri or super.
It would have been interesting what decision the stewards would have made had the third place finisher won the place photo rather than losing it. Since she only missed second by a nose, I think it's hard to argue with any sense of certainty that Laylaben drifting did not impact that horse's ability to achieve a maximum placing.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-23-2010, 12:23 PM
CSC's Avatar
CSC CSC is offline
Arlington Park
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms View Post
It would have been interesting what decision the stewards would have made had the third place finisher won the place photo rather than losing it. Since she only missed second by a nose, I think it's hard to argue with any sense of certainty that Laylaben drifting did not impact that horse's ability to achieve a maximum placing.
This is a good point, however I find it interesting that stewards in general fall back on the horse interferred with was falling back and thus a DQ is not warranted. Either way it comes down to a judgment, to me if a horse is bumped hard, it inevitiably may have a significant effect on his or her performance, just because a horse doesn't run on after being bumped hard doesn't mean it could not have achieved a better placing if it hadn't. A horse could have been disinterested, nicked or knocked off stride when bumped and as I cited in the Bejarano case, the stewards guessed the horse was fading regardless and it wouldn't have figured into exotics, to me if the horse wasn't bumped it would have achieved a better placing. There doesn't seem to be any consistency with stewards lately.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-23-2010, 12:37 PM
The Indomitable DrugS's Avatar
The Indomitable DrugS The Indomitable DrugS is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,007
Default

The horse that was impeded was beaten a nose for 2nd. It's not hard to figure out their decision ... two things have to happen, 1.) a foul has to take place 2.) that foul has to cost a horse a chance at a better placing.

Like Rupert said - it's a little like pass interference in football. If the contact is significant - but the ball flies 15 yards over the recievers head and lands way out of bounds - it's no flag.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-23-2010, 12:48 PM
CSC's Avatar
CSC CSC is offline
Arlington Park
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS View Post
The horse that was impeded was beaten a nose for 2nd. It's not hard to figure out their decision ... two things have to happen, 1.) a foul has to take place 2.) that foul has to cost a horse a chance at a better placing.

Like Rupert said - it's a little like pass interference in football. If the contact is significant - but the ball flies 15 yards over the recievers head and lands way out of bounds - it's no flag.
I understand the point, and all things considered I don't disagree. The consistency issue is what I don't like. How do you determine a horse was fading only when after a horse was significantly bumped then fell back, it's like saying the bumping had absolutely no effect on a horse's desire to run or had no effect on an outcome in a race. Just as in the original post of this thread, how do the stewards know Prado's horse achieved maximum placing had it not been bumped, since we do not know for 100% certain it would have placed higher had it not been bumped so vigorously. It's like saying all horses run the same race regardless whether they are bumped or not?
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.