KHRC scapegoating of John Veitch (Multiple thread merge; Update)

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by pweizer

Not warming up well is one thing. But Life at Ten was never asked to run from the moment the gates open. She never takes a forward step and is never encouraged to do so by the jock. That does not happen all the time.

Paul

It really came apart at the seams so quickly. She broke a step slow and she was last instantly. I thought that JV gave her about a 1/4 of a mile to try to get her stride going, but it just never happened. Not sure what else he was supposed to do after the slow break, quarter horse her to the lead?

IMO, JV was in a no win situation and I have no fault with him.

(edit : ) Obviously, I might have a different feeling if I had a boatload of money on her. I only had a small win bet.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

It really came apart at the seams so quickly. She broke a step slow and she was last instantly. I thought that JV gave her about a 1/4 of a mile to try to get her stride going, but it just never happened. Not sure what else he was supposed to do after the slow break, quarter horse her to the lead?

IMO, JV was in a no win situation and I have no fault with him.

But who takes the blame then? That is the question that no one seems to be able to answer. The person BEST suited to tell the condition of the horse once they are on the racetrack is the jockey. I'm not saying that he wasn't in a difficult position but once he said that the horse wasn't warming up properly AND he didn't alert the vets in charge of his feelings AFTER he has already told a national TV audience, well isn't he really the only one who could have made a difference? And I am not suggesting that jockeys be given the authority to scratch horses but you need to pass along that information to the state vets on the scene if you remain concerned as JV did when he repeated that she still wasn't right.

As said before, very few scenarios will ever play out like this especially considering that the connections had nothing to gain by starting her and having her ease. Hell I have seen this happen in claiming races where the jock breaks from the gate and basically pulls the horse up 5 strides out of the gate in the hopes some sucker dropped a claiming slip. And it would be hard to imagine that the connections were trying to make some srt of betting coup considering the size of the purse.

[analyizethis]

The blame really needs to be with the jock. On the one hand he announces on television that the horse isn't warming up right, then he decides that it isn't necessary to inform the state vets of any concern and then he basically eases her up out of the gate. Aside from a fine to the jockey, the only change that is put in place is to prohibit jocks from talking to the television crew. Maybe all that is enough of a deterrent to protect the bettors going forward but I guess I'm skeptical.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

But who takes the blame then? That is the question that no one seems to be able to answer. The person BEST suited to tell the condition of the horse once they are on the racetrack is the jockey. I'm not saying that he wasn't in a difficult position but once he said that the horse wasn't warming up properly AND he didn't alert the vets in charge of his feelings AFTER he has already told a national TV audience, well isn't he really the only one who could have made a difference? And I am not suggesting that jockeys be given the authority to scratch horses but you need to pass along that information to the state vets on the scene if you remain concerned as JV did when he repeated that she still wasn't right.

As said before, very few scenarios will ever play out like this especially considering that the connections had nothing to gain by starting her and having her ease. Hell I have seen this happen in claiming races where the jock breaks from the gate and basically pulls the horse up 5 strides out of the gate in the hopes some sucker dropped a claiming slip. And it would be hard to imagine that the connections were trying to make some srt of betting coup considering the size of the purse.

Velazquez had said after, that there were other times when Life at Ten hasn't warmed up well and when the race started she was fine.

Obviously Pletcher was aware that something was off in the paddock and the reports said that 7 vets heard what JV had said in the interview. I'm guessing if one of the vets followed through and checked her out before she went in to the gate, she still would have raced. I'm not sure if Pletcher heard the interview, but it's hard for me to believe that he wasn't aware of it.
So then it would have came down to John Velazquez on his own accord refusing to ride a top filly in one of the biggest races of the year on a national stage for his bread and butter employer who just happens to be arguably one of the best trainers in the world.

I guess everyone should share in some of the Blame, but like the point I tried to make yesterday, who really cares? The money bet on her isn't coming back. As far as the future goes, I'm pretty sure jocks will think twice about reporting the "accurate" conditions of their mounts before these big races. Let's face it, if JV doesn't give the interview then the fallout from this wouldn't have been so great.

It's nice to be connected in Kentucky. Just ask Underwood.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Velazquez had said after, that there were other times when Life at Ten hasn't warmed up well and when the race started she was fine.

Obviously Pletcher was aware that something was off in the paddock and the reports said that 7 vets heard what JV had said in the interview. I'm guessing if one of the vets followed through and checked her out before she went in to the gate, she still would have raced. I'm not sure if Pletcher heard the interview, but it's hard for me to believe that he wasn't aware of it.
So then it would have came down to John Velazquez on his own accord refusing to ride a top filly in one of the biggest races of the year on a national stage for his bread and butter employer who just happens to be arguably one of the best trainers in the world.

I guess everyone should share in some of the Blame, but like the point I tried to make yesterday, who really cares? The money bet on her isn't coming back. As far as the future goes, I'm pretty sure jocks will think twice about reporting the "accurate" conditions of their mounts before these big races. Let's face it, if JV doesn't give the interview then the fallout from this wouldn't have been so great.

If he has just alerted a vet that she wasnt warming up great then the onus would have been off of him. He didnt have to refuse to ride her, just have one of the team of vets examine her as she warmed up. If they agreed that something was visably amiss then they in conjunction with the stewards make the call. But if you dont make anyone in an official capacity aware that something might be wrong then the fault lies with you IMO. Like you said it doesnt really matter at this point and the horse was acting sluggish, not lame which would be a lot more common occurence. Of course had the vets/stewards scratched the horse and nothing was found wrong with her I'm sure someone would have been sued for something.