Catty Madeline

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Stall Mucker

Stewards are NOT allowed to wager in the state of NY as well as many other juristictions.

Posters, however, are apparently allowed to drink.

[docicu3]

Originally Posted by philcski

The Admiral Bird DQ was a joke. I walked away from the tv at CD to watch the live race, came back to check the prices, to find out he'd been DQ'd. Was 5 deep in the p6, and didn't have the 11. Had the rest, of course.

I couldn't agree more but apparently was in the minority yesterday.....

[sumitas]

It is kind of hard to believe a runner can just blind side one next to her and bull through like that. The jock had nowhere else to go and he was probably surprised it stood.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, a part-owner of the horse was talking to a friend of mine before the race, and they intend to point her to the NYS Stallion Series race at Saratoga for her next start. With $150K on the line, I'm sure Spa Princess will still get "the good hay" (whatever that is in Ubillo's barn) for the next few weeks.

Is that nice?

Rodrigo is a friend of mine. I assume you know him.

By the way, I don't see how you can compare this to the Admiral Bird DQ, where there was a blanket finish, and this seemed like a good no-call.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by robfla

I think the guys on TVG said it best. She was the best horse in the race, why punish the owners, trainer, and bettors. Let the stewards deal with the jockey later on.

This is how it should be. Grant it, with the qestionable calls in the last week or so, its is hard to believe the stewards actually used logic.

Kind of an irresponsible statement by the TVG (I didn't hear them myself, so I will take your word on this), I don't think we are asking the Stews to punish anybody. Just get it right.

As GPK said, there were other owners, trainers and horses being bet on in the race.

Just get it right and be consistent. That's not too much to ask is it?

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I thought it was a decent no call because it didn't impact the outcome - however, Margah basically made his own room and should get fined for that ride.

Margah rode like he was on bumper cars at an amusement park instead of race horses at Belmont in three different turf races yesterday. His ride on the 4th place finisher in the 5th race was textbook careless riding.

[SentToStud]

The stewards are taking the "it didn't impact the outcome" piece of their duty too far. There are far too many instance of this excuse being used. And the stewards can't state with certainty whether outcomes would be unaffected in a lot of these no-calls.

Take a look at Bemont's 7th on 5/24. In the stewards opinion, the outcome was not impacted. The 3rd, 4th,5th and 6th finishers were all close together and it is impossible to say the outcome was not impacted.

I suppose until a rider gets slammed head first into the rail while having a chance to win, my take on this is going to be pretty moot.

[the_fat_man]

Terrible ride by Maragh. Absolutely TERRIBLE!!! If he waits a second or so, the hole OPENS WIDE for him.

I think this horse needs to come down because not only does Maragh come out BUMPING the other horse, which would've been a good NO CALL, he also lays into her immediately after that, effectively fouling her TWICE.

Nice to see an interest in races (albeit a limited one). If this continues, perhaps the stewards will start feeling some of the pressure and get a bit more consistent.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

By the way, I don't see how you can compare this to the Admiral Bird DQ, where there was a blanket finish, and this seemed like a good no-call.

As I said in an earlier post, viewed as an isolated incident, I don't have that much of a problem with yesterday's no-call.

My problem is that when the Proud Spell DQ (alleged foul had no impact on the likely outcome of the race), the Admiral Bird DQ (borderline foul may have had an impact on Doc N Roll's chance to finish third), and yesterday's no-call (where bumping may have had an impact on Spa Princess's chance to finish third) are all viewed together, yesterday's decision makes no sense.

I fail to see how the fact that there was a blanket finish in the Admiral Bird race - and this one did not have a close finish - has any relevance if the standard being applied is whether the "fouled" horse had a fair opportunity to achieve a maximum placing - as the contact likely impacted Spa Princess's ability to finish third (for which she was beaten about one length). For that matter, there was no blanket finish in the Mother Goose, while there was a photo in the Les Antiques race in which repeated contact caused by the winner was ingored.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

As I said in an earlier post, viewed as an isolated incident, I don't have that much of a problem with yesterday's no-call.

My problem is that when the Proud Spell DQ (alleged foul had no impact on the likely outcome of the race), the Admiral Bird DQ (borderline foul may have had an impact on Doc N Roll's chance to finish third), and yesterday's no-call (where bumping may have had an impact on Spa Princess's chance to finish third) are all viewed together, yesterday's decision makes no sense.

I fail to see how the fact that there was a blanket finish in the Admiral Bird race - and this one did not have a close finish - has any relevance if the standard being applied is whether the "fouled" horse had a fair opportunity to achieve a maximum placing - as the contact likely impacted Spa Princess's ability to finish third (for which she was beaten about one length). For that matter, there was no blanket finish in the Mother Goose, while there was a photo in the Les Antiques race in which repeated contact caused by the winner was ingored.

well said and i totally agree.

[blackthroatedwind]

The blanket finish is relevent in that a bumping incident could well have caused the victim to have lost a position. I can understand the argument against yesterday's no-call, even though I agree with the steward's decision in this case, but not the one Friday. I think taking Les Antiques down would have been a VERY bad call and really think they got that one right. The Mother Goose? Debatable for sure.

Honestly, and I am not trying to demean your arguments, I guess overall I just care less than most people. That doesn't make me right, or my position the right one, I just think people tend to overemphasize steward's decisions of all kinds while ignoring far more relevent and important issues. I don't think you do this....but most do.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I think taking Les Antiques down would have been a VERY bad call and really think they got that one right. The Mother Goose? Debatable for sure.

You then condone a horse going from the 5 or 6 path and SQUEEZING a horse that's on the rail? So much so, that the horse repeatedly HITS the rail as a result. That race was a joke. Castellano is repeatedly allowed to get away with **** like this.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

the Admiral Bird DQ (borderline foul may have had an impact on Doc N Roll's chance to finish third), and yesterday's no-call (where bumping may have had an impact on Spa Princ

Doc N Roll was definitely finishing 2nd if he's not impeded.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The blanket finish is relevent in that a bumping incident could well have caused the victim to have lost a position. I can understand the argument against yesterday's no-call, even though I agree with the steward's decision in this case, but not the one Friday. I think taking Les Antiques down would have been a VERY bad call and really think they got that one right. The Mother Goose? Debatable for sure.

Honestly, and I am not trying to demean your arguments, I guess overall I just care less than most people. That doesn't make me right, or my position the right one, I just think people tend to overemphasize steward's decisions of all kinds while ignoring far more relevent and important issues. I don't think you do this....but most do.

As a practical matter, there are periods when focus comes to certain aspects of the sport. Over the years, I have viewed the stewards in NY as making more appropriate decisions than their counterparts elsewhere (particularly in FL and KY, where I have seen what I thought to be phantom fouls result in takedowns). That's why the events of the past 10 days have been so baffling.

As a horseplayer, I think that, like anything, the "good calls" and "bad calls" tend to even out. I got taken down from the pic-6 with Admiral Bird on Friday, but was the beneficiary for a fairly comparable amount of money when Raw Silk was (wrongly, IMO) DQ'd at Aqueduct last fall. The problem is that, at a time when racing has enough problems to worry about, we really need consistent adjudication of these matters, for inconsistency breeds questions of integrity and the like (which I am not raising).

You may know the answer to this question which a friend and me were discussing yesterday. With the holiday period, and the high-pressure Saratoga meet around the corner, were any of the "regular" stewards on vacation, with alternate stewards sitting in for them this past week? I recall that, when DRF used to publish the charts in the Form on a daily basis, the identity of the stewards was published as part of an introductory section before the chart for the first race, along with such information as weather, how long the meet ran, etc. This information is not currently part of any charts of which I am aware. At least if this was published, it might create better accountability, or at least a perception of it. (It's like the equivalent in basketball, which I officiate, where some referees call a "tighter" whistle than others - and the players and coaches know it. Human nature being what it is, I assume the stewards, as a collection of persons, are probably the same.)

[blackthroatedwind]

Nobody ever said anything about any of the regular stewards being on vacation but I guess it's possible.

[freddymo]

Everybody wants decisions to be uniformed but the problem lies in its context.. This thread is composed of 5 or 6 well informed knowledgible racing minds accurately and cogently making sensible cases for DQ's and Non calls.. All of you folks have seen ten of thousands of races and are well versed yet .. The Fat Man BTW DrugS and thebby etc all differ in there adjudication.. Think about it we have been discussing this for days and with unlimited replay time.. These folks need to make a decision and move on in 5 minutes TOPS.. My point is simple no matter how hard you try to get stewards to be accountable and prefect they just cant because so much of these decisions are subjective.. I guess sometimes it will work out for you and sometimes you are going to get hurt eitherway as long as the folks doing the deciding are competitent I guess you have to let it go when it works against you and cheer when it works in your favor..

Unless The Fat Man is available to judge every objection and inquiry??lol

[the_fat_man]

Four possible outcomes in a given race:

1) right horse and wins

2) right horse but loses --stewards, bad trip, etc.

3) wrong horse and loses

4) wrong horse BUT wins --stewards, good trip, etc.


However, increased 'interest' in the decisions of the stewards can only help in the long run as it makes the process a bit more public.

[Gander]

Okay. I bet Ms Holden and needed her for a huge score this day. While she didnt deserve to win the race as she had every chance and just wasnt good enough, I still think Levine's horse should have come down based on 3 prior takedowns within 2 week's of this race, a la Admiral Bird being the most noteworthy.

Ms Holden runs back tomorrow at Saratoga in the last race. The race is scheduled for turf but will probably come off. I still think she may run.

Thoughts on betting her back?

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Gander

Okay. I bet Ms Holden and needed her for a huge score this day. While she didnt deserve to win the race as she had every chance and just wasnt good enough, I still think Levine's horse should have come down based on 3 prior takedowns within 2 week's of this race, a la Admiral Bird being the most noteworthy.

Ms Holden runs back tomorrow at Saratoga in the last race. The race is scheduled for turf but will probably come off. I still think she may run.

Thoughts on betting her back?

Tim, I'm just not sure what kinda price she will be. Sure to take some action and go off a little lower than her 5-1ML. I like Intoxicatingbeauty coming out of that race. Appears to be a couple with some speed in there and it should set up well for her.

Anyways...it's all probably moot, as I can't imagine they would be back on the turf tomorrow.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Gander

Okay. I bet Ms Holden and needed her for a huge score this day. While she didnt deserve to win the race as she had every chance and just wasnt good enough, I still think Levine's horse should have come down based on 3 prior takedowns within 2 week's of this race, a la Admiral Bird being the most noteworthy.

Ms Holden runs back tomorrow at Saratoga in the last race. The race is scheduled for turf but will probably come off. I still think she may run.

Thoughts on betting her back?

It's already off - only race that's staying on is the feature.