Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Triple Crown Topics/Archive..
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:45 AM
jms62's Avatar
jms62 jms62 is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,732
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by herkhorse View Post
It's horse racing, we are a 1/2 second from disaster in every race. Thousands of people got to experience the thrill of victory, followed by the gut punch of a disqualification. The worst feeling in all of sports betting. My guess is most won't become lifelong fans.
Was it a BS call? maybe, maybe not. The track condition was surely a factor, if WOW goes inside of Max instead of trying to squeeze outside, maybe nothing happens. I'm just not a fan of humans deciding the outcome.
You do realize that I am not commenting on the DQ but that the fact that a lot of horses would have gone down there and given what happened at Santa Anita over the winter it could have been a death blow.

As far as the DQ goes I understand the call but 90% of the time it wouldnít be called at that point of the race. It would be great if it were called 90% of the time. Just an odd time to do it. I had the 2 underneath on my tickets but if I had him on top I would consider what happened an absolute gift and wouldnít complain about a bad beat for at least 24 hours
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:48 AM
moses's Avatar
moses moses is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,041
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by herkhorse View Post
It's horse racing, we are a 1/2 second from disaster in every race. Thousands of people got to experience the thrill of victory, followed by the gut punch of a disqualification. The worst feeling in all of sports betting. My guess is most won't become lifelong fans.
Was it a BS call? maybe, maybe not. The track condition was surely a factor, if WOW goes inside of Max instead of trying to squeeze outside, maybe nothing happens. I'm just not a fan of humans deciding the outcome.
In fairness, and Iím not saying youíre suggesting this, but if they start ruling based on how many new fans they can create by the decision, then the entire integrity of the sport is in much bigger trouble than it currently is.

Iíd also prefer that stewards not determine the outcome but that becomes impossible when something happens on the track warranting an objection or inquiry. It sucks that the finish happened like this, but I canít really find any fault in what the stewards did.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:36 AM
ninetoone's Avatar
ninetoone ninetoone is offline
Oaklawn
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 2,272
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richard burch View Post
To me, it looks like WoW is riding up the MS arse. That is what I felt when I saw it live and on replay. He moved too soon. WoW caused the problem.
After watching the replay several times, it did look like WoW was up his ass and way too close, even before the incident. Like the jackass on the highway that's a foot off someone's bumper when traffic is such that there's nowhere to go. With that said, I do think that the stewards technically made the correct call. I just wish Irad would have had a little better trip. Wasn't his day....
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:43 AM
moses's Avatar
moses moses is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,041
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ninetoone View Post
After watching the replay several times, it did look like WoW was up his ass and way too close, even before the incident. Like the jackass on the highway that's a foot off someone's bumper when traffic is such that there's nowhere to go. With that said, I do think that the stewards technically made the correct call. I just wish Irad would have had a little better trip. Wasn't his day....
Iíll have to watch it again. I thought WOW had space created by the #21 (I think) falling back and then his lane got shut off by MS drifting out quite a bit. Not really seeing it how you guys see it, but Iíll watch again to see.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:50 AM
ninetoone's Avatar
ninetoone ninetoone is offline
Oaklawn
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 2,272
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moses View Post
Iíll have to watch it again. I thought WOW had space created by the #21 (I think) falling back and then his lane got shut off by MS drifting out quite a bit. Not really seeing it how you guys see it, but Iíll watch again to see.
Watch WoW's entire trip in relation to MS. Most are watching only the incident. I guess it's possible I was hallucinating last night after a long day. I'm sure I'll watch it again today many times as well.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:53 AM
moses's Avatar
moses moses is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,041
Default

I recall seeing WOW close behind and being restrained because he was boxed in. But I thought a hole eventually opened up for him. Iíll watch again tonight.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:55 AM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
A screenshot, out of context with no benefit of a head on proves nothing. Horses race in tight daily. If the horse (MS) shied toward the crowd that purportedly spooked him ( makes no sense) , and a speed horse (WoW) is fading outside, what exactly is the jock supposed to do?

These are the facts:
1. There was NO Stewards Inquiry
2. Neither of the 2 horses that claimed foul were ever fouled

Itís the most ridiculous takedown Iíve ever seen. If you want to give him days for the ride thatís one thing. Placing clearly the best, and unquestionably the winning horse 17th serves no one, and is another black eye for the sport.
You know I respect your opinion as well, but I think youíre being overly dramatic. The most ridiculous takedown youíve ever seen? Come on man.

MS came out at least 2 paths, maybe 3-4. War of Will was bothered and Long Range Toddy was totally eliminated. It caused a chain reaction.

It doesnít matter where it was on the turn and while I donít think Saez purposely did it....he did it. There was a foul and horses were cost placings. How is that not a DQ? Maximum Security being the best horse (and miraculously rebreaking ) should have nothing to do with whether or not his foul cost other horses a placing.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 05-05-2019, 12:29 PM
casp0555's Avatar
casp0555 casp0555 is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Humble,Texas
Posts: 18,106
Default

My two cents on this will not matter or change one thing so Im out of the debate. This Derby and the call will continue to be debated forever or so it will seem....the fact is, and we as participants and lovers of this sport, should be divinely grateful that there was not a pileup of human and horse flesh coming out of that turn. An event like that would have not only been catastrophic for the athletes but for the sport itself.

Thank whoever you want but be grateful for the safe outcome of 143. Money can be replaced, egos restored, and new athletes will come along that will wow and entertain us. Nothing can bring back a fatality or permanent injury, horse or human.

Sorry to interrupt....
__________________
"Wise men talk because they have something to say, fools talk because they have to say something" - Plato
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 05-05-2019, 07:36 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
A screenshot, out of context with no benefit of a head on proves nothing. Horses race in tight daily. If the horse (MS) shied toward the crowd that purportedly spooked him ( makes no sense) , and a speed horse (WoW) is fading outside, what exactly is the jock supposed to do?

These are the facts:
1. There was NO Stewards Inquiry
2. Neither of the 2 horses that claimed foul were ever fouled

Itís the most ridiculous takedown Iíve ever seen. If you want to give him days for the ride thatís one thing. Placing clearly the best, and unquestionably the winning horse 17th serves no one, and is another black eye for the sport.
The always great Scott Carson posted the most definitive video. If this isn't a foul... I don't know what is.

https://twitter.com/CarsoniPH/status...28240144457730

Quote:
Originally Posted by casp0555 View Post
My two cents on this will not matter or change one thing so Im out of the debate. This Derby and the call will continue to be debated forever or so it will seem....the fact is, and we as participants and lovers of this sport, should be divinely grateful that there was not a pileup of human and horse flesh coming out of that turn. An event like that would have not only been catastrophic for the athletes but for the sport itself.

Thank whoever you want but be grateful for the safe outcome of 143. Money can be replaced, egos restored, and new athletes will come along that will wow and entertain us. Nothing can bring back a fatality or permanent injury, horse or human.

Sorry to interrupt....
Well said.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 05-05-2019, 07:46 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss View Post
You know I respect your opinion as well, but I think youíre being overly dramatic. The most ridiculous takedown youíve ever seen? Come on man.

MS came out at least 2 paths, maybe 3-4. War of Will was bothered and Long Range Toddy was totally eliminated. It caused a chain reaction.

It doesnít matter where it was on the turn and while I donít think Saez purposely did it....he did it. There was a foul and horses were cost placings. How is that not a DQ? Maximum Security being the best horse (and miraculously rebreaking ) should have nothing to do with whether or not his foul cost other horses a placing.
Nobody talking about this... it should be at least discussed.

22.1, 24.2, 25.4, 26.1, 25.1. That's not normal.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:21 PM
Rudeboyelvis Rudeboyelvis is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
The always great Scott Carson posted the most definitive video. If this isn't a foul... I don't know what is.

https://twitter.com/CarsoniPH/status...28240144457730



Well said.
Neither War of Will nor Long Range Toddy was winning this race, with or without interference.

The most impeded horse, War of Will never filed an objection. The Same Stewards being lauded on this board for their takedown are the same Stewards that completely missed it real time and never even filed an inquiry to look at it. The 2 horses that filed the objection were never fouled.

I get it. It certainly appears that Saez was momentarily not in control of his mount. You wanna give him days for this? I'm in complete agreement. But to put up an also-ran as a Kentucky Derby Champion - purely punitively- instead of keeping clearly best horse and eventual winner up is mind-numbing inexplicable
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:23 PM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
Neither War of Will nor Long Range Toddy was winning this race, with or without interference.

The most impeded horse, War of Will never filed an objection. The Same Stewards being lauded on this board for their takedown are the same Stewards that completely missed it real time and never even filed an inquiry to look at it. The 2 horses that filed the objection were never fouled.

I get it. It certainly appears that Saez was momentarily not in control of his mount. You wanna give him days for this? I'm in complete agreement. But to put up an also-ran as a Kentucky Derby Champion - purely punitively- instead of keeping clearly best horse and eventual winner up is mind-numbing inexplicable
You donít think itís possible either one would have been 4th without the interference?
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:51 PM
Rudeboyelvis Rudeboyelvis is offline
Belmont Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahoss View Post
You donít think itís possible either one would have been 4th without the interference?
Day 1 of Steward Training 101 they teach you that if you take down the best horse in the race, you do so only because it clearly affected another's opportunity to win, Regardless of who finishes 4th, 5th, or 17th. There is absolutely no way on earth that distinction can be made at the point of call in the race the infraction occurred.

Without interference, would Country House have won, finished 2nd, 3rd, or 4th?

that's a Huge No for me.

But because these Stewards ( who, again, were asleep at the switch) decided to punish the horse, its owners, trainer, etc. rather than the jockey who failed to maintain a hold of his mount, we have an also-ran masquerading as a champion.

How some here can reconcile that, I don't get. It makes a mockery of the sport.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 05-05-2019, 08:59 PM
Dahoss Dahoss is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
Day 1 of Steward Training 101 they teach you that if you take down the best horse in the race, you do so only because it clearly affected another's opportunity to win, Regardless of who finishes 4th, 5th, or 17th. There is absolutely no way on earth that distinction can be made at the point of call in the race the infraction occurred.

Without interference, would Country House have won, finished 2nd, 3rd, or 4th?

that's a Huge No for me.

But because these Stewards ( who, again, were asleep at the switch) decided to punish the horse, its owners, trainer, etc. rather than the jockey who failed to maintain a hold of his mount, we have an also-ran masquerading as a champion.

How some here can reconcile that, I don't get. It makes a mockery of the sport.
Weíre not talking about Country House. He wasnít fouled.

Letís get real basic. Do you think Maximum Security fouled War of Will and Long Range Toddy when he came out?
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 05-05-2019, 09:04 PM
tjfla tjfla is offline
Aqueduct
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 649
Default

My biggest problem is the 20 was placed #1 even tho had NOTHING to do with any of this.

I just hope that from here on out EVERY race the stewards follow the "RULE" horses who touch another horse coming out of the gate OR cuts in front of another horse to get to the front are DQ. If u touch legs with another horse they go back and check

I have been a horse racing fan and bettor for 20 years and will NEVER bet another race. Horses touch/bang/cut each other off all the time its a part of the race
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 05-05-2019, 10:19 PM
cakes44's Avatar
cakes44 cakes44 is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
Nobody talking about this... it should be at least discussed.

22.1, 24.2, 25.4, 26.1, 25.1. That's not normal.
ďLikedĒ
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 05-05-2019, 10:48 PM
hurricanefrank's Avatar
hurricanefrank hurricanefrank is offline
Turf Paradise
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
Day 1 of Steward Training 101 they teach you that if you take down the best horse in the race, you do so only because it clearly affected another's opportunity to win, Regardless of who finishes 4th, 5th, or 17th. There is absolutely no way on earth that distinction can be made at the point of call in the race the infraction occurred.

Without interference, would Country House have won, finished 2nd, 3rd, or 4th?

that's a Huge No for me.

But because these Stewards ( who, again, were asleep at the switch) decided to punish the horse, its owners, trainer, etc. rather than the jockey who failed to maintain a hold of his mount, we have an also-ran masquerading as a champion.

How some here can reconcile that, I don't get. It makes a mockery of the sport.
I could not disagree more. A mockery of the sport occurs when rules aren't followed. Country House was mere a benefactor of the decision. How do you know War of the Will would not have won or placed or showed? Give Mark Casse a listen. Or Tyler G. A foul occurred. Whether its the Derby or 12.5 claimer on Thursday afternoon should make no difference. A rule is a rule and should be applied even handedly. Now if you want to take on the Ky stewards for how they handled the situation, that's a different kettle of fish,
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 05-05-2019, 10:48 PM
hurricanefrank's Avatar
hurricanefrank hurricanefrank is offline
Turf Paradise
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis View Post
Day 1 of Steward Training 101 they teach you that if you take down the best horse in the race, you do so only because it clearly affected another's opportunity to win, Regardless of who finishes 4th, 5th, or 17th. There is absolutely no way on earth that distinction can be made at the point of call in the race the infraction occurred.

Without interference, would Country House have won, finished 2nd, 3rd, or 4th?

that's a Huge No for me.

But because these Stewards ( who, again, were asleep at the switch) decided to punish the horse, its owners, trainer, etc. rather than the jockey who failed to maintain a hold of his mount, we have an also-ran masquerading as a champion.

How some here can reconcile that, I don't get. It makes a mockery of the sport.
I could not disagree more. A mockery of the sport occurs when rules aren't followed. Country House was a mere benefactor of the decision. How do you know War of the Will would not have won or placed or showed? Give Mark Casse a listen. Or Tyler G. A foul occurred. Whether its the Derby or 12.5 claimer on Thursday afternoon should make no difference. A rule is a rule and should be applied even handedly. Now if you want to take on the Ky stewards for how they handled the situation, that's a different kettle of fish,
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 05-05-2019, 11:43 PM
richard burch's Avatar
richard burch richard burch is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: new jersey
Posts: 1,751
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ninetoone View Post
After watching the replay several times, it did look like WoW was up his ass and way too close, even before the incident. Like the jackass on the highway that's a foot off someone's bumper when traffic is such that there's nowhere to go. With that said, I do think that the stewards technically made the correct call. I just wish Irad would have had a little better trip. Wasn't his day....
thank you. Their legs were tangled together. I would say that WOW actually forced MS to move further out because he was "pushing" him.
Also curious as to why WOW didn't file an objection. he was the one making contact from the back. I think He knew He ****ed up and whistled pass the graveyard.

look at it....thats not an illusion...and it went on for a few strides....

the 1 is the cause and although it wouldn't help the bettors, they should REVERSE the decision before the Preakness......just my OP..
__________________
Support your local Re-run or horse rescue organization.
https://www.rerunottb.com/:)
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 05-06-2019, 02:19 AM
Kitan Kitan is offline
Gulfstream Park
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Other side of the globe
Posts: 1,178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricanefrank View Post
I could not disagree more. A mockery of the sport occurs when rules aren't followed. Country House was mere a benefactor of the decision. How do you know War of the Will would not have won or placed or showed? Give Mark Casse a listen. Or Tyler G. A foul occurred. Whether its the Derby or 12.5 claimer on Thursday afternoon should make no difference. A rule is a rule and should be applied even handedly. Now if you want to take on the Ky stewards for how they handled the situation, that's a different kettle of fish,
Maybe the question should be why is that the rule in the first place? North American rules in this respect are dissimilar to those of other racing jurisdictions, which have their own individual quirks but are pretty consistent for DQs. Hell, what is a foul in one state is not in another, and vice versa. This DQ is a perfect example of why the rules need changing. What we had was a young horse drifting on the turn for whatever reason (noise, glare, uneven surface, etc), possibly compromising the chances of the 1 (came up empty; 18 and 21 were done). But, in the end who did the DQ benefit? It didn’t benefit the connections of the horses interfered with (the reason why Gaffalione said they didn’t lodge an objection). It didn’t benefit those that bet the 1 or 18. It sure didn’t benefit the horse who was best on the day nor those that bet him (in North America). It only benefitted the bettors and connections of horses that had fair chances to but couldn’t beat the winner.

One of the reasons the rules in other jurisdictions are set as such is to protect the bettors. In this case, why should someone who handicapped and bet the race perfectly be punished? Why should those who had fair chances to win be rewarded? Neither are beneficial to those that bet on the affected runners. Full disclosure, at the start of the card I bet the 7 overseas because I got 9-1 odds...I’m just angry because the DQ cost me on the exotics and the 20 was my original pick before I decided he wasn’t good enough to win, which was correct—so I’m right but I still lose. My bet still got paid as if it was a winner, because 1) what I just mentioned above, and 2) that horse would never have come down in their (or any other major) jurisdiction (rather, jockey likely suspended even if it maybe wasn’t his fault). Sometimes the best horses don’t win for whatever reason, whether it be a bad trip or fair and square. The 20 had every chance to be the deserved winner. Maybe I’m sour because it’s the same scenario for me in the Oaks...9 ranged up on the outside for a huge score but got turned back by the winner who was best on the day. My horse had her chance but was second best. Same scenario happened in the Derby. The 20 had his chance to win and didn’t. He still wasn’t winning even if the 1 or 18 weren’t interfered with. Same with the 13 and the 5 and the rest that finished with a cheque, they weren’t finishing any higher. So, maybe “rules are rules”, but those rules need to be re-looked at, because in situations like this they don’t benefit the connections or bettors—those who are the heart and soul of the game.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 10:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.