Top Flight at Aqueduct

Originally Posted by pick4

Why would another horse have to pass Malibu Mint to make the DQ legit? I agree that Rahy's Appeal was the best horse in the race. I just don't understand your logic.

One could make the arguement that a whip to the nose could have costed the horse a 2nd place finish. This didnt happen so it doesnt matter--but if MM did finish third then I could understand the logic.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There is NO rule!

By the way, at least an honorable mention for most hilarious internet post of the year to the poster who claimed getting hit by the whip could cost a horse four lengths.

Even my fish laughed at that one!

You have pet fish? Don't most guys grow out of that?

[NoCarolinaTony]

Blackthroat,

I benefited by the DQ in that it kept me alive in the P4 and ultimately won it. Felt like stealing (8k). I also had the reverse happen, so the racing gods even things out every so often. Yes the 8 was MTB, no doubt about it. I just got lucky today.

But for the record, I take it you know the NY rule on whip to the face. Does the NYRA or the NY Racing Officials have a site where you can view the rules for fouls and dq's ?

Thanks !!

NC Tony

[Downthestretch55]

LaBelle's story....
http://www.nyracing.com/aqueduct/stories/TopFlight.html

[NoCarolinaTony]

Based upon that NYRA release it seems it pretty straight forward that a whip to the face is an instant DQ. Coa says " I hate to win that way but the rules are the rules?"

So what is it. Steve can you clarify?

NC Tony

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by NoCarolinaTony

Based upon that NYRA release it seems it pretty straight forward that a whip to the face is an instant DQ. Coa says " I hate to win that way but the rules are the rules?"

So what is it. Steve can you clarify?

NC Tony

In the News today, it said unequivocally that it is not an automatic DQ.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

In the News today, it said unequivocally that it is not an automatic DQ.

"Whip interference is not an automatic reason for disqualification. It is up to the stewards' discretion"

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/mo...p-399089c.html

[NoCarolinaTony]

http://sports.yahoo.com/rah/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

As you can see by Coa's quote here, those are the rules....so I think the question is still open as you have two different printed interpertations

Who care's anymore .....Anyway.

[Crown@club]

originally posted by Scudsbrother
"While many believe that a whip to the face is automatic grounds for disqualification, that is not the case. The rules state that a horse should be disqualified "if a jockey willingly strikes another horse or jockey" with the whip. The Aqueduct stewards did not deem Garcia's actions as willful, but they did determine it cost Malibu Mint a chance to win."-DRF

originally posted by Scudsbrother
HEY THOUGHT SHE HAD A CHANCE TO COME BACK.I GIVE HER SOME CHANCE TO COME BACK.NOT MUCH,BUT SOME.

Originally Posted by randallscott35
In the News today, it said unequivocally that it is not an automatic DQ.


Originally Posted by randallscott35
"Whip interference is not an automatic reason for disqualification. It is up to the stewards' discretion"

My useless comment:
Catching up on the reading from the weekend.
Man this reminds me so much of Snow Ridge's DQ a few years ago on Derby Day.

[philcski]

Rahy's Appeal's owner has appealed the DQ.
I didn't have a cent on the race, but the bettors who had RA got hosed.

Oh, could you imagine if they over turn this. Boy, I would be in a fit of rage of I had Rahy's Appeal.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by philcski

Rahy's Appeal's owner has appealed the DQ.
I didn't have a cent on the race, but the bettors who had RA got hosed.

Well,it is a foul.She wasn't moving over when he hit her.She had already done that.She was there,and for whetever reason ,he blew it,and whipped her hard.Now,whether she had any chance to come back on(if not hit) is the question.They may find that the stewards were wrong to think she had any shot to rally back on(if she wasn't hit.) The majority on here,think she had no shot to rally back,and so it is odd that 2 out of the 3 stewards would think she had a chance to win the race.I have seen too many horses rally back for me to say she had no shot.It probably didn't have an effect on the outcome of the race,but I don't know if they have to go by probably,or certainty.