2/20 (TAM): Tampa Bay Breeders Cup

[Bigsmc]

Ramon, "I could see it going either way."

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

Ramon, "I could see it going either way."

When they showed the camera angle at 4:51 into this link...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVxZd6Pfr1E


I thought there was zero chance of them doing anything ... but, the camera angle they kept showing from higher up after that looked worse.

On the angle at 4:51 I would have said there was no chance of a take down - at the later angle - I thought there was an 80 percent chance of one.

[ateamstupid]

I would've taken him down. I realize there was no contact, but you shouldn't be able to drift over seven paths in deep stretch, win by a nose and stay up.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

I would've taken him down. I realize there was no contact, but you shouldn't be able to drift over seven paths in deep stretch, win by a nose and stay up.

While I agree with your conclusion again if you read the rule, contact is never mentioned. If the race was a 10 claimer the winner would have been taken down in a heartbeat.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While I agree with your conclusion again if you read the rule, contact is never mentioned. If the race was a 10 claimer the winner would have been taken down in a heartbeat.

I know, I'm referring to what DrugS said about contact.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

I know, I'm referring to what DrugS said about contact.

(5) If a horse or jockey jostles another horse, the aggressor shall be disqualified, unless the jostle was wholly caused by the fault of some other horse or jockey or had no impact upon the outcome of the race.

Section of the rules dealing with contact though this is the FL rule which may be worded different in NY

[randallscott35]

I think the horse should've come down. I've seen plenty of no contact takedowns.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

I know, I'm referring to what DrugS said about contact.

I thought he was 80% to come down after seeing the up-top head on angle, I wanted him to come down so I could cash my double, according to the rules he should have come down.

As a bettor though, my stance is F' the F'ing rules. It's a desperate finish - let them play.

I'm not quite one of those guys like DRF's Dick Jeradi who believes there should never be a takedown for any reason - only jockey fines and purse redistributions ... but, I would say I disagree with most takedowns.

The fact is that the most worthless and meaningless trouble that can occur to a horse in a race happens in the late stages when the horses are all decelerating. Yet, a slight foul there is going to result in a DQ.

Horses who get fouled in an earlier and far, far, far more important stage of the race often run so poorly that these fouls get a pass because the assumption is they performed so poorly that the foul didn't matter. You pretty much have to dislodge the rider from his mount for a takedown to occur at some places...unless it happens in deep stretch.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I thought he was 80% to come down after seeing the up-top head on angle, I wanted him to come down so I could cash my double, according to the rules he should have come down.

As a bettor though, my stance is F' the F'ing rules. It's a desperate finish - let them play.

I'm not quite one of those guys like DRF's Dick Jeradi who believes there should never be a takedown for any reason - only jockey fines and purse redistributions ... but, I would say I disagree with most takedowns.

The fact is that the most worthless and meaningless trouble that can occur to a horse in a race happens in the late stages when the horses are all decelerating. Yet, a slight foul there is going to result in a DQ.

Horses who get fouled in an earlier and far, far, far more important stage of the race often run so poorly that these fouls get a pass because the assumption is they performed so poorly that the foul didn't matter. You pretty much have to dislodge the rider from his mount for a takedown to occur at some places...unless it happens in deep stretch.

A lot of what you said is true but the idea that jockeys would police themselves (which is what would have to happen in the land of no DQ's) is crazy. The white elephant in the room that everyone either ignores or simply isnt aware of is that in many jurisdictions the stewards themselves dont know or understand the rules properly and the facade of stewards accreditation makes this problem even worse. There are some people who have completed the Stewards accredadition program who simply arent bright enough to understand the rules or would have a hard time reading the rulebook, let alone comprehend it.

The problem isnt the rules, it is the inconsistent application of them.