DQing to last

[cordep17]

If a horse is officially made the winner after a race, but is later disqualified to last, does it mean that he was using illegal drugs. If that is the case, Since they were caught using the performance enhancers, is it a guarantee that, at least for this upcoming race, that he will be off of them? A horse that I think may be a good favorite to bet against in race 1 tomorrow won at the same class level in his last, but was DQed later. The whole thing is a bit tragic to be honest. What once was a Grade III winner is now a 4000 claimer at FP.

[rastajenk]

It means that the horse was given, most likely, permissible drugs too soon (2 days, 3 days...it depends) before the race, so that the concentration in the post-race test was above the allowable limit. The drug was not necessarily a performance-enhancer, and the horse is not necessarily taken off the permissible medication, but the trainer would have to be more aware of the dosage and when it is used.

Lots of stakes winners find their way down the class ladder into the lower ranks, it's not a big deal. Besides, those Grey Stakes winners are usually bums anyway. :eek:

:p

[Edward DeVere]

I keep waiting for the lawsuit against a track or a trainer, by a bettor, in this situation.

Surely there are any number of judges all across the fruited plain who would rule in favor of the bettor.

Of course, the bettor/plaintiff would have to be unconcerned about his or her legal costs. . . .

[Rise Over Run]

Ran 5 lengths behind the field all the way around to finish dead last as the second choice.

[cordep17]

I didn't bet on him, but it was bothersome to watch.

[VeryOldMan]

I didn't bet on him, but it was bothersome to watch.

Your original post about the horse was a nice catch about the DQ - i.e., here's a horse whose last result/speed figure might possibly be drug-aided and should be discounted.

That replay was a very bothersome performance at a couple of levels.

[cordep17]

Blue Laser is in today in FP's 7th.

[rastajenk]

might possibly be ... should be...
Sounds like a recipe for losing.

[cordep17]

Sounds like a recipe for losing.

How so?

[Stillriledup]

I keep waiting for the lawsuit against a track or a trainer, by a bettor, in this situation.

Surely there are any number of judges all across the fruited plain who would rule in favor of the bettor.

Of course, the bettor/plaintiff would have to be unconcerned about his or her legal costs. . . .

I'm no lawyer, but occasionally play one here at PA, but i can't for the life of me figure out why a bettor, who bets on the "runner up" in a race where the winner gets DQd for cheating, can't file "charges" and collect damages. There has to be a legal reason a bettor can't file a lawsuit, or even small claims court, and get a judgment for the monies he lost by the cheating. If any wanna be lawyer wants to chime in, i'd love to hear this.

[davew]

Most states have rules written by the state legislature, stating specifically how the pay-offs must go - when the race declared official, the numbers and pay-offs can not be changed. Betters implicitly agree to these rules when making a bet for a race at that track.

The DQ to last frequently is for higher than allowed level in the serum for Bute or Lasix, which are allowed most places. This could be from 1) given too close to the race, 2) higher dosage than recommended/allowed or 3) slower than normal metabolism/breakdown for the chemical by the horse in question. If an illegal stimulant / pain blocker is found, a large fine and/or suspension of the trainer is usually involved (various dollars or time lengths depending on what and history of trainer).

[Rise Over Run]

Or maybe a horse is disqualified to last for not even meeting the conditions of the race...

http://www.nytbreeders.org/news/2012/11/11/kelli-got-frosty-fifth-avenue/

Not only did PJs Superego get run down by a horse that didn't even fit the conditions of the race, but she hasn't made it back to the races since....