"Secret"DQs at Charlestown?

[Stillriledup]

So, i'm watching the 4th race at CT tonight and they cross the line 6-10. There's a "delay" in posting the prices, no inquiry or objection. After a few minutes they just disqualify the 2nd place finisher and place him last. They never showed the slow motion of the inquiry, i just saw it briefly one time on the regular head on replay.

Was this a "Secret" DQ or did they have a normal inquiry, where the public saw what the judges were watching?

If i missed that part, i humbly apologize.

[wiffleball whizz]

So, i'm watching the 4th race at CT tonight and they cross the line 6-10. There's a "delay" in posting the prices, no inquiry or objection. After a few minutes they just disqualify the 2nd place finisher and place him last. They never showed the slow motion of the inquiry, i just saw it briefly one time on the regular head on replay.

Was this a "Secret" DQ or did they have a normal inquiry, where the public saw what the judges were watching?

If i missed that part, i humbly apologize.


I've seen exactly what your talking about.....don't know how to explain but I've seen it before

[Stillriledup]

I've seen exactly what your talking about.....don't know how to explain but I've seen it before

Was i just imagining things and they never showed the public what was the reason for the DQ?

I saw it briefly on the head on shot of the replay, but that was it, they never slowed it down or showed us multiple views.

Odd.

[SharpCat]

So, i'm watching the 4th race at CT tonight and they cross the line 6-10. There's a "delay" in posting the prices, no inquiry or objection. After a few minutes they just disqualify the 2nd place finisher and place him last. They never showed the slow motion of the inquiry, i just saw it briefly one time on the regular head on replay.

Was this a "Secret" DQ or did they have a normal inquiry, where the public saw what the judges were watching?

If i missed that part, i humbly apologize.


I watched the replay on TwinSpires and they announced the inquiry as the 6 came to the winners circle. The inquiry lasted approximately 5 minutes before they disqualified the 10 to last for interference shortly after the start. They did not show the replays like the usually do but it looked like an easy call to me.

[Stillriledup]

I watched the replay on TwinSpires and they announced the inquiry as the 6 came to the winners circle. The inquiry lasted approximately 5 minutes before they disqualified the 10 to last for interference shortly after the start. They did not show the replays like the usually do but it looked like an easy call to me.

From the brief one time look i had at the replay, it seemed that the chain reaction happened a split second before the 10 came in. I don't have a solid opinion either way, i'd have to see it again in slo mo, pretty interesting that they just made a DQ without showing what the stewards were looking at.

[SharpCat]

From the brief one time look i had at the replay, it seemed that the chain reaction happened a split second before the 10 came in. I don't have a solid opinion either way, i'd have to see it again in slo mo, pretty interesting that they just made a DQ without showing what the stewards were looking at.


I wonder if they were having some problems. Midway through the inquiry the announcer came on the feed to remind everyone there was an inquiry on the 10 for interference shortly after the start. I don't think anything shady went on here.

[affirmedny]

From the brief one time look i had at the replay, it seemed that the chain reaction happened a split second before the 10 came in. I don't have a solid opinion either way, i'd have to see it again in slo mo, pretty interesting that they just made a DQ without showing what the stewards were looking at.

This is not the first time they've done this. Also, they are the only track I know of that doesn't show a replay of the stretch drive immediately after the race. If you're involved in a close finish you don't get to see it again until the replay AFTER the race.

[Stillriledup]

This is not the first time they've done this. Also, they are the only track I know of that doesn't show a replay of the stretch drive immediately after the race. If you're involved in a close finish you don't get to see it again until the replay AFTER the race.

Hmmm, interesting.

Maybe its just the way they "do things" at this joint.

[Robert Fischer]

They are as I type this doing a proper "Public" Objection claim , with replay review angles.

Good Job CT. Maybe we have a PA member on the team...

http://s29.postimg.org/q38aiig1z/hold_all_tix.jpg

[Stillriledup]

lol and then they cancel.

Good job guys. Another card cancelled due to "Rain".

:bang:

[andtheyreoff]

lol and then they cancel.

Good job guys. Another card cancelled due to "Rain".

:bang:

Yeah, because it's so much better to have horses and jockeys out there on a hazardous track than to cancel for the sake of safety.

[Stillriledup]

Yeah, because it's so much better to have horses and jockeys out there on a hazardous track than to cancel for the sake of safety.

The sake of safety? I've been following thoroughbred racing for a long time and do you know how many times i've see horses race on sloppy tracks? I've seen quite a few cards in the wet, hundreds and probably thousands.

Mountaineer is racing in slop and snow tonight, Aqu raced in the rain today, Penn Nat is racing in a quagmire, Laurel raced today in a monsoon, its just a sloppy track, its not any different from any other sloppy track out there.

[andtheyreoff]

The sake of safety? I've been following thoroughbred racing for a long time and do you know how many times i've see horses race on sloppy tracks? I've seen quite a few cards in the wet, hundreds and probably thousands.

Mountaineer is racing in slop and snow tonight, Aqu raced in the rain today, Penn Nat is racing in a quagmire, Laurel raced today in a monsoon, its just a sloppy track, its not any different from any other sloppy track out there.

It's a judgment call by the jockeys. If they think it's not safe to ride, they have every right to call off the card- after all, they're the ones who could be seriously hurt out there.

And, if you'll look at the photo Robert Fischer posted, that track wasn't just sloppy, it was a quagmire. No surprise it was felt it was unsafe.

[Stillriledup]

It's a judgment call by the jockeys. If they think it's not safe to ride, they have every right to call off the card- after all, they're the ones who could be seriously hurt out there.

And, if you'll look at the photo Robert Fischer posted, that track wasn't just sloppy, it was a quagmire. No surprise it was felt it was unsafe.

A judgment call?

There have been more racing cancellations in the last few years than the entire decade of the 70s, 80s and 90s combined.

Why do you think that is?

Are the tracks less safe? Is water more wet than it was in 1970?

[Jay Trotter]

A judgment call?

There have been more racing cancellations in the last few years than the entire decade of the 70s, 80s and 90s combined.

Why do you think that is?

Are the tracks less safe? Is water more wet than it was in 1970?I don't have a dog in this fight. I was just reading through all the day's posts and upon reading this it struck me that the reason probably comes down to two things:

1) Knowledge - everyone in sport today simply knows more than they did in the past. Football and similar sports have taken concussions into consideration, etc.

2) Quality of Life - everyone today is simply better off than any time in the past. Even poor people have tv's and cell phones. In the past people literally had to fight to stay alive and that included playing sports no matter the conditions or personal consequences.

Just my thoughts.....I don't think there is some big conspiracy. We're all just a little softer than in the old days. :ThmbUp:

[Stillriledup]

I don't have a dog in this fight. I was just reading through all the day's posts and upon reading this it struck me that the reason probably comes down to two things:

1) Knowledge - everyone in sport today simply knows more than they did in the past. Football and similar sports have taken concussions into consideration, etc.

2) Quality of Life - everyone today is simply better off than any time in the past. Even poor people have tv's and cell phones. In the past people literally had to fight to stay alive and that included playing sports no matter the conditions or personal consequences.

Just my thoughts.....I don't think there is some big conspiracy. We're all just a little softer than in the old days. :ThmbUp:


Thank you Jay, good post. :ThmbUp:

[Stillriledup]

CT had massive and graphic accident in Race 2, had a LONG inquiry, Never showed any replays, and made the race official. Half the field finished and half the field did not. It APPEARED that the horse who fell was involved in some sort of chain reaction into the turn.....now, i'm not accusing anyone of anything, but the rider on the 1 isnt a Charles Town rider and that turn comes up very quick.....you know, not blaming anyone, just sayin.

[Relwob Owner]

CT had massive and graphic accident in Race 2, had a LONG inquiry, Never showed any replays, and made the race official. Half the field finished and half the field did not. It APPEARED that the horse who fell was involved in some sort of chain reaction into the turn.....now, i'm not accusing anyone of anything, but the rider on the 1 isnt a Charles Town rider and that turn comes up very quick.....you know, not blaming anyone, just sayin.

Im asking this genuinely-how do you know it was graphic or are you guessing? I only ask because I missed it and they dont have a head on and was wondering if you saw it in the live feed and I just missed it. Thanks in advance

[Robert Fischer]

"SRU, Please contact the clerk of scales"...

[Saratoga_Mike]

CT had massive and graphic accident in Race 2, had a LONG inquiry, Never showed any replays, and made the race official. Half the field finished and half the field did not. It APPEARED that the horse who fell was involved in some sort of chain reaction into the turn.....now, i'm not accusing anyone of anything, but the rider on the 1 isnt a Charles Town rider and that turn comes up very quick.....you know, not blaming anyone, just sayin.

That's good given the rider has over 30k riders under his belt, including a stint at Great Lakes, a 5/8s mile track. Moreover, you do not hit the turn that quickly in a 4.5 fur race at CT. Finally, something happened to his horse - that's why he had to steady and grab the horse. But I know you weren't blaming anyone.

[Stillriledup]

That's good given the rider has over 30k riders under his belt, including a stint at Great Lakes, a 5/8s mile track. Moreover, you do not hit the turn that quickly in a 4.5 fur race at CT. Finally, something happened to his horse - that's why he had to steady and grab the horse. But I know you weren't blaming anyone.

I might blame someone if CT showed the race more than once, but i saw it once and the angle they showed into the turn was inconclusive. They never showed "all the angles" i would like to have seen if someone crashed into the horse who started the chain reaction.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I might blame someone if CT showed the race more than once, but i saw it once and the angle they showed into the turn was inconclusive. They never showed "all the angles" i would like to have seen if someone crashed into the horse who started the chain reaction.

Now that's a reasonable comment.

[maclr11]

is it really in the best interest of racing to show graphic spills and breakdowns... No one wants to see it.

[Saratoga_Mike]

is it really in the best interest of racing to show graphic spills and breakdowns... No one wants to see it.

I understand the sentiment of your second statement, but I do think bettors should be able to see what happened.

[maclr11]

Then have it online or something or put some sort of warning on it. Nothing turns off new fans more than that.

[proximity]

It's a judgment call by the jockeys. If they think it's not safe to ride, they have every right to call off the card- after all, they're the ones who could be seriously hurt out there.


i know villegas (at least) went off to jefferson hospital after that debacle in the second. hopefully he will be ok.

i guess it got a little warmer tonight but i was down there for a couple days and was surprised they ran.

[speed]

If you have a weak stomach don't watch the head on.
Miracle if no serious injuries.

[Relwob Owner]

I think that if it stands as it is, the timing of the 6th should be seriously questioned

[Knowclew]

Head on available on Twin Spires. Nasty.

[SharpCat]

I might blame someone if CT showed the race more than once, but i saw it once and the angle they showed into the turn was inconclusive. They never showed "all the angles" i would like to have seen if someone crashed into the horse who started the chain reaction.


I've watched the replay several times. As they hit the turn the 7 brushes the 1 who makes contact with the rail. The 1 bounces of the rail and rear ends the 7 who rear ends the 11 and when the 11 comes out the 5 is right there and clips heels. Nobody at fault here just a freak accident. The jockey's took the worst of it on this occasion and I hope they come out ok.

[Stillriledup]

I've watched the replay several times. As they hit the turn the 7 brushes the 1 who makes contact with the rail. The 1 bounces of the rail and rear ends the 7 who rear ends the 11 and when the 11 comes out the 5 is right there and clips heels. Nobody at fault here just a freak accident. The jockey's took the worst of it on this occasion and I hope they come out ok.

So you're saying the 7 started the bumping?

[SharpCat]

So you're saying the 7 started the bumping?


Yes. Right as the horses hit the turn the rear end of the 7 contacts the 1 who was right on the rail and had nowhere to go except off the rail into the 7 starting the chain reaction. It was just an unfortunate incident.

[Stillriledup]

Yes. Right as the horses hit the turn the rear end of the 7 contacts the 1 who was right on the rail and had nowhere to go except off the rail into the 7 starting the chain reaction. It was just an unfortunate incident.

So you don't think that warranted a DQ? I know that when horses fall, the judges are usually more vigilant in DQs, in other words if you bump a horse and the jock falls off, there's more of a chance of a DQ than if you bumped the horse in the exact same way, but the jock stayed on. (at least in my opinion)

[SharpCat]

So you don't think that warranted a DQ? I know that when horses fall, the judges are usually more vigilant in DQs, in other words if you bump a horse and the jock falls off, there's more of a chance of a DQ than if you bumped the horse in the exact same way, but the jock stayed on. (at least in my opinion)


It is possible a DQ was warrented in this case. The problem like you said earlier in the thread is that they did not show all possible angles of the incident. Whenever there is an inquiry or objection I think they should show all possible angles of the incident. I also wish all tracks would show a replay of any incident and tell us why the stewards ruled the way they did.

[Stillriledup]

It is possible a DQ was warrented in this case. The problem like you said earlier in the thread is that they did not show all possible angles of the incident. Whenever there is an inquiry or objection I think they should show all possible angles of the incident. I also wish all tracks would show a replay of any incident and tell us why the stewards ruled the way they did.

.....not sure why they refuse to show slow motion replays of inquiries, seems like they have something to hide by not showing the wagering public why a horse is or is not disqualified. Its a big secret!

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/82955/charles-town-gets-funds-for-barn-surveillance