DQ or no DQ you be the judge

[Mineshaft]

should Bayern or Toast of NY should of been taken down?

[Mineshaft]

Bayern should of not been taken down


But you can make a point for Taste of NY definetely

[husker du]

bayern taken down

[husker du]

If Baffert was not the trainer he would have come down no doubt!!!

[Mineshaft]

I know one thing Mike Smith is one pissed off dude.

got taken wide by Victor in the Awesome Again and now today. I would not want to be on the side of Mike in the near future for fear of him hitting someone with his whip. Dude is pissed off..

[Redboard]

No. I have never seen a horse taken down for what he did at the first 30 yards of a race. Unless he completely turns into the field and knocks somebody down and completely out of the race.

[Stillriledup]

I know one thing Mike Smith is one pissed off dude.

got taken wide by Victor in the Awesome Again and now today. I would not want to be on the side of Mike in the near future for fear of him hitting someone with his whip. Dude is pissed off..

And, ironically, he rides a lot of really good horses for Baffert.

[mabred]

Stewards have no balls.Should have come down!!!

The 6 moved up.It cost him a placing!!!

terrible no call

Mabred

[husker du]

The Horse did not keep a straight course he affected the outcome of the race . i dont know what else you need to see it was obvious

[PICSIX]

Stewards have no balls.Should have come down!!!

The 6 moved up.It cost him a placing!!!

terrible no call

Mabred

Also took out Moreno, the horse that would have applied pace pressure. Coming over 4 paths is far worse than the "one jump out of the gate stuff" that is typical of horse racing.

[tophatmert]

For me it is simple . When the jockey(Garcia) causes all of the problem the horse must come down . Bayern didn't want to bear in , Garcia took him there. This was not incidental gate contact , it was a tactic.

[madera12227]

if Bayern does not affect Moreno. Bayern might of tired out because Moreno was going to run next to him. Tuff call for the stewards to make. However, the Santa Anita steward are never consistent. They are horrible when it comes to fairness.

[deathandgravity]

Down & I had him on my P4 ticket. (knocked out previous race)

[olddaddy]

If I was a steward today I would have taken down bayern because I had toast of ny as a live double.

[OntheRail]

Should of been DQ'd and placed last. Jock should get days... weeks... months to think about it. This is racing not last mount standing... could of been real ugly if horses went down. Bet Mike would like to bitch slap em'.

[Scanman]

Bayern - Easy DQ. Gutless stewards.

[Sinner369]

If you watch the telecast today.........all the commentators and Baffert said that they do not take you down on the first steps of the start because all horses bump leaving the gate!

[husker du]

omg what b.s by Baffert, i believe that if he was not the trainer he would have come down !

[Mineshaft]

If you watch the telecast today.........all the commentators and Baffert said that they do not take you down on the first steps of the start because all horses bump leaving the gate!



and hes right theres always bumping at the start and they dont take you down

[luisbe]

No. I have never seen a horse taken down for what he did at the first 30 yards of a race. Unless he completely turns into the field and knocks somebody down and completely out of the race.

He knocked down SB and pace competitor Moreno, changed completely the developing of the race. Also SB got pulled strongly after that. Unbelievable he was 4th at the end.

[OntheRail]

If you watch the telecast today.........all the commentators and Baffert said that they do not take you down on the first steps of the start because all horses bump leaving the gate!
All they needed was a puck on the track... and it a been horse hockey. Bayern's move will be shown by the Red Wings this year on how to check a opponents.

[Mineshaft]

He knocked down SB and pace competitor Moreno, changed completely the developing of the race. Also SB got pulled strongly after that. Unbelievable he was 4th at the end.




Horse did run a helluva race and was in perfect striking distance but didnt kick on

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Had to be DQd. I didn't even think it would be a question, and then you see the inquiry lifted and no change of order.

I don't know what argument anybody can make to not DQ Bayern. A gutless decision.

[horses4courses]

I wouldn't have had a problem with a DQ.
Did Bayern's actions at the start cost Shared Belief at least one placing?
I would answer - yes.

Likely, however, that it would have created
more controversy than the decision they reached.
I think they tried to take the safest option.

What would have happened had an east coast horse run second?
Say it was Tonalist, V.E. Day, or Zivo beaten a nose?
I shudder to think........

[JustRalph]

For me it is simple . When the jockey(Garcia) causes all of the problem the horse must come down . Bayern didn't want to bear in , Garcia took him there. This was not incidental gate contact , it was a tactic.

Over the top

[Bullet Plane]

Agree, gutless!

[tophatmert]

Over the top
Are you saying Bayern was bearing in and Garcia was trying tom keep him straight ?

[Robert Fischer]

No. I have never seen a horse taken down for what he did at the first 30 yards of a race. Unless he completely turns into the field and knocks somebody down and completely out of the race.

I agree 100%.

I also think that it's time change the rule.

The Breeders Cup (or any race) is not the place to change the rule.

The competition committee must consider changes.

Within reason, it makes sense that a horse "taking out" another horse at the break should be a DQ whether intentional or not. It should be a hard foul and take place in the other runner's lane and be unavoidable.

The changes should then be announced at the start of the next seasonal meet (winter?) and adopted.


Within the current understanding of the rules it would have been unusual to take down Bayern.

Bayern ran a tremendously game race, but you have to wonder whether Moreno's presence contesting the pace, and Shared Belief's presence in the stretch run, would have produced a different outcome.

[taxicab]

I don't know....
It's tough to take Bayern down because it's out of the gate.
I get that he drilled SB,but that's horseracing.
And it is tough to DQ out of a giant race like the Classic.

[Stillriledup]

If you watch the telecast today.........all the commentators and Baffert said that they do not take you down on the first steps of the start because all horses bump leaving the gate!

But that's not the rule, its not even an unwritten rule according to the judges.

First of all, if it was a rule, there wouldn't have been an inquiry to begin with because it wouldn't have been a foul and therefore, wouldn't have had any need to be looked at. Second, the judges said it didn't cost Smith a placing, which is another reason why this bump at the gate stuff is actually punishable.

[Stillriledup]

I don't know....
It's tough to take Bayern down because it's out of the gate.
I get that he drilled SB,but that's horseracing.
And it is tough to DQ out of a giant race like the Classic.

Its not really horseracing if you do it on purpose. As far as a "giant race" goes, is there a difference in the color of the money that the bettors get paid vs hitting the 4th at Charlestown on a rainy Monday? Personally, any bet i make is a "big race" its my super bowl, i could care less what the purse is for the owners, its all the same to the bettors.

[Tara73]

A foul is a foul and that was a.foul.

[Tom]

Nice to see racing is getting the same credibility as WWE.
Wrestlemania is coming...maybe Bayern and Shared Belief can have a rematch.

[Stillriledup]

Mans game. Jim Rome Proud, took the high road.

https://twitter.com/jimrome

[Bennie]

Contact right out of the gate is not an issue with me, happens all the time, but coming over 4 paths is a little too much. If it was 2 yr olds, it can be expected. Not so much with experienced horses. Just my opinion. Didn't matter to me as far as the outcome because I didn't have Toast of New York anywhere on my tickets.

[Mineshaft]

You are not going to get a perfect trip every time ur horse runs. Thats horse racing. Does it suck that he got cut off? Sure does but thats going to happen in horse racing its the nature of the game.

[Stillriledup]

You are not going to get a perfect trip every time ur horse runs. Thats horse racing. Does it suck that he got cut off? Sure does but thats going to happen in horse racing its the nature of the game.

I would absolutely love all the money back that i've been DQd for on borderline BS "thats horse racing" type of calls.

[pandy]

Some have said that horses never get down for bumping at the start. That is not true. It is true that many horses get squeezed at the start when a horse breaks sideways and there is no dq, but, I have seen many horses taken down for severely lugging in at the start and causing obvious and severe interference that greatly affected the running of the race. This was an obvious and severe infraction. The judges either made a mistake or have no balls.

[Stillriledup]

Some have said that horses never get down for bumping at the start. That is not true. It is true that many horses get squeezed at the start when a horse breaks sideways and there is no dq, but, I have seen many horses taken down for severely lugging in at the start and causing obvious and severe interference that greatly affected the running of the race. This was an obvious and severe infraction. The judges either made a mistake or have no balls.

Heres a DQ for something at the start.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111298&highlight=charlestown

[OntheRail]

No Balls.

If I remember correctly last year or the year prior Gulfstream Park. Rainbow 6 was in the millions... last race with one ticket live horse wins... inquiry goes up. They show the start... banging out of the gate... less then what we seen today. Horse gets took down. Carryover.

[dansan]

not quater hores racing mike smith had plenty of race left to win that race the better horse won

[pandy]

The bigger picture here is that there is no need for the starting gate at all. A couple of years ago I interviewed Dan Coon, who designs and builds racing surfaces. He is mostly known for his work with harness tracks but he has also built and worked on many thoroughbred surfaces including training tracks.

Coon told me that it's unfortunate that horsemen resist change, but, he said that there are two things that should be eliminated in thoroughbred races, the rail and the starting gate. He said that both have contributed to many injuries of riders and horses, some fatal. He said that the hard rail is simply not necessary and either is the starting gate. He also said that if they eliminated the starting gate there would be much less trouble at the start, and a lot less injuries.

I have never seen the need for the starting gate. You could easily start the horses from a starting line with a loud bang like you did years ago and you would eliminate horses flipping in the gate, breaking through the gate, getting left in the gate, getting injured in the gate, and breaking sideways out of the gate and ruining the Breeders Cup classic.

[Stillriledup]

The bigger picture here is that there is no need for the starting gate at all. A couple of years ago I interviewed Dan Coon, who designs and builds racing surfaces. He is mostly known for his work with harness tracks but he has also built and worked on many thoroughbred surfaces including training tracks.

Coon told me that it's unfortunate that horsemen resist change, but, he said that there are two things that should be eliminated in thoroughbred races, the rail and the starting gate. He said that both have contributed to many injuries of riders and horses, some fatal. He said that the hard rail is simply not necessary and either is the starting gate. He also said that if they eliminated the starting gate there would be much less trouble at the start, and a lot less injuries.

I have never seen the need for the starting gate. You could easily start the horses from a starting line with a loud bang like you did years ago and you would eliminate horses flipping in the gate, breaking through the gate, getting left in the gate, getting injured in the gate, and breaking sideways out of the gate and ruining the Breeders Cup classic.

If you watch the start of steeplechase races, the horse are all over the place, they're not starting at the same time.....those are very long races run at very slow paces, so if a horse gets a neck or 1/2 length better start than another horse, it doesn't matter. In a sprint race, its going to matter, that would be tricky to pull off.

[overthehill]

i agree with you 100%. if this was a 2 year old race, I would have let the result stand. but that kind of interference by a 3 year old merits a DQ. Even more perplexing is the statement by the stewards that it didnt effect the outcome of the race. Lets see the favorite in the race was completely impeded early, and the other main speed was taken out of the race completely after bayern bumped and drifted in at least 3 paths. Im surprised there wasnt a fist fight in the jocks room after this. If I had a say I would remove all of the stewards, as I wouldnt be happy to see a string of left turns coming out of the gate by jockeys with speed horses trying to get to the rail right away.

[pandy]

If you watch the start of steeplechase races, the horse are all over the place, they're not starting at the same time.....those are very long races run at very slow paces, so if a horse gets a neck or 1/2 length better start than another horse, it doesn't matter. In a sprint race, its going to matter, that would be tricky to pull off.


That's true for sprints. In a race like the classic I really don't think the starting gate is needed. The thing is, it causes all sort of problems and injuries. Is it really worth it?

[Valuist]

if Bayern does not affect Moreno. Bayern might of tired out because Moreno was going to run next to him. Tuff call for the stewards to make. However, the Santa Anita steward are never consistent. They are horrible when it comes to fairness.

Its irrelevant; you cannot automatically assume Moreno would've battled Bayern. I think it would've been suicide if Moreno did try to go after him.

What Pride of New York did, which was clearly after the start, was worse.

[magwell]

If you watch the start of steeplechase races, the horse are all over the place, they're not starting at the same time.....those are very long races run at very slow paces, so if a horse gets a neck or 1/2 length better start than another horse, it doesn't matter. In a sprint race, its going to matter, that would be tricky to pull off.Yep "right again" on this,(your on a roll) if racing wont change the time between races on the Triple Crown, they sure wont get rid of the gate or the rail in our life time........;)

[taxicab]

Its not really horseracing if you do it on purpose. As far as a "giant race" goes, is there a difference in the color of the money that the bettors get paid vs hitting the 4th at Charlestown on a rainy Monday? Personally, any bet i make is a "big race" its my super bowl, i could care less what the purse is for the owners, its all the same to the bettors.

Whatever...
Blah.
Blah.
Blah.
4th at Charlestown.
My Super Bowl.....rainy Monday.
Color of Money.
Give it a rest.
You bitch and moan about every DQ you see,and now when one gets left up you bitch and moan about that.
Newsflash.....You can't have it both ways.
The stewards weren't going to take a horse down in the Classic for drilling another horse out of the gate.
That's the reality of it.
Key words there SRU.....Reality.
Try it sometime.

[PhantomOnTour]

I believe Bayern should have come down.
His action at the start caused Shared Belief and Moreno to bump heads, and who knows what kind of damage that did.

Yes, I bet Toast Of New York

[nijinski]

Nice to see racing is getting the same credibility as WWE.
Wrestlemania is coming...maybe Bayern and Shared Belief can have a rematch.
Looks like Alphabet Soup after his Goodwood DQ at SA LOL !

[mostpost]

My first thought was that no DQ was correct, because I felt Shared Belief had ample chances to finish third and failed to do so. Then I realized that was not the question. The question was should he be placed third while Bayern was placed behind him. And wouldn't it be great if Toast of New York was also disqualified for even more egregious interference with Shared Belief and California Chrome won the race. Alas, after looking at the chart and watching the replay again, I could not justify that.

After the first quarter mile Shared Belief was outside and out of trouble. He was sixth, four lengths and a head from first. After a half mile he was four and a half lengths plus a head from first. After six furlongs he had improved slightly to be fifth three and a half lengths behind the leader. On the turn, when he should have been making his move he lost three lengths to all of the three leaders. Midway on the turn Shared Belief was right behind California Chrome. Within a sixteenth of a mile California Chrome opened that margin to three plus lengths. To be moved up Shared Belief should have cut into that three and a half length margin or at the very least maintained it.

[Mr_Ed]

My first thought was that no DQ was correct, because I felt Shared Belief had ample chances to finish third and failed to do so. Then I realized that was not the question. The question was should he be placed third while Bayern was placed behind him. And wouldn't it be great if Toast of New York was also disqualified for even more egregious interference with Shared Belief and California Chrome won the race. Alas, after looking at the chart and watching the replay again, I could not justify that.

After the first quarter mile Shared Belief was outside and out of trouble. He was sixth, four lengths and a head from first. After a half mile he was four and a half lengths plus a head from first. After six furlongs he had improved slightly to be fifth three and a half lengths behind the leader. On the turn, when he should have been making his move he lost three lengths to all of the three leaders. Midway on the turn Shared Belief was right behind California Chrome. Within a sixteenth of a mile California Chrome opened that margin to three plus lengths. To be moved up Shared Belief should have cut into that three and a half length margin or at the very least maintained it.

An NBA style flop would have ended all speculation.

Anyway, SB received an impact that would have DQ'd the offender at any juncture of the race...................except the start. :confused:

A real mosh pit.

[nijinski]

Surprised to see no objections from the jocks .

[JustRalph]

Are you saying Bayern was bearing in and Garcia was trying tom keep him straight ?

you implying that he did it on purpose is a load of crap. get real.

I actually think the horse should have been taken down. But the ruling is consistent with what they normally do. I also think that there might have been a case for taking the 2nd place horse down too.

But to imply that Garcia planned to come out of the gate like that .....come on?

[Smarty Cide]

NO DQ....


Shared Belief needs to muscle up a little

[Clocker]

But to imply that Garcia planned to come out of the gate like that .....come on?

Ditto. That could have been suicidal if things had gone just a little differently. One step slower by Beyern and he was toast.

[Mineshaft]

Shared Belief had every chance after the break to win the race. He didnt.

[Dark Horse]

Regardless of the decision, this type of foul play in the biggest race of the year is terrible for the reputation of the sport.

And Baffert has been on a mission since he retired Game On Dude, for which he blamed other horses... for not giving that one-dimensional speed a breather.

Immediately after that Bayern got an uncontested lead in the Pennsylvania Derby. In spite of the presence of California Chrome. You may want to rewatch that video.

The next week Fed Biz got an uncontested lead in the Awesome Again and nearly beat Shared Belief. This was the race where Espinosa (on Baffert-trained Sky Kingdom) was suspended for herding Shared Belief into the Santa Anita parking lot.

And, last but not least, the BC Classic, where Bayern leaves the gate like a bowling ball, and completely destroys the most anticipated race of the year. But hey, he did get the uncontested lead...

Third time's a charm. Baffert is little better than a bankrobber. Only they get life in prison after a 5 million heist.

[Stillriledup]

Regardless of the decision, this type of foul play in the biggest race of the year is terrible for the reputation of the sport.

And Baffert has been on a mission since he retired Game On Dude, for which he blamed other horses... for not giving that one-dimensional speed a breather.

Immediately after that Bayern got an uncontested lead in the Pennsylvania Derby. In spite of the presence of California Chrome. You may want to rewatch that video.

The next week Fed Biz got an uncontested lead in the Awesome Again and nearly beat Shared Belief. This was the race where Espinosa (on Baffert-trained Sky Kingdom) was suspended for herding Shared Belief into the Santa Anita parking lot.

And, last but not least, the BC Classic, where Bayern leaves the gate like a bowling ball, and completely destroys the most anticipated race of the year. But hey, he did get the uncontested lead...

Third time's a charm. Baffert is little better than a bankrobber. Only they get life in prison after a 5 million heist.

Here's one thing that nobody commented on, i just watched the head on again out of the gate. Garcia makes NO ATTEMPT to "correct". He just keeps barreling towards the fence....you would have to ask a steward about that, but i was under the impression that the judges give more of the benefit of the doubt to jocks who attempt to correct. This guy not only didnt correct, he just put his head down and kept lugging.

If this was a "gate infraction" do you get to keep beelining towards the fence? In other words, if you don't come out straight, can you take advantage of your "crookedness" and just keep angling and angling towards the inside.

You just gotta love Baffert too in the interview during the inquiry, he acted as if he did nothing wrong, there was no "geez, im a little worried, i did crash into the entire field" no, no worry, the guy acted as if it was an inconvenience that he had to wait around while thing thing is blinking.

Amazing.

[PaceAdvantage]

What did you want him to do? Pull up and lose all chance of winning?

You're talking about split second decision making. He's either going to lose the race via DQ or lose the race trying to straighten his horse out and risk giving up his position and advantage at that point. As a jockey, he did the best thing in a bad situation...in terms of trying to win.

[Stillriledup]

What did you want him to do? Pull up and lose all chance of winning?

You're talking about split second decision making. He's either going to lose the race via DQ or lose the race trying to straighten his horse out and risk giving up his position and advantage at that point. As a jockey, he did the best thing in a bad situation...in terms of trying to win.

He's obligated to try and pull his horse off rivals. He made no attempt, if there was another horse inside of him he would have crashed that horse too, he was a reckless regard for life and limb.

And the 3 blind mice bought it.

[ultracapper]

I thought Garcia made an effort to correct. He got up in the stirrups and was tugging hard on the right rein. I thought he was doing it as much for his personal safety as anything. HE could have gotten badly hurt if he wouldn't have corrected it in the time he did. We all worry about Smith's safety and SB's safety, but Garcia was definitely in a precarious spot himself.

I don't believe that there was any premeditation on Garcia's part to bear in like that, and kind of reluctantly, I agree there shouldn't have been any DQ. I know it affected the way the race was run, and ultimately probably finishing positions, but, like one poster said already, you can't assume Moreno, or any other horse, was going to compete on the engine with Bayern. Sure, that's Moreno's running style, but you can't assume he lost his chance to get the lead because of that. He may not have been able to get it anyway, or the connections may have decided that this was the day to sit off the front runner. You can't just assume that the start was the reason SB didn't fire either. This may have been the day, even if everything went perfect, that SB came up flat.

I did not bet the race. Except for the first 30 yards, I thought it was a great race. Was disappointed CC did not take advantage of his position at the 1/8th pole and get over the top. As he leveled out and it became apparent he wouldn't get by, I heard any chance of him winning HOY flush down the toilet.

[ultracapper]

I shouldn't have said tugging hard on his right rein. He was favoring it however.

[Thomas Roulston]

If this same thing happens in the Melbourne Cup on Tuesday you can bet - no pun intended! - that there will be a DQ. This "the foul has to cost the horse a placing" garbage doesn't play Down Under - and I say good for them!

[HUSKER55]

it was a large field filled with "dominant type horses" all vying for the rail.

that first 100 yards is mean in any race but in a quality race like this it can be brutal.

I watched the replay and I don't think the jockey did it deliberately.

I had shared belief and chrome so, obviously, yesterday I wanted the horse brought down.

oh well.....next

[MJC922]

IMO the winner should've been placed 4th, really shouldn't let that kind of interference go. The rider should be held blameless but the favorite's chances were really compromised. With that said I was shocked to see Smith wheel out early and gun up wide into the first turn like he had road rage or something, very poor ride IMO. If he just settled back in the pocket and sat chilly back there IMO he would've been challenging those three late. Very strange move for a top rider, I think he'd like to have that decision back.

[pandy]

it was a large field filled with "dominant type horses" all vying for the rail.

that first 100 yards is mean in any race but in a quality race like this it can be brutal.

I watched the replay and I don't think the jockey did it deliberately.

I had shared belief and chrome so, obviously, yesterday I wanted the horse brought down.

oh well.....next

I agree it wasn't deliberate, but it doesn't make any difference. It was clear and distinct interference and should have resulted in a dq.

[Hambletonian]

i thought he might come down since he interfered with the favorite, who came in 4th, and I don't feel it is honest to say the bumping did not cost him a placing, especially in a 5 mill race. Complicating is that Bayern's jock was yanking on the right rein, in an apparent attempt to look like he was trying to straighten him up, but you also get the impression he was hell bent on crossing over.

gate interference is a tricky situation. if they called it in QH racing you would have 3 DQs a race, and that is in races where the effect is critical. generally, in my lifetime it seems that gate interference is normally called when it is the result of a jockey causing it directly through recklessness, or complete incompetence in not alleviating it immediately.

[JohnGalt1]

Being brushed or jostled out of the gate is common and should be able to be overcome by competent horses.

But to be banged and sent 4 lengths over and into another horse is absolutely grounds for a disco in my opinion.

The two main reasons for disqualifying a horse are to protect jockeys and horses from injury, and protection for the betters :lol:

In reading all the racing forums, Paulick's site and Blood Horse about the Classic, I have a question----------

If the stewards DID disqualify Bayern, would there be as much criticism of that decision? Or would most say, that was an understandable decision?

[foregoforever]

The jockey's intent and actions should be immaterial in determining a DQ. These factors should only be considered in determining whether to sanction the jock.

Applying the "cost a placing" rule is not viable for gate incidents such as these, unless you're willing to give the stewards some tea leaves to make their judgements.

There should be two criteria for gate incidents. Was it an egregious foul, and did the fouler gain a significant advantage (or a foulee a significant disadvantage) as a result? As the cause of all this, the fouler should generally not be given the benefit of the doubt.

This foul was egregious, and it's hard to imagine any foul that would have been less advantageous to the fouler. He should have been DQ'd.

[mirageburbank]

I think that is the troubling difference. You can't assume that any horse would've went with Bayern.

However, due to the break, they were not allowed to go with Bayern. Allowed vs assumed is why I believe Bayern has to come down.

[Relwob Owner]

Question, and Im sorry if it has already been addressed: What is the official rule on infractions out of the gate in California? Everyone keeps saying horses get a pass in the first few strides but is that anywhere in writing or in the rules?

I think the biggest issue, which I think has been stated, is that if you are OK the first few strides, it then encourages jocks to do whatever they want, creating a very dangerous situation.

[Track Phantom]

This is not a debatable topic. Bayern eliminated 3 or 4 runners from the race at a critical point in the race (when early position was established). It was illegal and changed the outcome of the race. DQ.

Anything other than that is white noise.

[mirageburbank]

Excellent post

[magwell]

I shouldn't have said tugging hard on his right rein. He was favoring it however.It looked to me he tried hard to keep his horse to straighten up by pulling hard on the right rein .........:cool:

[Tommy Tom]

I know one thing Mike Smith is one pissed off dude.

got taken wide by Victor in the Awesome Again and now today. I would not want to be on the side of Mike in the near future for fear of him hitting someone with his whip. Dude is pissed off..

But did Mike Smith or Javier or any jockey lodge an OBJECTION? in addition to the stewards inquiry?

I watched the race on my NYRewards wagering account with the sound off so I do not know if the jockey's themselves lodged an objection.

All I do know is I was alive in the pk 3 and I needed Chrome to win so yeah I was hoping they would have taken them both down and moved up Chrome for the win.....but sweet dream is all that was and quite frankly CC did not deserve the win.

But no sour grapes from me as Chrome had the perfect position to pass the top two in the stretch and the fact is he didn't....

But late last evening I was reading some jockey comments on how they feel their horses getting crushed lost all chances in the race and that is what makes me ask did any jockey's officially OBJECT?

I would think if the jockey's objected the stewards decision would have possibly have a different outcome...

Which jockey's in the race lodged an Objection?

[NY BRED]

.

Bob Baffert interview after the race:

1:first jump out of the gate you can't control, 'they"(stewards)
usually allow(blink). Bayern was wiped out in the Preakness,
(so this is payback?).Anyone knowledgeable about this
rule?

2 I told Martin ,WHATEVER YOU DO, go to the Lead and
DON"T LOOK BACK.(in other words, don't appear guilty),ie
throw the gun away after the hit.

3.Don't like when they take so long to review a race.
(I bring a lot of money to this State)


Realistically, if SB or Moreno and/ or the jocks were injured, do you
believe the result stays? Secondly, if this is the 'general" rule,
you just created an arena for collusion and scams at
major and minor tracks.


Typically stewards forgive bumping incidents with Maidens , which clearly
is not justified in a Grade I race . Mike Smith clearly stated SB was severely
impacted after the break, but what the heck, Mr. B is a prominent trainer,
so lets continue the show, and screw horse of the year award for
Shared Belief.


:mad: :mad:

[Mineshaft]

The break reminded me of the break of the KY Derby when everyone is in a rush to get over and get position. It was like the KY Derby all over again but with less horses.

And there will be one KY derby when a horse falls coming out the break and jock gets tossed or hell maybe even 2 horses go down. Then what? Do they stop the race to take of the horse and jocks? The there would be no Derby if that happened.

[Relwob Owner]

This is not a debatable topic. Bayern eliminated 3 or 4 runners from the race at a critical point in the race (when early position was established). It was illegal and changed the outcome of the race. DQ.

Anything other than that is white noise.


I agree 100% with you but have yet to hear anything about a rule in place that actually backs up either side of the argument.

I also disagree with the general thought that because a race is "a big one"(Triple Crown, BC, etc) there should be less of a likelihood a horse will be taken down. Seems like in races with so much money on the line and so much prestige, the rules should be even more in place and enforced to ensure a fair result.

[MutuelClerk]

Baffert has always struck me as some sort of west coast mafia don. After watching the Awesome Again and yesterdays start of the Classic. Nothing has changed. He owns California.

[Tommy Tom]

"I think it cost me the race," Hall of Fame jockey Mike Smith said of the early tangle. "I was never able to get comfortable after getting hit at the break."

"The nine horse, Toast of New York, probably came over and did more damage 100 yards out of the gate," Baffert said. "The nine was doing more crushing back there than we did."

http://www.nola.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/11/breeders_cup_2014_bayern_wins.html

__

I wished they would have DQ both of them and moved CC to the top so I could have cashed in on my Pk 3 ticket

I just feel bad that CC had every chance to pass the two leaders in the stretch but he did not have it in him to do so yesterday...No excuse for his loss but I sure as heck would not complain about nailing the huge pk 3 due to two disqualifications :)

[Mineshaft]

"I think it cost me the race," Hall of Fame jockey Mike Smith said of the early tangle. "I was never able to get comfortable after getting hit at the break."

"The nine horse, Toast of New York, probably came over and did more damage 100 yards out of the gate," Baffert said. "The nine was doing more crushing back there than we did."

http://www.nola.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/11/breeders_cup_2014_bayern_wins.html

__

I wished they would have DQ both of them and moved CC to the top so I could have cashed in on my Pk 3 ticket

I just feel bad that CC had every chance to pass the two leaders in the stretch but he did not have it in him to do so yesterday...No excuse for his loss but I sure as heck would not complain about nailing the huge pk 3 due to two disqualifications :)





will pay to the 13?

[Tommy Tom]

will pay to the 13?

$2k for 50 cents

[Mineshaft]

$2k for 50 cents




that was a sweet payoff

[Track Phantom]

I agree 100% with you but have yet to hear anything about a rule in place that actually backs up either side of the argument.

Let's walk this backward logically.


Can (and do) the stewards DQ horses for actions immediately out of the gate? The answer is YES. Not my answer, the stewards answer. How do I know this? The sheer fact that they posted an inquiry is admission that events that occurred early in the race can warrant a DQ.
Did Bayern commit action that can be seen as DQ-worthy? YES. Again, the stewards indicated that "...Bayern took a sharp left and did impede horses". No one is disputing that he did that. We can all see. We went through 2nd grade. We don't need it to be interpreted. It happened and Bayern caused it to happen.
Once an illegal, DQ worthy event happens, does it matter who did what afterwards? NO. How can stewards or anyone for that matter, say with a straight face that they know how something that happened early in the race (and, in my opinion, at least in this race, at the most important time of the race, position establishment) had no bearing on the outcome. If anything, the exact opposite is true.
This whole thing is illogical and criminal. Bob Baffert has influence there and I believe it is the reason his horse wasn't DQ'd. I was sitting with Steve Davidowitz and he thought the DQ should have happened but felt it wasn't the Baffert effect but sheer incompetence. I disagree. Incompetence is not seeing the illegal action. This was a willing decision. Why the decision was made is open to interpretation. You know what my interpretation is.

[Relwob Owner]

Let's walk this backward logically.


Can (and do) the stewards DQ horses for actions immediately out of the gate? The answer is YES. Not my answer, the stewards answer. How do I know this? The sheer fact that they posted an inquiry is admission that events that occurred early in the race can warrant a DQ.
Did Bayern commit action that can be seen as DQ-worthy? YES. Again, the stewards indicated that "...Bayern took a sharp left and did impede horses". No one is disputing that he did that. We can all see. We went through 2nd grade. We don't need it to be interpreted. It happened and Bayern caused it to happen.
Once an illegal, DQ worthy event happens, does it matter who did what afterwards? NO. How can stewards or anyone for that matter, say with a straight face that they know how something that happened early in the race (and, in my opinion, at least in this race, at the most important time of the race, position establishment) had no bearing on the outcome. If anything, the exact opposite is true.
This whole thing is illogical and criminal. Bob Baffert has influence there and I believe it is the reason his horse wasn't DQ'd. I was sitting with Steve Davidowitz and he thought the DQ should have happened but felt it wasn't the Baffert effect but sheer incompetence. I disagree. Incompetence is not seeing the illegal action. This was a willing decision. Why the decision was made is open to interpretation. You know what my interpretation is.


There have been many posts on here but that is by far the best and thanks for the info. My interpretation is the same. Between this and the enforcement of trainer violations, it sometimes makes me wonder why I put up with this game.

[The WindfallAngler]

Had to be DQd. I didn't even think it would be a question, and then you see the inquiry lifted and no change of order.

I don't know what argument anybody can make to not DQ Bayern. A gutless decision.
Works for me.

[Mr_Ed]

Works for me.

Yup. This was MUCH MORE than the typical Mr Ed Friday night bump 'n grind.

[Stillriledup]

Here's what i have a problem with.

There are mostly 2 things a jockey could be thinking as he's entering the gate. One thing is that i have a specific plan on what i want to do when the gates open and the other thing is i have no real plan i'm just going to get out of there in 1 piece and see where the wind takes me.

If you have the "Wind takes me" theory of riding, and you come out of the gate crooked, its 50/50 to which way your horse is going to veer. Its a coin flip because you dont have a plan, and you can't predict sometimes where 1,000+ pound kegs of dynamite are going to veer once that gate opens, so its really random as to which way you're going to veer, if you do happen to veer.

BUT, if you have a specific plan to get the lead and get over to the rail, the veering you do isn't random, it wasn't sheer coincidence that Bayern drifted inward and not outward, his jock had a specific plan and part of the plan was to get the lead and get over to the rail and get around Moreno as soon as you can, so his veering in and crashing was just a miscalculation on his part.

Now, if you want to give leeway to accidental gate mishaps that's one thing, but when you start giving the same leeway to a jock who had intent to get over to the rail and he miscalculates his distance between his rivals, i don't know if that deserves to have the same "leeway" attached to it.

[The WindfallAngler]

I thought Garcia made an effort to correct. He got up in the stirrups and was tugging hard on the right rein. I thought he was doing it as much for his personal safety as anything. HE could have gotten badly hurt if he wouldn't have corrected it in the time he did. We all worry about Smith's safety and SB's safety, but Garcia was definitely in a precarious spot himself.

I don't believe that there was any premeditation on Garcia's part to bear in like that, and kind of reluctantly, I agree there shouldn't have been any DQ. I know it affected the way the race was run, and ultimately probably finishing positions, but, like one poster said already, you can't assume Moreno, or any other horse, was going to compete on the engine with Bayern. Sure, that's Moreno's running style, but you can't assume he lost his chance to get the lead because of that. He may not have been able to get it anyway, or the connections may have decided that this was the day to sit off the front runner. You can't just assume that the start was the reason SB didn't fire either. This may have been the day, even if everything went perfect, that SB came up flat.

I did not bet the race. Except for the first 30 yards, I thought it was a great race. Was disappointed CC did not take advantage of his position at the 1/8th pole and get over the top. As he leveled out and it became apparent he wouldn't get by, I heard any chance of him winning HOY flush down the toilet.To the contrary. Chrome's close third may be good enough for HoY honors, on balance [and in view of his two prior starts (which were unambiguous lineouts)].

To some extent, my sympathies are with the backers, and connections of Shared Belief. Who lost all chance (but who can't be crowned deserving in absentia ).

The one colt you CAN't elevate to HoY ...is Bayern ...who MAY even be best, but is plainly no victor, not after these spoils.

[Robert Fischer]

If it was up to me ( :D ):

1. Bayern stays up.

2. The press release from judges says: "He smashed those other horses and probably cost them any chance, but we don't usually DQ a horse out of the gate in big races".

3. A rules committee reviews the interpretation and decides to DQ horses in that situation but only based on odds. (example: a 2-1 shot smashes a 7-1 shot right out of the gate? - No DQ. ... or a 7-1 smashes a 2-1 right out of the gate? -yes DQ.

4. New Rule interpretation is announced publicly and set in motion starting the "winter" meets.

5. I hire SRU to be my assistant.

[Dark Horse]

Other speed sports have false starts. It wouldn't be ideal, from an energy perspective, but why not have an immediate red flag up that would make the field stop racing within a furlong?

[Stillriledup]

If it was up to me ( :D ):

1. Bayern stays up.

2. The press release from judges says: "He smashed those other horses and probably cost them any chance, but we don't usually DQ a horse out of the gate in big races".

3. A rules committee reviews the interpretation and decides to DQ horses in that situation but only based on odds. (example: a 2-1 shot smashes a 7-1 shot right out of the gate? - No DQ. ... or a 7-1 smashes a 2-1 right out of the gate? -yes DQ.

4. New Rule interpretation is announced publicly and set in motion starting the "winter" meets.

5. I hire SRU to be my assistant.
:jump: :jump: :jump:

[dilanesp]

Let's walk this backward logically.


Can (and do) the stewards DQ horses for actions immediately out of the gate? The answer is YES. Not my answer, the stewards answer. How do I know this? The sheer fact that they posted an inquiry is admission that events that occurred early in the race can warrant a DQ.
Did Bayern commit action that can be seen as DQ-worthy? YES. Again, the stewards indicated that "...Bayern took a sharp left and did impede horses". No one is disputing that he did that. We can all see. We went through 2nd grade. We don't need it to be interpreted. It happened and Bayern caused it to happen.
Once an illegal, DQ worthy event happens, does it matter who did what afterwards? NO. How can stewards or anyone for that matter, say with a straight face that they know how something that happened early in the race (and, in my opinion, at least in this race, at the most important time of the race, position establishment) had no bearing on the outcome. If anything, the exact opposite is true.
This whole thing is illogical and criminal. Bob Baffert has influence there and I believe it is the reason his horse wasn't DQ'd. I was sitting with Steve Davidowitz and he thought the DQ should have happened but felt it wasn't the Baffert effect but sheer incompetence. I disagree. Incompetence is not seeing the illegal action. This was a willing decision. Why the decision was made is open to interpretation. You know what my interpretation is.

2 is wrong. Your mistake is the syllogism "stewards DQ out of the gate, this was a foul committed out of the gate, therefore DQ".

The problem is stewards don't DQ for THIS out of the gate. And by "this" I mean stuff that costs horses a few lengths but leave them within striking distance of contention so that they still have a reasonable opportunity to make a run to win the race.

The reason stewards don't DQ is because they are only allowed, by statute, to DQ when they believe that the interference cost a horse a placing.

Shared Belief lost a few lengths, but still had every opportunity to win the race or get third. He failed to rally and finished a well-beaten 4th. So there's no basis for a DQ.

Moreno didn't do anything either, so there's no reason to think the interference cost him a placing. (And the stewards aren't allowed to assume that Moreno would have cooked Bayern on the pace either. They don't know what the jockey's tactics were going to be or whether they would have worked.)

So there's no basis for a disqualification.

[Stillriledup]

2 is wrong. Your mistake is the syllogism "stewards DQ out of the gate, this was a foul committed out of the gate, therefore DQ".

The problem is stewards don't DQ for THIS out of the gate. And by "this" I mean stuff that costs horses a few lengths but leave them within striking distance of contention so that they still have a reasonable opportunity to make a run to win the race.

The reason stewards don't DQ is because they are only allowed, by statute, to DQ when they believe that the interference cost a horse a placing.

Shared Belief lost a few lengths, but still had every opportunity to win the race or get third. He failed to rally and finished a well-beaten 4th. So there's no basis for a DQ.

Moreno didn't do anything either, so there's no reason to think the interference cost him a placing. (And the stewards aren't allowed to assume that Moreno would have cooked Bayern on the pace either. They don't know what the jockey's tactics were going to be or whether they would have worked.)

So there's no basis for a disqualification.

I don't think the "statute" gives them a chance to interject their opinion in this case, there might be a rule that says if intereference happens early in the race its treated differently than interference at the wire. Its obvious that SB was hampered in some way, but i believe that they can't guess, there has to be a situation where they can know for sure that it cost him a placing...like, for example, if SB was roaring out of his mind at the wire and finished 4th and lost the race by 1/2 length. THAN, they make a change, but i dont think they're allowed to guess that SB might have been able to finish in the top 3 if such and such would have happened, i think in order to get rewarded, by rule, you have to be gaining rapidly at the wire and or finish very close up to a board spot for them to consider it.

[NY BRED]

to quote Jerry Stiller, "serenity now, serenity now".

Mike Smith ,interviewed immediately after the race claimed he
lost the race due to the bump with Bayern.

The stewards state Smith ,when questioned if the bump
cost him the race counters "it would be hard to say"

really, this speaks legends about the integrity of a
jockey who stated, on national television he lost the race due to the
bumping with Bayern.

Jerry Hollander tells the press you saw what happened...

inevitably money talks , why risk losing mounts from
good ol' Bob..

[dilanesp]

I don't think the "statute" gives them a chance to interject their opinion in this case, there might be a rule that says if intereference happens early in the race its treated differently than interference at the wire. Its obvious that SB was hampered in some way, but i believe that they can't guess, there has to be a situation where they can know for sure that it cost him a placing...like, for example, if SB was roaring out of his mind at the wire and finished 4th and lost the race by 1/2 length. THAN, they make a change, but i dont think they're allowed to guess that SB might have been able to finish in the top 3 if such and such would have happened, i think in order to get rewarded, by rule, you have to be gaining rapidly at the wire and or finish very close up to a board spot for them to consider it.

That's correct. I think if SB had been up there with the other 3, The :7: would have been taken down. The other scenario would have been if a horse was completely wiped out (lost rider, or ended up hopelessly behind the rest of the field).

[nijinski]

No objections from not one jockey . That doesn't help anything but a
courtesy to a trainer who can and has in the past , given a them a
shot on a million dollar baby .

[nijinski]

to quote Jerry Stiller, "serenity now, serenity now".

Mike Smith ,interviewed immediately after the race claimed he
lost the race due to the bump with Bayern.

The stewards state Smith ,when questioned if the bump
cost him the race counters "it would be hard to say"

really, this speaks legends about the integrity of a
jockey who stated, on national television he lost the race due to the
bumping with Bayern.

Jerry Hollander tells the press you saw what happened...

inevitably money talks , why risk losing mounts from
good ol' Bob..

All true didn't see you wrote this and my post is similar .

Headlines today could have read differently .
Bayern gets his second DQ in a little over 6 months .
Lucky for Baffert , he doesn't get another win come down .

[Stillriledup]

No objections from not one jockey . That doesn't help anything but a
courtesy to a trainer who can and has in the past , given a them a
shot on a million dollar baby .

Exactly. If Smith objects against Bob than Bob might just forget to put him on the next rocket ship.

Its politics, i can't really blame Smith, most of us probably would have done the same thing.

[pandy]

Jockeys rarely claim an objection when there is an inquiry. It's not necessary and doesn't help. The judges are already reviewing the incident.

[Stillriledup]

Jockeys rarely claim an objection when there is an inquiry. It's not necessary and doesn't help. The judges are already reviewing the incident.

Back in the day, when i was learning this game from the ground up, i believed (maybe wrongly so) that if there was an inquiry AND an objection, there was more of a chance for there to be a DQ. So, i thought that jocks objected to really emphasize to the judges that they feel they were wronged.

[pandy]

Wouldn't have mattered, anyway. The judges put the inquiry sign up just to make it look like they were doing their job, but they weren't. It was all for show. They had no intention of making the correct call.

[Stillriledup]

Wouldn't have mattered, anyway. The judges put the inquiry sign up just to make it look like they were doing their job, but they weren't. It was all for show. They had no intention of making the correct call.

Can't argue.

[dilanesp]

Wouldn't have mattered, anyway. The judges put the inquiry sign up just to make it look like they were doing their job, but they weren't. It was all for show. They had no intention of making the correct call.

Their intention was to make the correct call, and they made it.

And it was also correct to have an inquiry, and having an inquiry when the incident is high profile is not "for show". Most inquiries don't result in disqualification.

[pandy]

Everyone I've spoken to who I consider to be an expert on racing agrees that Bayern should have been disqualified. Richard Migliore called it correctly on HRTV.

[nijinski]

Jockeys rarely claim an objection when there is an inquiry. It's not necessary and doesn't help. The judges are already reviewing the incident.
Been around a while and I've seen my share of both .

[ILovetheInner]

The SA feed commentators I had on thought he was coming down, including Mig who I assume would know more than any of us when it comes to acceptably clean race riding. In terms of no objections, I would imagine your focus is intense straight on coming out of the gate and all in a line you might not know why you got slammed into in terms of a chain reaction.

[dilanesp]

The SA feed commentators I had on thought he was coming down, including Mig who I assume would know more than any of us when it comes to acceptably clean race riding. In terms of no objections, I would imagine your focus is intense straight on coming out of the gate and all in a line you might not know why you got slammed into in terms of a chain reaction.

Migliore never rode here except for an occasional shipper, and does not work for Santa Anita. He knows less than the average California horseplayer about our rules.

[Tom]

He rode at least a full meet there. He was the leading rider on the downhill turf course.

[ILovetheInner]

Migliore never rode here except for an occasional shipper, and does not work for Santa Anita. He knows less than the average California horseplayer about our rules.

He is a rider who felt he saw a horse who initially bore in when the gates sprung but after an initial response felt the rider seized the moment and allowed his mount to cross over on his competitors. The ruling had not been made yet. I don't know who was the co-anchor...I believe it was Scott Hazelton....but as soon as the horses passed the wire he said great ride but "at what cost."

To be honest, at that moment I had missed the commotion, for I was looking at the outside horses. The "at what cost" comment obviously pricked my ears, and from there during the tape analysis there was much talk of what happened at the break, with Mig giving his assessment of the ride, and why to him it was damning in terms of efforts applied to right the horse.

What are the CA rules? Is the break a free for all? Must be a pretty easy job out there.

[the little guy]

Migliore never rode here except for an occasional shipper, and does not work for Santa Anita. He knows less than the average California horseplayer about our rules.


At least you're consistent....consistently wrong.

Mig rode in CA for over a year.

Keep up the bad work.

[dilanesp]

At least you're consistent....consistently wrong.

Mig rode in CA for over a year.

Keep up the bad work.

I stand corrected. He rode here for a bit in 2008. He obviously wasn't very successful as I didn't remember it.

Still the majority of his career was in New York. He is definitely no expert on California racing. And his commentary after the BC Classic was idiotic. Did he bet on the 9 or the 6?

[cj]

I stand corrected. He rode here for a bit in 2008. He obviously wasn't very successful as I didn't remember it.

Still the majority of his career was in New York. He is definitely no expert on California racing. And his commentary after the BC Classic was idiotic. Did he bet on the 9 or the 6?

Mig doesn't bet, he states so often on National Racing Report.

[ILovetheInner]

And his commentary after the BC Classic was idiotic. Did he bet on the 9 or the 6?

I don't know how you can call it "idiotic." He was commenting on how the horse was ridden out of the gate, with some attention paid to differences between not being able to control what a horse does versus what a jockey can do (and how quickly) to correct in the aftermath. I assume it is safe to say he knows what he is talking about. How many races have you ridden? If the answer is a presumed "none," then I don't know how you call it idiotic. He was offering a jockey's perspective on what happened coming out of the gate, not commenting on the stewards' decision, which had not occurred.

[ILovetheInner]

I stand corrected. He rode here for a bit in 2008. He obviously wasn't very successful as I didn't remember it.

Won the George Wolfe Award while there and won the Pacific Classic, Kilroe Mile and Norfolk in 2007, so I guess you were blinking then.

[the little guy]

I stand corrected. He rode here for a bit in 2008. He obviously wasn't very successful as I didn't remember it.

Still the majority of his career was in New York. He is definitely no expert on California racing. And his commentary after the BC Classic was idiotic. Did he bet on the 9 or the 6?


What you are is someone who doesn't even follow racing seriously, he rode WAY more than a "bit in 2008", even in the State you claim to live in, yet feel comfortable hypothesizing ad finitum about racing and racing jurisdictions you know absolutely nothing about. You try to pass yourself off as some sort of expert, yet you don't even have the courtesy to be informed about what you endlessly pontificate about.

[Scanman]

I stand corrected. He rode here for a bit in 2008. He obviously wasn't very successful as I didn't remember it.

Still the majority of his career was in New York. He is definitely no expert on California racing. And his commentary after the BC Classic was idiotic. Did he bet on the 9 or the 6?delanesp - just curious, do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing. What is your role there?

Migliore never rode here except for an occasional shipper, and does not work for Santa Anita. He knows less than the average California horseplayer about our rules.Also, you sound somewhat foolish when you make a statement like this. Migliore has over 30,00 starts (4,450) wins.

How many races have you ridden? If the answer is a presumed "none," then I don't know how you call it idiotic. He was offering a jockey's perspective on what happened coming out of the gate, not commenting on the stewards' decision, which had not occurred.Great question? Like you, I'm looking forward to the answer.

[thaskalos]

At least you're consistent....consistently wrong.

Mig rode in CA for over a year.

Keep up the bad work.

He is even more consistent than you think. He is consistently wrong when he discusses poker here as well.

[dilanesp]

delanesp - just curious, do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing. What is your role there?

Also, you sound somewhat foolish when you make a statement like this. Migliore has over 30,00 starts (4,450) wins.

Great question? Like you, I'm looking forward to the answer.

Being a rider does't make one either a good television announcer or an expert on California stewards' rulings.

Ever watch football on television? It's full of former players. Some of them are very good commentators. Others are not.

The best baseball pitcher in history, Sandy Koufax, was an awful television announcer.

Migliore's comments on that telecast were completely ignorant. He literally has NO idea if he thinks that the reason why they didn't disqualify is it was a $5 million race. NO idea. That sort of thing happens all the time in non-5 million dollar races in California and there is no DQ.

I don't care how many races he won. He acted like a complete idiot on that telecast. Maybe he was trying to sound edgy and controversial, maybe he had a bet. But he sounded like an idiot.

You don't either need a Ph.D. or any sort of honesty or integrity to get on the back of horses and ride them. Migliore is evidence of that.

[dilanesp]

He is even more consistent than you think. He is consistently wrong when he discusses poker here as well.

I'm almost certainly one of the best limit hold 'em players on PA. (Because I'm in the top 4 percent of regular players, and have the stats to prove that.)

Do you have an example of me being wrong on poker here?

[dilanesp]

Won the George Wolfe Award while there and won the Pacific Classic, Kilroe Mile and Norfolk in 2007, so I guess you were blinking then.

The Woolf award, which you misspelled, is meaningless. It is regularly given to non-California jockeys.

But you are implying he was here a long time. He wasn't.

[dilanesp]

I don't know how you can call it "idiotic." He was commenting on how the horse was ridden out of the gate, with some attention paid to differences between not being able to control what a horse does versus what a jockey can do (and how quickly) to correct in the aftermath. I assume it is safe to say he knows what he is talking about. How many races have you ridden? If the answer is a presumed "none," then I don't know how you call it idiotic. He was offering a jockey's perspective on what happened coming out of the gate, not commenting on the stewards' decision, which had not occurred.

His comment on what the stewards should do was the idiotic part. He said there was a different standard for a $5 million race. That's not true, and if he was actually the "expert" on California racing you guys say he is he would have known that. The people on this board from California-- NOT JUST ME-- are all telling you this. We obviously do know more than Migliore about this subject (or Migliore was being dishonest for the purpose of entertaining the public).

[wiffleball whizz]

I'm almost certainly one of the best limit hold 'em players on PA. (Because I'm in the top 4 percent of regular players, and have the stats to prove that.)

Do you have an example of me being wrong on poker here?

Let's get some details.....

Highly doubt your a better player then proximity.....kid is crushing 3/6 like it's cotton candy.....and if you can beat that game you can beat any game

I have great contacts in many jurisdictions I can certainly make a call to verify what you claim

[Scanman]

Being a rider does't make one either a good television announcer or an expert on California stewards' rulings.

Ever watch football on television? It's full of former players. Some of them are very good commentators. Others are not.

The best baseball pitcher in history, Sandy Koufax, was an awful television announcer.

Migliore's comments on that telecast were completely ignorant. He literally has NO idea if he thinks that the reason why they didn't disqualify is it was a $5 million race. NO idea. That sort of thing happens all the time in non-5 million dollar races in California and there is no DQ.

I don't care how many races he won. He acted like a complete idiot on that telecast. Maybe he was trying to sound edgy and controversial, maybe he had a bet. But he sounded like an idiot.

You don't either need a Ph.D. or any sort of honesty or integrity to get on the back of horses and ride them. Migliore is evidence of that.Okay, you have an uncomplimentary opinion of Migliore as a rider and analyst. But the questions still stand:

Do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing and its rules. If so, what is your role there?

Have you ever ridden in a race and if so where, how many starts/wins?

[dilanesp]

Let's get some details.....

Highly doubt your a better player then proximity.....kid is crushing 3/6 like it's cotton candy.....and if you can beat that game you can beat any game

I have great contacts in many jurisdictions I can certainly make a call to verify what you claim

3/6 online or 3/6 live?

I did more than fine in 20/40 live and 1/2 online.

To be more specific, I am a net 1BB/hour online and a net .5BB/hour live, and am pretty well known in the LA poker community.

[dilanesp]

Okay, you have an uncomplimentary opinion of Migliore as a rider and analyst. But the questions still stand:

Do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing and its rules. If so, what is your role there?

Have you ever ridden in a race and if so where, how many starts/wins?

I obviously haven't ridden. But the relevant qualification here isn't riding- it's having been a steward, and having seen stewards' decisions in California. Neither me or Mig have been a California steward, and I have seen about 30 years more of California racing than he has.

[Scanman]

I obviously haven't ridden. But the relevant qualification here isn't riding- it's having been a steward, and having seen stewards' decisions in California. Neither me or Mig have been a California steward, and I have seen about 30 years more of California racing than he has.Okay, but you keep ducking the question:

Do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing and its rules. If so, what is your role there?

[dilanesp]

Okay, but you keep ducking the question:

Do you have a position with CHRB? You seem to know a lot about CA racing and its rules. If so, what is your role there?

I have no position with the CHRB. I have read a lot of California stewards rulings in connection with a former potential client and also in connection with my handicapling, and I know the rules relating to DQ's pretty well (and the prevailing practices very well).

[Stillriledup]

Being a rider does't make one either a good television announcer or an expert on California stewards' rulings.

Ever watch football on television? It's full of former players. Some of them are very good commentators. Others are not.

The best baseball pitcher in history, Sandy Koufax, was an awful television announcer.

Migliore's comments on that telecast were completely ignorant. He literally has NO idea if he thinks that the reason why they didn't disqualify is it was a $5 million race. NO idea. That sort of thing happens all the time in non-5 million dollar races in California and there is no DQ.

I don't care how many races he won. He acted like a complete idiot on that telecast. Maybe he was trying to sound edgy and controversial, maybe he had a bet. But he sounded like an idiot.

You don't either need a Ph.D. or any sort of honesty or integrity to get on the back of horses and ride them. Migliore is evidence of that.

You're putting this pretty bluntly, but i agree that having been on the back of a horse doesn't make you an expert in any other field other than actually riding horses.

[Scanman]

Why not just ask what's your first and last name? :D
Cut right to the chase.This poster seems to be an expert on racing stewardship. I could care less what his name is. I'd just like to know what his motivation is for his unwavering support of the SA stewards, who absolutely "screwed the pooch" on Saturday.

[Scanman]

I have no position with the CHRB. I have read a lot of California stewards rulings in connection with a former potential client and also in connection with my handicapling, and I know the rules relating to DQ's pretty well (and the prevailing practices very well).Thanks. I was hoping you had a level of expertise (you don't) that could make a compelling enough argument to help me see where I might be wrong about the Classic's decision, but you haven't; nor despite my detailed support for the DQ, I haven't convinced you. Guess, we'll have to leave it at that. Good on you, though.

[dilanesp]

Thanks. I was hoping you had a level of expertise (you don't) that could make a compelling enough argument to help me see where I might be wrong about the Classic's decision, but you haven't; nor despite my detailed support for the DQ, I haven't convinced you. Guess, we'll have to leave it at that. Good on you, though.

You are looking for the wrong sort of authority

Say you wanted to know how fast you could drive I-5 between the Grapevine and Sacramento without getting a ticket. Would you ask a CHP officer?

[the little guy]

I obviously haven't ridden. But the relevant qualification here isn't riding- it's having been a steward, and having seen stewards' decisions in California. Neither me or Mig have been a California steward, and I have seen about 30 years more of California racing than he has.

Yet didn't even know that he was a regular rider in CA for an extended period of time.

The BS meter just blew up.

Let me guess, you do REALLY well with the ladies too?

[thaskalos]

I'm almost certainly one of the best limit hold 'em players on PA. (Because I'm in the top 4 percent of regular players, and have the stats to prove that.)

Do you have an example of me being wrong on poker here?

I don't doubt that...because you might be the ONLY limit holdem player on PA.

And yes...of COURSE I have an example of you being wrong about poker here. Weren't you the guy who kept saying that online poker was a "bubble" which eventually had to burst? And when I pointed out to you that online poker was enormously popular when the government effectively killed it...instead of admitting that you were wrong with your "bubble" comparison...you took the conversation down a different path -- by pointing out how much more difficult to beat the game had become. "It takes 25 losers to support one winner"...you said, "and, since these losers eventually start dropping out of the game, the 'bubble' bursts".

All this is nonsense, of course, because we all know that online poker would STILL be enormously popular, if the government didn't interfere with it. Gambling "bubbles" don't burst because the games get more difficult to beat. They burst only because of oversaturation. Casino gambling is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to beat, and yet, the casino industry remained vibrant up until casinos popped up in every town. COMPETITION kills gambling games...not some winners/losers ratio that some know-it-all thinks up.

I haven't seen you admit that you were wrong even once...even though you've been wrong consistently. Even when it was pointed out to you that you were wrong about Migliore's tenure in California...your admission of making a mistake was conditional. Typical...

[dilanesp]

Yet didn't even know that he was a regular rider in CA for an extended period of time.

The BS meter just blew up.

Let me guess, you do REALLY well with the ladies too?

He didn't ride here for an extended period of time. It was about 1/20th of his career.

[Scanman]

You are looking for the wrong sort of authority

Say you wanted to know how fast you could drive I-5 between the Grapevine and Sacramento without getting a ticket. Would you ask a CHP officer?No worries, dil. You've really got "stuck in" on this topic in many threads and I thought you might have an advanced level of expertise on the subject. I wasn't looking for authority, just expertise (you don't have any). It's all good though, I enjoyed the banter.

[the little guy]

He didn't ride here for an extended period of time. It was about 1/20th of his career.

More BS deflecting.

Your credibility is shot.

[thaskalos]

He didn't ride here for an extended period of time. It was about 1/20th of his career.
1/20th of his career! What a joke you are. You said you didn't even notice him BEING there.

Too bad I can't meet you across a poker table. With observational skills like these...you'd be toast against a "real" poker player.

[dilanesp]

No worries, dil. You've really got "stuck in" on this topic in many threads and I thought you might have an advanced level of expertise on the subject. I wasn't looking for authority, just expertise (you don't have any). It's all good though, I enjoyed the banter.

You don't think having been to the track and seen stewards rulings hundreds of times, and having read the rules, constitutes expertise? You are, with respect, confusing it with authority.

[dilanesp]

1/20th of his career! What a joke you are. You said you didn't even notice him BEING there.

Too bad I can't meet you across a poker table. With observational skills like these...you'd be toast against a "real" poker player.

It's true. I didn't remember him here. Because he spent most of his career in New York.

If you think that one has to have a perfect memory of every jockey who temporarily rode here, that's silly.

[Stillriledup]

This poster seems to be an expert on racing stewardship. I could care less what his name is. I'd just like to know what his motivation is for his unwavering support of the SA stewards, who absolutely "screwed the pooch" on Saturday.

I think the more pressing issue isn't his knowledge on stewardship, its the constant defending of the "Establishment" and not defending the player. There are also a few other posters in here who seem to always side with the track, or the trainers, or owners and never defend the rights of the player.

[dilanesp]

I think the more pressing issue isn't his knowledge on stewardship, its the constant defending of the "Establishment" and not defending the player. There are also a few other posters in here who seem to always side with the track, or the trainers, or owners and never defend the rights of the player.

I plead semi guilty to this. I probably do defend the establishment too much.

But is this really a "player's" issue? It depends on who you bet, right?

[Stillriledup]

I plead semi guilty to this. I probably do defend the establishment too much.

But is this really a "player's" issue? It depends on who you bet, right?

Its an establishment issue if you defend the stewards no matter what they decide. If you're an "establishment guy" and you come to argue that the judges made the right call in this case, it looks like just another pro establishment post. Now, if you can show posts that you've made in the past that criticize judges and say they made a bad call, that would be considered an anti establishment post. Do you have many posts like this?

[castaway01]

Its an establishment issue if you defend the stewards no matter what they decide. If you're an "establishment guy" and you come to argue that the judges made the right call in this case, it looks like just another pro establishment post. Now, if you can show posts that you've made in the past that criticize judges and say they made a bad call, that would be considered an anti establishment post. Do you have many posts like this?

There is no one with less credibility on this topic than you.

No one.

[Tom]

Being a rider does't make one either a good television announcer or an expert on California stewards' rulings.

Neither does being an anonymous internet poster.

[Bigadam119]

I just watched the NBC version again and in the slow mo of the start it appears that Martin Garcia is trying hard to pull Bayern back outside.

[Bigadam119]

Still of start
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUs7KlD8o0s#t=283

[cj]

I just watched the NBC version again and in the slow mo of the start it appears that Martin Garcia is trying hard to pull Bayern back outside.

Of course he is, but people see what they want to see.

[Tom]

Mig shows up in my DB from Nov 06 to Nov 09 with 1300 starts.
Or don't we care now because you have already abandoned that argument? :D

[Tom]

I just watched the NBC version again and in the slow mo of the start it appears that Martin Garcia is trying hard to pull Bayern back outside.

FYI...Roger Stein had the steward, Channey (sp?) and Baffert on his Sunday show.

[Bettowin]

On such a big day with so much money on the line why even use the track stewards? Bring in an official BC steward crew made up of the best like they do in other sports?

[Stillriledup]

On such a big day with so much money on the line why even use the track stewards? Bring in an official BC steward crew made up of the best like they do in other sports?

If they brought in the Charlestown stewards we would have had a DQ for sure.

[Dark Horse]

Turn up the sound and you can actually hear Baffert saying to Garcia, in the seconds before the press conference starts: "the ground broke out under him." And Garcia gives a quick nod.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/11815381/santa-anita-steward-explains-breeders-cup-classic-ruling

Not to ask the obvious question... Why does the trainer tell the rider who was on the horse what happened at the start?

When Garcia is asked what happened, around the 2:25 mark, he replies "well, uh, like he's (Baffert) saying, the ground broke... "

[ultracapper]

Of course he is, but people see what they want to see.
My first impression, right after the start, before the race was over and all the hubbub, was that he tried to straighten him. I saw him stand up almost all the way in the stirrups and pull on the right rein. My initial, reflex reaction was that he was kind of defensive, like he was saving his own neck. Garcia's first reflexive actions looked very self-perservatory to me. I thought HE was in danger at that split second, and thought he was saving his own neck. That was my very first, split second impression. He was startled.

[JustRalph]

I don't know why Baffert and crew would even talk about what happen? The race is official, it's a done deal. Refer anybody/everybody to the stewards......have a nice day

[nijinski]

I don't know why Baffert and crew would even talk about what happen? The race is official, it's a done deal. Refer anybody/everybody to the stewards......have a nice day

LOL Did you see him whispering to Garcia at the press conference .
Likely was "let me do the talking " . Cause "did" most of it !

[nijinski]

Turn up the sound and you can actually hear Baffert saying to Garcia, in the seconds before the press conference starts: "the ground broke out under him." And Garcia gives a quick nod.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/11815381/santa-anita-steward-explains-breeders-cup-classic-ruling

Not to ask the obvious question... Why does the trainer tell the rider who was on the horse what happened at the start?

When Garcia is asked what happened, around the 2:25 mark, he replies "well, uh, like he's (Baffert) saying, the ground broke... "

I just saw this and you're right , he did say that .

[Poindexter]

Turn up the sound and you can actually hear Baffert saying to Garcia, in the seconds before the press conference starts: "the ground broke out under him." And Garcia gives a quick nod.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/11815381/santa-anita-steward-explains-breeders-cup-classic-ruling

Not to ask the obvious question... Why does the trainer tell the rider who was on the horse what happened at the start?

When Garcia is asked what happened, around the 2:25 mark, he replies "well, uh, like he's (Baffert) saying, the ground broke... "

Worthy or a thread of it's own. His rider just wins the Breeders Cup Classic and he has a muzzle on him. I tried to make out the words like you did, could not conclusively come up with anything(with the announcer being so loud), though it did sound something like you said, so I will assume you were able to discern the words better than I was able to(other poster Nijinsky verified). Baffert was so full of ****, just bsing through the press conference. He should run for Congress. Clearly did not want his Jockey saying anything. What the heck is he trying to hide? His behavior certainly seems more consistent with the gate incident being plannned or the stewards making their decision under his influence. I just do not see why he would be so secretive otherwise. Makes no sense.

[Stillriledup]

Turn up the sound and you can actually hear Baffert saying to Garcia, in the seconds before the press conference starts: "the ground broke out under him." And Garcia gives a quick nod.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/11815381/santa-anita-steward-explains-breeders-cup-classic-ruling

Not to ask the obvious question... Why does the trainer tell the rider who was on the horse what happened at the start?

When Garcia is asked what happened, around the 2:25 mark, he replies "well, uh, like he's (Baffert) saying, the ground broke... "

Sounds like a trainer jockey relationship where the Jock is on his own and "doing what he wants".

:faint:

[thaskalos]

Worthy or a thread of it's own. His rider just wins the Breeders Cup Classic and he has a muzzle on him. I tried to make out the words like you did, could not conclusively come up with anything(with the announcer being so loud), though it did sound something like you said, so I will assume you were able to discern the words better than I was able to(other poster Nijinsky verified). Baffert was so full of ****, just bsing through the press conference. He should run for Congress. Clearly did not want his Jockey saying anything. What the heck is he trying to hide? His behavior certainly seems more consistent with the gate incident being plannned or the stewards making their decision under his influence. I just do not see why he would be so secretive otherwise. Makes no sense.

Oh, come on. What does Baffert have to hide? His jockey did all he could to straighten out the horse, for heaven's sake. Haven't you guys been listening to Cj? :)

[badcompany]

Much in the same way an NFL Ref can call holding on every play, a steward can find a foul at the start of a every race.

While this one was pretty blatant, way more often than not the horse doesn't come down, especially in a race of this magnitude.

[dilanesp]

On such a big day with so much money on the line why even use the track stewards? Bring in an official BC steward crew made up of the best like they do in other sports?

Horse racing is state regulated legalized gambling. The stewards are state officials appointed pursuant to state law. The bettors are entitled to stewards who are accountable to state officials.

Unless they want to hold betless exhibitions, this is non - negotiable.

[dilanesp]

Mig shows up in my DB from Nov 06 to Nov 09 with 1300 starts.
Or don't we care now because you have already abandoned that argument? :D

I don't care because it's not really here nor there. He spent the bulk of his career in New York and basically defamed the California stewards and falsely accused them of inconsistency on national television, when EVERYONE here (not just me) who goes to tracks in California agrees they called this one the same way they always do it.

[Tom]

Being consistent is a good thing.
Even when you are consistently wrong. :rolleyes:

Water under the bridge.
California racing is not relevant again for two years.
Next year, we get to defame KEE stewards.

[Poindexter]

Horse racing is state regulated legalized gambling. The stewards are state officials appointed pursuant to state law. The bettors are entitled to stewards who are accountable to state officials.

Unless they want to hold betless exhibitions, this is non - negotiable.

Just curious since you follow the subject so closely.I do not follow the subject at all. Can you give us an example of the type of discipline the stewards have faced in a past incident from state officials, that demonstrates exactly how accountable they are. I am just curious how seriously the state official take there job of overseeing the actions of the stewards. I like to know our tax dollars are good for something. Something tells me that a set of stewards set up by the Breeders Cup and held accountable to the Breeders Cup would be far more unbiased and just than a set of local stewards anywhere.

By the way anything is negotiable. I am sure if the criterion for Califonia getting the Breeders Cup was Califonia(or any other state) having to use Breeders Cup appointed Stewards for the Breeders Cup races, it would take all of 7 seconds for that to be signed into law.

[dilanesp]

Just curious since you follow the subject so closely.I do not follow the subject at all. Can you give us an example of the type of discipline the stewards have faced in a past incident from state officials, that demonstrates exactly how accountable they are. I am just curious how seriously the state official take there job of overseeing the actions of the stewards. I like to know our tax dollars are good for something. Something tells me that a set of stewards set up by the Breeders Cup and held accountable to the Breeders Cup would be far more unbiased and just than a set of local stewards anywhere.

By the way anything is negotiable. I am sure if the criterion for Califonia getting the Breeders Cup was Califonia(or any other state) having to use Breeders Cup appointed Stewards for the Breeders Cup races, it would take all of 7 seconds for that to be signed into law.

If your implication is the accountability is theoretical and not actual, I agree.

But no way will any state give up the power to appoint the people who regulate gaming. That is a fundamental aspect of why we have legal gaming in the first place.

[the little guy]

I don't care because it's not really here nor there. He spent the bulk of his career in New York and basically defamed the California stewards and falsely accused them of inconsistency on national television, when EVERYONE here (not just me) who goes to tracks in California agrees they called this one the same way they always do it.


Except that EVERYONE in CA doesn't agree ( I spoke to one yesterday, for instance ).

Just stop with your silly and inaccurate absolutes.

[Mineshaft]

Except that EVERYONE in CA doesn't agree ( I spoke to one yesterday, for instance ).

Just stop with your silly and inaccurate absolutes.




This thread is about if you believed there should be a DQ or not? If yall 2 want to argue about how long Mig was in Cali go start another thread about that. Stick to the subject at hand you got it ?

[Stillriledup]

This thread is about if you believed there should be a DQ or not? If yall 2 want to argue about how long Mig was in Cali go start another thread about that. Stick to the subject at hand you got it ?

I agree. Not one of Serling's posts talks about the the DQ (or not) its all crying over spilled milk, who cares when Mig rode in Cal, it has nothing to do with anything, least of all, this thread.

[Robert Fischer]

Maybe this point of view is not "appropriate", but I think a big part of the controversy is that Shared Belief was the FAVORITE and Moreno was the other quality speed.

Had Bayern played bumper cars with Prayer for Relief and Majestic Harbor, many of the people now saying he should have been DQ'd would not have as strong a view....

It's hard to come up with a better rule.

Something like a rule that only goes into effect when a horse bumps a top 5 public choice out of the gate sounds good in internet land(to some) but it would be hard to get right. Then you still have to include things like 20-1 shots who figure to be a huge pace factor. It's difficult to get a rule that really covers it without ending up back where we already are.

I may be biased, because I did bet Bayern and Tonalist and Social Inclusion to win.

[Stillriledup]

It's hard to come up with a better rule.

Something like a rule that only goes into effect when a horse bumps a top 5 public choice out of the gate sounds good in internet land(to some) but it would be hard to get right. Then you still have to include things like 20-1 shots who figure to be a huge pace factor. It's difficult to get a rule that really covers it without ending up back where we already are.

I may be biased, because I did bet Bayern and Tonalist and Social Inclusion to win.

I think the public choice stuff is some sort of a factor as its more likely that a favorite would have "gained more lengths" or a "higher placing" than a 50-1 shot and this is where handicapping comes in. Also, if we are going down this road, we also could consider how the interference affected the race shape.
If a steward wants to make the best possible decisions he or she can, isn't it a good idea to be an expert on the handicapping process and knowing the horses and their talents inside and out? I mean, it can't hurt to be an expert handicapper, right?

[Robert Fischer]

I think the public choice stuff is some sort of a factor as its more likely that a favorite would have "gained more lengths" or a "higher placing" than a 50-1 shot and this is where handicapping comes in. Also, if we are going down this road, we also could consider how the interference affected the race shape.
If a steward wants to make the best possible decisions he or she can, isn't it a good idea to be an expert on the handicapping process and knowing the horses and their talents inside and out? I mean, it can't hurt to be an expert handicapper, right?

I agree.

[Poindexter]

Oh, come on. What does Baffert have to hide? His jockey did all he could to straighten out the horse, for heaven's sake. Haven't you guys been listening to Cj? :)

Honestly, I was leaning towards CJ's take. I Think more damage was done when the outside horses came in and he is correct in saying you cannot punish Bayern for that. If I did not see that press conference posted by dark horse, I would not be so suspicious. But after what Baffert pulled with his other horse in Shared Belief's prior race, and seeing him muzzle Garcia, it seems to me that this was probably planned(looking for a little edge getting a jump on Moreno) knowing that the stewards do not take horses down in this situation. Obviously, he had no way of anticipating how much it would affect the other horses. I am still waiting for someone to give me a rational explanation on why he wanted to muzzle Garcia. He obviously was covering something up.

That is the problem when you let stuff go. People can take shots. That is why you have to enforce the rules no matter what the situation is and there probably needs to be more clarity and universal rules for these situations. This type of behavior if intentional can be extremely dangerous.

[Stillriledup]

Honestly, I was leaning towards CJ's take. I Think more damage was done when the outside horses came in and he is correct in saying you cannot punish Bayern for that. If I did not see that press conference posted by dark horse, I would not be so suspicious. But after what Baffert pulled with his other horse in Shared Belief's prior race, and seeing him muzzle Garcia, it seems to me that this was probably planned(looking for a little edge getting a jump on Moreno) knowing that the stewards do not take horses down in this situation. Obviously, he had no way of anticipating how much it would affect the other horses. I am still waiting for someone to give me a rational explanation on why he wanted to muzzle Garcia. He obviously was covering something up.

That is the problem when you let stuff go. People can take shots. That is why you have to enforce the rules no matter what the situation is and there probably needs to be more clarity and universal rules for these situations. This type of behavior if intentional can be extremely dangerous.

Victor would never throw bob under the bus, but i wonder if he floated SB out wide like that per instructions.

Also, a way to think about SB getting floated out very wide in the previous race, why would Victor, on his own, intentionally lose much ground in Turn 1? He's not that smart.

I'm sure its pretty easy to see what the precedent is for Baffert and riders and if he gives out instructions and is a control freak, or he's likely to tell Garcia and Espinoza nothing at all except good luck.

I can't imagine that guy is just giving legs up and saying nothing, but i'm sure its easy to find out if you ask some jocks, off the record, who have ridden for Baffert.

[cj]

Victor would never throw bob under the bus, but i wonder if he floated SB out wide like that per instructions.

Also, a way to think about SB getting floated out very wide in the previous race, why would Victor, on his own, intentionally lose much ground in Turn 1? He's not that smart.

I'm sure its pretty easy to see what the precedent is for Baffert and riders and if he gives out instructions and is a control freak, or he's likely to tell Garcia and Espinoza nothing at all except good luck.

I can't imagine that guy is just giving legs up and saying nothing, but i'm sure its easy to find out if you ask some jocks, off the record, who have ridden for Baffert.

Stretch Armstrong type reach. Espinoza had plenty of reasons that had nothing to do with Baffert in wanting to see Shared Belief lose. Here are two:

1) California
2) Chrome.

[Stillriledup]

Stretch Armstrong type reach. Espinoza had plenty of reasons that had nothing to do with Baffert in wanting to see Shared Belief lose. Here are two:

1) California
2) Chrome.

It might be a reach, but only insiders and jocks who have ridden for Baffert know if he's ever given out those types of instructions. Its entirely possible VE was on his own, i'm not privy to know what BB tells his jocks before races.

[horses4courses]

Stretch Armstrong type reach. Espinoza had plenty of reasons that had nothing to do with Baffert in wanting to see Shared Belief lose. Here are two:

1) California
2) Chrome.

Then there's the other side of the conspiracy coin - Baffert.

Would he sacrifice lesser lights Sky Kingdom and Fed Biz
for potentially bigger gains down the road?

It was pretty obvious that Fed Biz wasn't the same
horse after his exertions against Shared Belief.

Pawns in the chess game?

[Robert Fischer]

I may be biased, because I did bet Bayern and Tonalist and Social Inclusion to win. Shared Belief

It might be a reach, but only insiders and jocks who have ridden for Baffert know if he's ever given out those types of instructions. Its entirely possible VE was on his own, i'm not privy to know what BB tells his jocks before races.

It is anyone's guess what Victor Espinoza's instructions were prior to the Awesome Again Stakes (when he carried Social Inclusion way out).

I do not think that in the Breeders Cup Classic, that Baffert would have instructed a bump-n-run strategy. He's got a top speed horse, and he has confidence in his horse. Trying that BS would be very risky in terms of knocking his own horse (Bayern) out as well. I think he was prepared to give it his best shot in the Classic vs. Moreno up front and make Shared Belief prove that he could beat Grade I runners.

Speculation in the Classic itself seems silly.

[Stillriledup]

Shared Belief



It is anyone's guess what Victor Espinoza's instructions were prior to the Awesome Again Stakes (when he carried Social Inclusion way out).

I do not think that in the Breeders Cup Classic, that Baffert would have instructed a bump-n-run strategy. He's got a top speed horse, and he has confidence in his horse. Trying that BS would be very risky in terms of knocking his own horse (Bayern) out as well. I think he was prepared to give it his best shot in the Classic vs. Moreno up front and make Social Inclusion prove that he could beat Grade I runners.

Speculation in the Classic itself seems silly.

But he could have told the guy get the horse out as fast as possible and start angling over immediately. I can't imagine he's going to instruct the guy to crash into horses on purpose, but telling the guy to angle over immediately is a more believable scenario, if he told him anything at all.

Is it possible that Baffert would have said absolutely nothing at all to Garcia and just said good luck? Mike Smith would know, he's ridden the BCC for Baffert on a speed horse, he knows what goes on in those little paddock talks.

[Robert Fischer]

But he could have told the guy get the horse out as fast as possible and start angling over immediately. I can't imagine he's going to instruct the guy to crash into horses on purpose, but telling the guy to angle over immediately is a more believable scenario, if he told him anything at all.

Is it possible that Baffert would have said absolutely nothing at all to Garcia and just said good luck? Mike Smith would know, he's ridden the BCC for Baffert on a speed horse, he knows what goes on in those little paddock talks.

Too risky in my opinion.

Shared Belief (**** I didn't call him SI this time!) wasn't some monster that Baffert would be scared of one of his Grade I speed horses being unable to beat.

Part of the fun is the debate, and I guess we'll "never know" for sure. ;)

Maybe bump-n-run tactics were in fact instructed by Bob Baffert? Maybe there was bad blood, behind the scenes with Jim Rome??

I think it was 'on the level'.

[Stillriledup]

Too risky in my opinion.

Shared Belief (**** I didn't call him SI this time!) wasn't some monster that Baffert would be scared of one of his Grade I speed horses being unable to beat.

Part of the fun is the debate, and I guess we'll "never know" for sure. ;)

Maybe bump-n-run tactics were in fact instructed by Bob Baffert? Maybe there was bad blood, behind the scenes with Jim Rome??

I think it was 'on the level'.

All we have is speculation and the video that proves exactly what DID happen. Unless, like one poster suggests in another thread, there's a lawsuit of some kind.

[the little guy]

This thread is about if you believed there should be a DQ or not? If yall 2 want to argue about how long Mig was in Cali go start another thread about that. Stick to the subject at hand you got it ?

You're just upset because Dilanesp is usurping your position as worst poster on PA.

It's a horse race, I'll give you that.

[Stillriledup]

You're just upset because Dilanesp is usurping your position as worst poster on PA.

It's a horse race, I'll give you that.

At least he stays on topic. Nothing you've posted in this thread has been about the inquiry in the BC Classic.

[Tor Ekman]

I would love to know what Mike Smith actually said to the stewards because based on Smith's unequivocal statement on air to NBC immediately post-race, either Scott Chaney is an outright liar or Mike Smith pulled a Fred McMurray/Caine Mutiny-like reversal when speaking to the stewards.

[cj]

At least he stays on topic. Nothing you've posted in this thread has been about the inquiry in the BC Classic.

The board has moderators, don't really need your input in that area. Lord knows we get enough of it in every other thread on the board.

[dilanesp]

I think the public choice stuff is some sort of a factor as its more likely that a favorite would have "gained more lengths" or a "higher placing" than a 50-1 shot and this is where handicapping comes in. Also, if we are going down this road, we also could consider how the interference affected the race shape.
If a steward wants to make the best possible decisions he or she can, isn't it a good idea to be an expert on the handicapping process and knowing the horses and their talents inside and out? I mean, it can't hurt to be an expert handicapper, right?

That's giving the stewards a whole lot of power to nullify people's winning tickets based on subjective handicapping.

Suppose Goldencents fouled Vicar's in Trouble at the start. If this were the rule, Goldencents could be disqualified for potentially affecting the race shape, when he was actually going to win the speed duel anyway.

Also, this sort of thing strikes me as massively unfair to longshot players.

[JustRalph]

I feel like I'm reading an episode of "The Soprano's" and Bob Baffert is Tony and Garcia is Christopher.

I have to say, Baffert sure did pull off one serious conspiracy if you believe some of the stuff in this thread.

I think it's possible that a pretty quick gate horse came blasting out of the gate sideways and it was totally organic. End of story.

[Stillriledup]

That's giving the stewards a whole lot of power to nullify people's winning tickets based on subjective handicapping.

Suppose Goldencents fouled Vicar's in Trouble at the start. If this were the rule, Goldencents could be disqualified for potentially affecting the race shape, when he was actually going to win the speed duel anyway.

Also, this sort of thing strikes me as massively unfair to longshot players.

These are good points, but i think the bottom line remains that anything the judges do is essentially rendering an opinion. If you're going to be making DQs based on "cost a placing" knowing how good the horses are and their likelihood of being able to overcome interference should be pretty important to your job.

I would have no problem with the judges if they didn't DQ Goldencents for bumping Vicar's in trouble while factoring in the greatness of Goldencents. If i bet Goldencents, i want the judges to take his greatness into consideration when forming an opinion on a DQ or not. Same with SB.

No need to treat all the horse's equally if you're making DQs and decisions based on whether or not a horse was cost a placing.

[castaway01]

I feel like I'm reading an episode of "The Soprano's" and Bob Baffert is Tony and Garcia is Christopher.

I have to say, Baffert sure did pull off one serious conspiracy if you believe some of the stuff in this thread.

I think it's possible that a pretty quick gate horse came blasting out of the gate sideways and it was totally organic. End of story.

But then how can people post 100 times building up their conspiracies if they believe such a simple, logical explanation? We all know a horse is a 1000-pound animal that can be steered like a car and always runs in a perfectly straight line...

[Mineshaft]

You're just upset because Dilanesp is usurping your position as worst poster on PA.

It's a horse race, I'll give you that.





All you want to do is correct people on here thats the only time you chime in you prick.

[Mineshaft]

Why would Garcia intentionally take out Shared Belief? When you take out a horse you risk also getting ur own horse in trouble. So why would he risk getting his own horse in trouble in a Grade 1 5 million dollar race?

[Mineshaft]

Also will Garcia get days?

Espinoza got days for floating SB wide in the Awesome Again why doesnt Garcia get days?

[Stillriledup]

Also will Garcia get days?

Espinoza got days for floating SB wide in the Awesome Again why doesnt Garcia get days?

I think i read that he won't get days.

[Mr_Ed]

Shared Belief banging heads with #4:

http://i1161.photobucket.com/albums/q517/chtrwd2/belief_zpscd721899.png

Should I show you the pic of Smith standing up just before the quarter because of the traffic problem created by Bayern?

[BlinkersOn]

There was a time that the stewards were much stricter with disqualifications. In the 70's and 80's, Bayern would have been disqualified for sure, and possibly Toast Of New York. I remember Secretarial having won 5 races in a row, three of them stakes races, and he was disqualified after winning by 2 lengths in the Champagne Stakes at Belmont. The stewards said he "interfered and impeded Stop The Music", and he was placed 2nd. Secretariat then went on to run in the Laurel and beat Stop The Music by 8 lengths. He was named HOY in 72. Things have changed. Then, Bayern would have come down without a doubt. The stewards are extremely lax in California, and we are talking the white haired devil, Baffert. He wanted this race at any costs. If you think it was intentional that Garcia interfered with SB on purpose..you could be right. If you think he didn't...you could also be right. The fact is he wiped out SB at the start, and Moreno too. Moreno is injured as a result of this race.

I thought that Bayern should definitely have come down, and possibly Toast of NY. What a mess it would have been though, but I still think it would have been the right thing to do. That would have put CC and SB on the board, and I think that would have been the right move, but it was never going to happen. My surprise is that people are surprised by the California stewards doing nothing. It didn't surprise me at all.

Mike felt a jockey objection wasn't needed, because the inquiry light went on immediately, and he really thought the stewards would do the right thing. He now realizes that was foolish. If any of you belonged to FB, and had him as a friend, you would know how upset he is about this race.

The bottom line is that everyone is entitled to their opinion on this.

[Greyfox]

Should I show you the pic of Smith standing up just before the quarter because of the traffic problem created by Bayern?

We all saw Smith stand up and check Shared Belief.

But you say Bayern created a traffic problem? I don't think so.

[Mr_Ed]

Toast Of New York, too.

[Greyfox]

Toast Of New York, too.

5 runners were ahead of Shared Belief when Smith stood up.

[Mr_Ed]

5 runners were ahead of Shared Belief when Smith stood up.

So you are saying CC caused an issue for SB.

:bang:

[Greyfox]

So you are saying CC caused an issue for SB.

:bang:

There was a gate "issue." Yes.
But Smith was in no hurry to get into the space that Toast of New York went into.
After that Smith looked somewhat lost and I'm not so convinced that Smith had to steady Shared Belief.
"Snooze yuh lose."

[Mr_Ed]

Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. Get turned sideways and bang heads......................you're a snoozer.

You must be a Fox News contributor.

[Greyfox]

Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. Get turned sideways and bang heads......................you're a snoozer.

You must be a Fox News contributor.

Just a realist.
Sometimes I don't like the reality that I see, but it is what it is.

[cj]

Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket. Get turned sideways and bang heads......................you're a snoozer.

You must be a Fox News contributor.

No politics in horse section!

[Mr_Ed]

No politics in horse section!

Yup.

I will serve my 1 day tomorrow.

[iceknight]

Turn up the sound and you can actually hear Baffert saying to Garcia, in the seconds before the press conference starts: "the ground broke out under him." And Garcia gives a quick nod.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/11815381/santa-anita-steward-explains-breeders-cup-classic-ruling

Not to ask the obvious question... Why does the trainer tell the rider who was on the horse what happened at the start?

When Garcia is asked what happened, around the 2:25 mark, he replies "well, uh, like he's (Baffert) saying, the ground broke... " They just won the BC classic. Why do all three look so glum? :lol: :lol: And yes, you are right in what Baffert says and also what Garcia parrots later on...

[PaceAdvantage]

All you want to do is correct people on here thats the only time you chime in you prick.The funny thing is, the post TLG made that got you to go all moderator on his ass, actually WAS about the DQ.

And now you cant't post here any longer....shame

[Dark Horse]

I feel like I'm reading an episode of "The Soprano's" and Bob Baffert is Tony and Garcia is Christopher.

I have to say, Baffert sure did pull off one serious conspiracy if you believe some of the stuff in this thread.

I think it's possible that a pretty quick gate horse came blasting out of the gate sideways and it was totally organic. End of story.

It wouldn't be hard to put together a video list of favorites getting mugged right out of the gate. The Cajun boyz are especially good at the sharp left turn.

The philosophy/explanation by the stewards that this kind of pinball action doesn't affect the outcome is wonderfully absurd. As I've heard riders comment, it sets a dangerous precedent. Not so much in terms of bettors losing money, but in terms of riders and horses losing their lives.

[rastajenk]

So you're saying that the only thing stopping jockeys from being murderous bastards willing to do anything for a bigger piece of the purse is the panel of stewards? I've called them "pinheads" as often as anyone, but really, I give them more credit than that.

[dilanesp]

It wouldn't be hard to put together a video list of favorites getting mugged right out of the gate. The Cajun boyz are especially good at the sharp left turn.

The philosophy/explanation by the stewards that this kind of pinball action doesn't affect the outcome is wonderfully absurd. As I've heard riders comment, it sets a dangerous precedent. Not so much in terms of bettors losing money, but in terms of riders and horses losing their lives.

It might very well affect the outcome. The problem is it is complete speculation to determine how it would have, because it is based on assunptions of speed duels cooking Bayern and we can't be invalidating bets based on speculation.

[thaskalos]

It might very well affect the outcome. The problem is it is complete speculation to determine how it would have, because it is based on assunptions of speed duels cooking Bayern and we can't be invalidating bets based on speculation.

Is it speculative thinking to believe that Shared Belief was bothered greatly as a result of that incident out of the gate? Would the effects of this infraction have been more pronounced if the contact was made a quarter-mile further into the race? I am aware of this "Californian way" of assessing trouble in a race...but how can someone claim that the start of the race is of less importance than what transpires later? Isn't THAT "complete speculation" as well?

[dilanesp]

Is it speculative thinking to believe that Shared Belief waswoud havthered greatly as a result of that incident out of the gate? Would the effects of this infraction have been more pronounced if the contact was made a quarter-mile further into the race? I am aware of this "Californian way" of assessing trouble in a race...but how can someone claim that the start of the race is of less importance than what transpires later? Isn't THAT "complete speculation" as well?

I do not believe for one second that Shared Belief lost the race because he was squeezed. He had 1 1/4 miles to recover and couldn't even get to Toast of New York or California Chrome. He had every chance to catch them and didn't.

The only argument for this incident costing someone a placing is that Bayern would have faced a speed duel. And any construction of how the race would have gone with a faster pace is speculation.

[thaskalos]

I do not believe for one second that Shared Belief lost the race because he was squeezed. He had 1 1/4 miles to recover and couldn't even get to Toast of New York or California Chrome. He had every chance to catch them and didn't.

The only argument for this incident costing someone a placing is that Bayern would have faced a speed duel. And any construction of how the race would have gone with a faster pace is speculation.

Is that what Shared Belief was? SQUEEZED? You are a funny guy. And to think I was starting to take you seriously...

[Stillriledup]

I do not believe for one second that Shared Belief lost the race because he was squeezed. He had 1 1/4 miles to recover and couldn't even get to Toast of New York or California Chrome. He had every chance to catch them and didn't.

The only argument for this incident costing someone a placing is that Bayern would have faced a speed duel. And any construction of how the race would have gone with a faster pace is speculation.

He's not going to be able to "Recover" in a field of equally matched horses. This was the BCC, its the best of the best, there's zero margin for error at this level.

[ILovetheInner]

The chart call says SB "failed to overcome his early adversity," thereby attributing some influence to it. Granted, there were multiple lines of trouble early, but to"not believe for one second" the break had any influence is a bit of stretch. It also notes Bayern prevailed by the "slimmest of margins." Given who this early trouble also took out (main pace challenge) and that the deliverers of all that mayhem ran one-two the whole way, there is no way, regardless of this ruling, this is not a controversial race.

[Dark Horse]

It might very well affect the outcome. The problem is it is complete speculation to determine how it would have, because it is based on assunptions of speed duels cooking Bayern and we can't be invalidating bets based on speculation.

Right. The outcome of the race could have been anything. But that's not an analysis. It's an irrelevant statement. That type of reasoning would pretty much apply to anything happening before the stretch run. Why even look at the start? The correct question is if the 'guilty' party, in this case Bayern and co, gained an advantage by interfering with others. If so, that would warrant a DQ. The severity of the DQ could depend on how sharp the left turn out of the gate was. Whether or not the infraction was on purpose or not would be irrelevant. The entire point would hinge on interference; not on a wonderfully undefinable 'the race could have been anything'. Doh.

Anyway, there's nothing new here. Until there is enough noise horse racing isn't going to clean up its act. It would be easy to define rules, across the board, to determine the severity of interference. But as long as horse racing leaves it to the vague discerning powers of stewards, who's objectivity often may be in question, nothing substantial will change.

[Stillriledup]

Right. The outcome of the race could have been anything. But that's not an analysis. It's an irrelevant statement. That type of reasoning would pretty much apply to anything happening before the stretch run. Why even look at the start? The correct question is if the 'guilty' party, in this case Bayern and co, gained an advantage by interfering with others. If so, that would warrant a DQ. The severity of the DQ could depend on how sharp the left turn out of the gate was. Whether or not the infraction was on purpose or not would be irrelevant. The entire point would hinge on interference; not on a wonderfully undefinable 'the race could have been anything'.

This is an interesting call when you say what did Bayern gain by the interference, how did HE benefit from his own mistake. It seems like he benefitted more than a normal horse would benefit because he's a one dimensional speed horse who eliminated the other speed as well as the undefeated favorite.

[rastajenk]

The severity of the DQ could depend on how sharp the left turn out of the gate was.
Not sure what you're getting at here. Are there varying degrees of disqualification? That would be news to me.

[Dark Horse]

Not sure what you're getting at here. Are there varying degrees of disqualification? That would be news to me.

really?

2nd
3rd
4th.

I would have put him no better than 4th.

[Dark Horse]

This is an interesting call when you say what did Bayern gain by the interference, how did HE benefit from his own mistake. It seems like he benefitted more than a normal horse would benefit because he's a one dimensional speed horse who eliminated the other speed as well as the undefeated favorite.

he benefited by unbenefiting others. lol


You can't take out a rival, or the race favorite, obviously. It shouldn't have to be spelled out. If we'd be cave men in the Stone Age, sure. Let's try to figure out this difficult mathematical proposition. How hard would I have to slam you on the head with my prehistoric baseball bat until I could run faster?

[rastajenk]

Now you are revealing a weakness that suggests your opinion in this current controversy is about worthless.

[Dark Horse]

Now you are revealing a weakness that suggests your opinion in this current controversy is about worthless.

What would be that be?

Pointing out to you that horses can be DQ'd in different ways?

lol

[rastajenk]

Keep digging, I can tell you haven't hit bottom yet.

[pandy]

I do not believe for one second that Shared Belief lost the race because he was squeezed. He had 1 1/4 miles to recover and couldn't even get to Toast of New York or California Chrome. He had every chance to catch them and didn't.

The only argument for this incident costing someone a placing is that Bayern would have faced a speed duel. And any construction of how the race would have gone with a faster pace is speculation.


You don't understand racing, man. Against these type of horses, what happened to him was devastating. But all of that is a moot point. It doesn't matter whether Shared Belief or Moreno would have won. The bottom line is, they were badly impeded and therefore we have no idea how they would have done, which is why Bayern had to be disqualified. The stewards chickened out, plain and simple. The judges should be appointed by the Breeders Cup, they should be non salaried, and not affiliated with the host track.

[Dark Horse]

I would suggest universal, measurable rules that jockeys have to abide by, or they are DQ'd.

So many lanes over per x amount of lengths. It's not rocket science.

If we can put yellow lines on football fields to show the distance to first down, we can measure this stuff as well.

Don't leave it up to anybody's imagination or interpretation. Define the rules, and enforce them.

Modern technology can do wonders in improving a sport. Look at sailing. A snooze fest, until the latest Americas Cup. Computerized lines across the water, computerized wind effect, etc. Apply that sort of stuff to horse racing and watch it take off. Get this sport out of the stone age. Please.

[Redboard]

I........but how can someone claim that the start of the race is of less importance than what transpires later? Isn't THAT "complete speculation" as well?
No, it's an accepted fact. Most serious "accidents" occur on the turn or down the stretch when they're going 40 mph. There's less chance of a serious incident at the break. The sport has always treated those infractions less seriously. I'm not talking about the situation where the horse rears and throws the jockey, yes, that occurs more frequently at the break, I'm talking about the bumping and pushing. There's less chance of a serious breakdown when they're not going as fast.

[JustRalph]

You don't understand racing, man. Against these type of horses, what happened to him was devastating. But all of that is a moot point. It doesn't matter whether Shared Belief or Moreno would have won. The bottom line is, they were badly impeded and therefore we have no idea how they would have done, which is why Bayern had to be disqualified. The stewards chickened out, plain and simple. The judges should be appointed by the Breeders Cup, they should be non salaried, and not affiliated with the host track.

Amen. Even though I knew they wouldn't DQ the horse based on California's history, I thought this event was just too much to leave the horse up

[Stillriledup]

When all is said and done, and all the minutia is debated till we are all blue in the face, the bottom line remains you can't violently crash into other horses and expect to not be punished.

We're making this harder than it needs to be.

[rastajenk]

What's with the royal "we?"

[thaskalos]

You don't understand racing, man. Against these type of horses, what happened to him was devastating. But all of that is a moot point. It doesn't matter whether Shared Belief or Moreno would have won. The bottom line is, they were badly impeded and therefore we have no idea how they would have done, which is why Bayern had to be disqualified. The stewards chickened out, plain and simple. The judges should be appointed by the Breeders Cup, they should be non salaried, and not affiliated with the host track.

Pandy...I am rapidly becoming your #1 fan here. :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

No, it's an accepted fact. Most serious "accidents" occur on the turn or down the stretch when they're going 40 mph. There's less chance of a serious incident at the break. The sport has always treated those infractions less seriously. I'm not talking about the situation where the horse rears and throws the jockey, yes, that occurs more frequently at the break, I'm talking about the bumping and pushing. There's less chance of a serious breakdown when they're not going as fast.

Let me ask you a question: If this mishap happens not right out of the gate, but 200 yards further into the race...does Bayern get disqualified or not? What's this you are telling me about the serious accidents happening on the turn or down the stretch?

The lax out-of-the-gate rules were meant to apply to the lite bumping that occurs in most of the races that we see...not to the extreme cases where multiple horses get plowed into and knocked hopelessly off stride. California Racing has it wrong...as usual.

[rastajenk]

Hopelessly?

[iceknight]

I would suggest universal, measurable rules that jockeys have to abide by, or they are DQ'd.

So many lanes over per x amount of lengths. It's not rocket science.

If we can put yellow lines on football fields to show the distance to first down, we can measure this stuff as well.

Don't leave it up to anybody's imagination or interpretation. Define the rules, and enforce them.

Modern technology can do wonders in improving a sport. Look at sailing. A snooze fest, until the latest Americas Cup. Computerized lines across the water, computerized wind effect, etc. Apply that sort of stuff to horse racing and watch it take off. Get this sport out of the stone age. Please.But we have to fix the Gulfstream timer first. Who are you kidding? Horse racing does not want any technology involved. They prefer tradition more, confusion, "run-ups" etc.

In fact, it is not too hard to have cameras at each gate that clearly show how horses break, what their jockeys are doing etc, their hands, what are they holding etc as they leave .. but integrity takes time to build up and I am not sure if racetracks want to do that when they keep more with complicated carryover and takeout structures (Ok maybe that is a little tangent there)

[Tom]

The Chief clown, er steward, said that is SB had finished closer, say within a length, they might have taken the winner down.

So if the early trouble had been LESS severe, Bayern may well have come down.

[thaskalos]

The Chief clown, er steward, said that is SB had finished closer, say within a length, they might have taken the winner down.

So if the early trouble had been LESS severe, Bayern may well have come down.
Makes as much sense as anything else coming out of California.

[Stillriledup]

Let me ask you a question: If this mishap happens not right out of the gate, but 200 yards further into the race...does Bayern get disqualified or not? What's this you are telling me about the serious accidents happening on the turn or down the stretch?

The lax out-of-the-gate rules were meant to apply to the lite bumping that occurs in most of the races that we see...not to the extreme cases where multiple horses get plowed into and knocked hopelessly off stride. California Racing has it wrong...as usual.

This is exactly right. The "leeway" only applies to light brushes and incidental contact, not jarring hits where one horse almost gets his skull cracked open.

[PaceAdvantage]

Let me ask you a question: If this mishap happens not right out of the gate, but 200 yards further into the race...does Bayern get disqualified or not? What's this you are telling me about the serious accidents happening on the turn or down the stretch?

The lax out-of-the-gate rules were meant to apply to the lite bumping that occurs in most of the races that we see...not to the extreme cases where multiple horses get plowed into and knocked hopelessly off stride. California Racing has it wrong...as usual.It's a judgement call from the stewards. It's what we've lived with from the beginning of time when we started betting on this game.

Accept it and move on. I didn't think it was possible to anguish so much over something like this.

[Appy]

Or maybe...
"...we have no idea how they would have done, which is why Bayern was not disqualified".

[Stillriledup]

It's a judgement call from the stewards. It's what we've lived with from the beginning of time when we started betting on this game.

Accept it and move on. I didn't think it was possible to anguish so much over something like this.

Why must one accept something he doesn't want to accept?

[PaceAdvantage]

Why must one accept something he doesn't want to accept?Who said anything about "must?"

He's free to do whatever he wishes...I view it all as a serious waste of time and energy.

I was offering my .02. You're an expert at the .02 offerings, so surely you can relate.

[Stillriledup]

Who said anything about "must?"

He's free to do whatever he wishes...I view it all as a serious waste of time and energy.

I was offering my .02. You're an expert at the .02 offerings, so surely you can relate.

You essentially recommended he bend over and say "yes racing industry, may i have another". Gus is nobody's lackey, he's not bending over for them, ever.

Keep fighting the good fight Gus!! :D

[PaceAdvantage]

You essentially recommended he bend over and say "yes racing industry, may i have another". Gus is nobody's lackey, he's not bending over for them, ever.

Keep fighting the good fight Gus!! :DWhere's the gagging emoticon when I need it?

[Tom]

Well, as the customers, we have the right to disagree with the way the place is run. And the right to not bet there. Boycott them.

The nice thing about racing today is no one forced to play any one track.
I will take Penn and Tam over anything California has to offer any day of the week. All I bet at SA is the 65.T races, and that will cease this year.

[PaceAdvantage]

As I read this thread, I see way more than disagreement.

I see grown men acting as if the stewards came into their home and ripped their first born away from them...ridiculous in my opinion...and not just this thread. Many in the media are acting like fools as well.

[Dark Horse]

As I read this thread, I see way more than disagreement.

I see grown men acting as if the stewards came into their home and ripped their first born away from them...ridiculous in my opinion...and not just this thread. Many in the media are acting like fools as well.

Before cynicism sets in, some people believe that rattling the cage and rocking the boat can change things. And you know what? No improvement has ever come about from just accepting things the way they are.

[Stillriledup]

Where's the gagging emoticon when I need it?

Get more emoticons! The same 20 you've had for over a decade isn't cutting it anymore, this is 2014!!! :D

[Stillriledup]

As I read this thread, I see way more than disagreement.

I see grown men acting as if the stewards came into their home and ripped their first born away from them...ridiculous in my opinion...and not just this thread. Many in the media are acting like fools as well.


Its like being mad at someone but not telling them about it and keeping it all bottled up and then something happens and you just go off on them, you unload and the person was like 'geez, why so mad" while not realizing that you were boiling and something little put you over the edge.

[iceknight]

As I read this thread, I see way more than disagreement.

I see grown men acting as if the stewards came into their home and ripped their first born away from them...ridiculous in my opinion...and not just this thread. Many in the media are acting like fools as well.You are hilarious man. newbie, maturity, grown men, fools.. haha you can keep trying. The fact remains that we were denied a clear winner and a decent race. Is it too much to ask for a fair fight or a fair race at racing's biggest stage? Or do you prefer Ben Johnson being given the 100m sprint over Carl Lewis? (just to show my age :lol: )

[pandy]

As I read this thread, I see way more than disagreement.

I see grown men acting as if the stewards came into their home and ripped their first born away from them...ridiculous in my opinion...and not just this thread. Many in the media are acting like fools as well.


Gee, I don't know. It was the richest race of the year, it decided the Horse of the Year, it was an obvious poor decision by the judges that may have been influenced by politics, not the actual incident...all in all, a pretty big deal, I'd say.

This is a longshot, but it would be great if the Breeders Cup took over the officiating by choosing a non partisan, volunteer (no pay) group of stewards from different areas of the country, but not the host track. We have a national track announcer for the big races, why not a national group of stewards?

When you think about it, using the track's judges for these international style races is absurd. How do we know that the judges wouldn't have made a different decision if the trainer of Bayern was from New York, or France? Or if the trainer was a small town guy, not the guy who has the biggest barn at the track and who has threatened to move his horses in the past? To me, this incident certainly raised conflict of interests questions.

Imagine if each NFL team had their own refs and the Super Bowl is played in New Orleans and the New Orleans refs, who are paid by the New Orleans Saints, get to ref the Super Bowl?

[PaceAdvantage]

You are hilarious man. newbie, maturity, grown men, fools.. haha you can keep trying. The fact remains that we were denied a clear winner and a decent race. Is it too much to ask for a fair fight or a fair race at racing's biggest stage? Or do you prefer Ben Johnson being given the 100m sprint over Carl Lewis? (just to show my age :lol: )Nobody was denied anything.

What happened in this race happens DAILY across racing in this country. Stewards are presented with a possible DQ, and they decide accordingly.

There is thread upon thread upon thread on this board filled with people complaining about stewards' decisions they did not agree with. This is nothing more than another tire on the burning pile.

This is the way the game is played when shit happens on the field. It's been this way since basically forever.

What exactly are you or anyone else going to do about it? If there was actually a BETTER WAY, it would have been implemented by now, don't you think?

No matter WHAT happens, somebody is going to come up with some little (often times ridiculous) angle to push. Was it the Baffert influence?...was it the fact that there was big money involved?...did the bumping turn one horse from clear winner to clear loser mere strides out of the gate when there were 10 more furlongs to run?...should we hire completely objective stewards just for this one day (GOOD LUCK FINDING SUCH PEOPLE)?

It's all nothing but massive conjecture, which is exactly what the stewards involved with this decision had to do...there will never be a right decision when it comes to this sort of thing that ALL will agree with...and there will always be saber rattlers when it comes to controversy...