The DQ (or non-DQ) complaint thread

[azeri98]

I had the :1: so I thank Kendrick, I was finally on the right side of a dq after 6 straight losses.

[Stillriledup]

Because its egregious. Plan and simple. You need to do it to send a message. Protecting riders is more important than protecting bettors. Rider safety transcends everything else. Plain and simple. When some bettor gets put in a wheelchair by a DQ it will be different but until that day rider safety trumps all.

Same as the NFL did with Vontaze Burfict. They could have not flagged what he did against Pittsburgh and just gave him the three game suspension. Instead they enforced the 15 yard penalty and handed pittsburgh the game. They could have not done that and protected the fans, the bettors and the other 52 guys on Cincy but safety transcends those needs.

So to answer your question when something this egregious happens everyone as a tribe or society has to bear the weight of the punishment. That the way life works. Just like what Burfict did wasn't a tricky tack holding call what Jose Ortiz did wasn't some tricky tack brush. Both required severe punishment.

Btw.. if you cashed on the :1: you need to thank Kendrick because if he goes down they're forced to take down the horse. The stewards were only able to do what they did because of his horsemanship.

The theory that you must harm the bettors and the integrity of the result to 'send a message' isn't something I'm on board with. You don't need to stick it to the bettors in order to punish a participant. If a relative of yours robbed a bank, would it be a 'better punishment' if you went to jail too?

[Stillriledup]

Incredible and frivolous claim of foul in the 6th at CT. The winner from post 8 was claimed against, no doubt due to the rider, the winner wasnt even close to the guy who claimed, I don't remember seeing anything more frivolous.

I would say obviously they left it up, but this is Charlestown so ill just say they left it up without using the word obviously.

[ultracapper]

I just saw an ADW that pays on DQ'd winners in Graded Stake Races. Won't mention the name as I'm not sure of PA's advertising policy. I have no connections to this site, just to be clear. I just mention it because I thought it was kind of a unique offer.

[ultracapper]

The theory that you must harm the bettors and the integrity of the result to 'send a message' isn't something I'm on board with. You don't need to stick it to the bettors in order to punish a participant. If a relative of yours robbed a bank, would it be a 'better punishment' if you went to jail too?

When you pay the ticket holders of a horse that committed a foul, that's like letting the family of the bank robber keep the money. I've seen it mentioned here many times how the ticket holders of the horse that crossed the finish line first are getting jilted if the horse gets brought down, but never of the ticket holders of the horse that perhaps would have won if that other horse hadn't committed the foul.

[Stillriledup]

When you pay the ticket holders of a horse that committed a foul, that's like letting the family of the bank robber keep the money. I've seen it mentioned here many times how the ticket holders of the horse that crossed the finish line first are getting jilted if the horse gets brought down, but never of the ticket holders of the horse that perhaps would have won if that other horse hadn't committed the foul.

There's a lot of DQs that aren't 'cost a placing' in nature. They don't affect the betting yet they come down anyway. If they can look the other way in some rich owners 'ky derby' they could look the other way in MY 'ky derby'.

[no breathalyzer]

hope you guys that watch these things cashed just now.. the plus side off bs dq's just stuck at gp ;)

[SuperPickle]

hope you guys that watch these things cashed just now.. the plus side off bs dq's just stuck at gp ;)

I did. I was mildly amused the horse went off second choice to the horse she allegedly interfered with last time.

[Stillriledup]

Silly inquiry at TuP in the last race, light brushing at wire but didnt affect outcome, right call to leave it up.

[v j stauffer]

Silly inquiry at TuP in the last race, light brushing at wire but didnt affect outcome, right call to leave it up.

That statement shows just how clueless you are. The word inquiry only means the stewards are looking at film and want the public to know. Many times if something during the live running looks strange the stewards will put the inquiry up even though they know there's little chance of any action. They want you to know they saw that strange thing just like everybody else.

To call any inquiry silly means you obviously don't know what the word means.

[Stillriledup]

That statement shows just how clueless you are. The word inquiry only means the stewards are looking at film and want the public to know. Many times if something during the live running looks strange the stewards will put the inquiry up even though they know there's little chance of any action. They want you to know they saw that strange thing just like everybody else.

To call any inquiry silly means you obviously don't know what the word means.

You've already said that there's essentially an inquiry every race, they could have looked at that one time on the headon before lighting the lamp and then made it official without wasting everyone's time.

[v j stauffer]

You've already said that there's essentially an inquiry every race, they could have looked at that one time on the headon before lighting the lamp and then made it official without wasting everyone's time.

I didn't see it so I have no opinion on that incident.

[Stillriledup]

I didn't see it so I have no opinion on that incident.

The inquiry light was up before the last horse hit the wire.....maybe they do things differently in Az and they don't look at incidents with a 'once over' before lighting the light. The horse who got brushed was 1-5 so maybe that was a factor in the lit lamp but man, that was a very quick inquiry it was blinking instantly.

[formula_2002]

8th race at Tampa Bay on 2/27, what are your thoughts?

I was sure they would dq the winner :faint:

[Stillriledup]

A 4 pct jock steadies in traffic on the first turn. Gets beat a long way for top 2 spots, yet these CT clowns take down the winner.

Nothing shocks me at this place.

[RXB]

That was a terrible DQ at Charles Town.

[Stillriledup]

That was a terrible DQ at Charles Town.

They're known for terrible decisions, worst judges are in west va if you're blinking at this place you're never safe.

[formula_2002]

lost on both these two dq's, but from my vantage point the CT dq seemed ok

[Stillriledup]

lost on both these two dq's, but from my vantage point the CT dq seemed ok

And what vantage point was that?

[ultracapper]

Hey SRU, aren't you jumping the gun on the Mr. 25k thing? That's something you have to earn first.

[Stillriledup]

Hey SRU, aren't you jumping the gun on the Mr. 25k thing? That's something you have to earn first.

Um, not sure what you mean. :D

[formula_2002]

And what vantage point was that?


I never saw the head on view, just a side view

[ultracapper]

Um, not sure what you mean. :D


OH...LOL

[Stillriledup]

I never saw the head on view, just a side view

There was no head on view.

[Stillriledup]

CT is incredible they just refuse to pay the winners.

[Stillriledup]

Rough DQ at SA seemed like the amateur jock caused his own problems and they punished the winner because of it.

[formula_2002]

Rough DQ at SA seemed like the amateur jock caused his own problems and they punished the winner because of it.


Was that the 5 horse that got the DQ.

[Stillriledup]

Was that the 5 horse that got the DQ.

Yes

[SG4]

Rough DQ at SA seemed like the amateur jock caused his own problems and they punished the winner because of it.

Can you please coherently advise how the jock who went down caused his own problems? Did he not sufficiently read the mind of the horse in front of him who quickly ducked out into his path, or are you mad he didn't stay atop his own mount after severely clipping heels?

[SuperPickle]

Rough DQ at SA seemed like the amateur jock caused his own problems and they punished the winner because of it.

Nothing written here is correct. Pratt clearly moved out a couple paths. You can say he didn't mean but it's pretty clear.

Btw... You do realize you're whining about a DQ in which a rider is put in the hospital and people all over Twitter are talking about how Pratt should be suspended.

[Kash$]

How did Ortiz stay up in the 6th?

[cj]

How did Ortiz stay up in the 6th?

I don't think it changed the outcome one bit personally.

[EMD4ME]

I don't think it changed the outcome one bit personally.

Over the weekend, I heard Franco had a BIG fight with Ortiz in the parking lot.

Refreshing to hear, as the perception is those 2 are riding friendly.

[EMD4ME]

THERE HAS TO BE AN INQUIRY IN RACE 5 AT AQU AND A DQ. WOW. What a bulldoze move that was by the rider of the 5..............

[Stillriledup]

THERE HAS TO BE AN INQUIRY IN RACE 5 AT AQU AND A DQ. WOW. What a bulldoze move that was by the rider of the 5..............

why? didnt affect the outcome or a placing. pay the winners and deal with punishment behind the scenes, leave the gamblers out of it. i have the 5 and the 4 in the pick 5 so its more money for me if the 4 gets put up, but that would be a bad dq imo. btw, too much to ask to get the 7 for 3rd? the guy never tried and rifled home missing 3rd to the cruddy 1 who was given the race on a silver platter.

[EMD4ME]

why? didnt affect the outcome or a placing. pay the winners and deal with punishment behind the scenes, leave the gamblers out of it. i have the 5 and the 4 in the pick 5 so its more money for me if the 4 gets put up, but that would be a bad dq imo. btw, too much to ask to get the 7 for 3rd? the guy never tried and rifled home missing 3rd to the cruddy 1 who was given the race on a silver platter.

Quite simply, because I don't think it's fair or that it's safe to "reward" bulldozing tactics.


If Franco fell off and was parayzed by that bulldozing JOLT, due you think there would've been a DQ?

I'm not a fan of this, "it didn't effect the placing stuff". I hard foul is a foul in my world.

I get your point about "pay the winners" but to me that's for most ticky tack variety crap.

If a finish is altered by a foul, a horse should come down.

If a foul so dangerous, a DQ should incur. You might say pay the winners but take the purse away....My answer is what if the jock had $10K on his horse to win?

[EMD4ME]

Another point that gets lost here in these types of incidents...

People will say it didn't effect the outcome, leave it up.

My response: WHAT IF the 5 stays buried inside and never gets out (gets caught behind the tiring 1 horse)????

Of course his bulldoze impacted the outcome of the race. Instead of running out of the $ or losing, he now won because of his bulldoze.

[cj]

Another point that gets lost here in these types of incidents...

People will say it didn't effect the outcome, leave it up.

My response: WHAT IF the 5 stays buried inside and never gets out (gets caught behind the tiring 1 horse)????

Of course his bulldoze impacted the outcome of the race. Instead of running out of the $ or losing, he now won because of his bulldoze.

I knew this was never going to be a DQ, but I don't like that it is allowed one bit. If a rider puts himself in a jackpot he shouldn't be allowed to bully his way out.

[Stillriledup]

Quite simply, because I don't think it's fair or that it's safe to "reward" bulldozing tactics.


If Franco fell off and was parayzed by that bulldozing JOLT, due you think there would've been a DQ?

I'm not a fan of this, "it didn't effect the placing stuff". I hard foul is a foul in my world.

I get your point about "pay the winners" but to me that's for most ticky tack variety crap.

If a finish is altered by a foul, a horse should come down.

If a foul so dangerous, a DQ should incur. You might say pay the winners but take the purse away....My answer is what if the jock had $10K on his horse to win?

the judges can take him down on the guise that if he didnt bull out, he would have finished off the board, so technically, his bulldozing affected the outcome, if you want to view it that way than yeah, i can see a dq and placed off the board, not just behind the 4.

[cj]

The Ortiz brothers did the old Malachi Crunch on Franco...AS IS, LOL.

(R8, Aqueduct, 4-22)

[cj]

Wow, Irad drifted many paths and they leave it as is. What a joke.

[Stillriledup]

Wow, Irad drifted many paths and they leave it as is. What a joke.

I was shocked they left that.

[EMD4ME]

Quite simply, because I don't think it's fair or that it's safe to "reward" bulldozing tactics.


If Franco fell off and was parayzed by that bulldozing JOLT, due you think there would've been a DQ?

I'm not a fan of this, "it didn't effect the placing stuff". I hard foul is a foul in my world.

I get your point about "pay the winners" but to me that's for most ticky tack variety crap.

If a finish is altered by a foul, a horse should come down.

If a foul so dangerous, a DQ should incur. You might say pay the winners but take the purse away....My answer is what if the jock had $10K on his horse to win?


Sorry to quote myself, just rehashing a point I made as Englehart seems to feel the same way....

http://live.drf.com/nuggets/28035


Finally, I love the last paragraph:

'if it doesnt affect the outcome, we leave it as is BUT we can DQ anyone to any position if we deem it necessary, even if the outcome was not affected' (or something similar to that).

Those stewards (if they actually are awake and watching) have super free reign.

It's a blanken joke out there

[EMD4ME]

The Ortiz brothers did the old Malachi Crunch on Franco...AS IS, LOL.

(R8, Aqueduct, 4-22)

Ya know what, after videotape proof like that, I'd like for TLG, PA or any Pro-NYRA person on this entire site to DENY the following statement:


REDACTED

If someone walked down the street, or into a Queens DA's office AND said the aforementioned: Who would defend NYRA?


P.S. REDACTED It's going to get a whole lot more interesting out there. If the beef is legit and not a show, you're going to see someone go down hard soon.

[illinoisbred]

A thread about DQ's...or non DQ's...and no discussion about yesterday's 8th at Los Alamitos? Interested in reading opinions of others regarding this non DQ.

[Stillriledup]

A thread about DQ's...or non DQ's...and no discussion about yesterday's 8th at Los Alamitos? Interested in reading opinions of others regarding this non DQ.

there was nothing to see, the horse who was supposedly bothered caused his own problem.

[cj]

Sorry to quote myself, just rehashing a point I made as Englehart seems to feel the same way....

http://live.drf.com/nuggets/28035


Finally, I love the last paragraph:

'if it doesnt affect the outcome, we leave it as is BUT we can DQ anyone to any position if we deem it necessary, even if the outcome was not affected' (or something similar to that).

Those stewards (if they actually are awake and watching) have super free reign.

It's a blanken joke out there

No DQ, but Irad suspended five days.

[EMD4ME]

No DQ, but Irad suspended five days.

Amazing..... they suspend him for 5 days but refused to do the obvious... DQ him parimutually.........its all for show (these fines and rare suspensions)

[EMD4ME]

If I were Iherd, I'd sue them on the grounds that THEY said : his move didn't IMPACT the outcome of the race :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Stillriledup]

Three days for the infraction and an additional 2 days as a slap in the face of horseplayers!

[thespaah]

Today's (Sun 4/24) KEE 5th..
Watch the stretch run of this race.
And then wait for the head on.
In mid stretch the :5: is tring her bes to get as far from the rail as possible the :2: ( post time fav) is moving strongly to the outside of the :5:
That one clearly gets into the :2: causing that horse to lose forward momentum. In my opinion this caused the :2: to lose a placing. I think the :2: would have finished second.
Here's the dilemma. The :5: finishes behind the :2:, Because of this, those that had the :2: in their exotics to NOT finish third kind of got the shaft.
Clearly a conundrum.
Comments?
Link to Keeneland website. Click on video.
http://www.keeneland.com/racing/race-replay

[PaceAdvantage]

If someone walked down the street, or into a Queens DA's office AND said the aforementioned: Who would defend NYRA?Please do. And tell us how it goes.

[no breathalyzer]

JOKE OF A DQ AT TAMPA JUST NOW... the more i look at that the more mad i get..... way to protect the player :rolleyes: horse was clear by 5 lengths

[Stillriledup]

This is why we don't need DQs

Here are some of the official chart comments from the Derby yesterday with, might I add, no inquiries, objections or DQs (I know, god forbid)

Suddenbreakingnews: trouble early

Destin: broke in, bumped

Mo Tom: steadied, fanned 7w

Lani: off slow, forced 8w

Mor Spirit: carried out 6w

My Man Sam: checked sharply

Creator: checked, bumped hard

Trojan Nation: checked start

Oscar Nom: steadied, bumped

Majesto: steadied early.


So, I guess there was nothing to see here, right?

If its ok to 'let them play' in the Derby, you can let them play in other races. Funny how some have suggested there would be chaos and bodies everywhere if they just 'paid the winners' so how come there's never any accidents or 'bodies everywhere' in the Derby? Apparently, there are 'no rules' so where are all these accidents that people speak of if they just paid the winners?

Where are they?

[cj]

This is why we don't need DQs

Here are some of the official chart comments from the Derby yesterday with, might I add, no inquiries, objections or DQs (I know, god forbid)

Suddenbreakingnews: trouble early

Destin: broke in, bumped

Mo Tom: steadied, fanned 7w

Lani: off slow, forced 8w

Mor Spirit: carried out 6w

My Man Sam: checked sharply

Creator: checked, bumped hard

Trojan Nation: checked start

Oscar Nom: steadied, bumped

Majesto: steadied early.


So, I guess there was nothing to see here, right?

If its ok to 'let them play' in the Derby, you can let them play in other races. Funny how some have suggested there would be chaos and bodies everywhere if they just 'paid the winners' so how come there's never any accidents or 'bodies everywhere' in the Derby? Apparently, there are 'no rules' so where are all these accidents that people speak of if they just paid the winners?

Where are they?

Don't think there was a single incident in the Derby that warranted an inquiry. Give me one, specifically, that you did.

[Stillriledup]

Don't think there was a single incident in the Derby that warranted an inquiry. Give me one, specifically, that you did.

There's never an inquiry or an objection and there's always physical contact and interference, as far as specifics I don't know I'm trusting the chart caller wasn't lying. I could certainly give you examples in other years as my post is derby specific and not 2016 specific.

[FrankieFigs]

There's never an inquiry or an objection and there's always physical contact and interference, as far as specifics I don't know I'm trusting the chart caller wasn't lying. I could certainly give you examples in other years as my post is derby specific and not 2016 specific.

If that is the case, then why are every one of your examples from the chart horses from the 2016 Derby??

[Stillriledup]

If that is the case, then why are every one of your examples from the chart horses from the 2016 Derby??
because that's the race that was run yesterday.

i was making a point, this happens every derby, you have a handful of horses who check, steady, etc.

[cj]

There's never an inquiry or an objection and there's always physical contact and interference, as far as specifics I don't know I'm trusting the chart caller wasn't lying. I could certainly give you examples in other years as my post is derby specific and not 2016 specific.

There have been inquiries and objections in the Derby.

[Stillriledup]

There have been inquiries and objections in the Derby.

There have? I don't remember any in recent times.

[cj]

There have? I don't remember any in recent times.

Yes, they have. Stop posting just to post, unless you actually think I'm lying.

[Stillriledup]

Yes, they have. Stop posting just to post, unless you actually think I'm lying.
How about posting when and where, you asked me for clarification on the exchange wager trainers complaint point I made and I supplied a link, but I'm not allowed to ask when and where? I never suggested you were lying.

[cj]

How about posting when and where, you asked me for clarification on the exchange wager trainers complaint point I made and I supplied a link, but I'm not allowed to ask when and where? I never suggested you were lying.

I know there was a foul claim against Monarchos, and I'm pretty sure Gate Dancer was DQed. You could look it up as easily as I can. Google is your friend.

[Stillriledup]

I know there was a foul claim against Monarchos, and I'm pretty sure Gate Dancer was DQed. You could look it up as easily as I can. Google is your friend.

Google was your friend here too.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1986888&postcount=39

[cj]

Google was your friend here too.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1986888&postcount=39

Except you didn't provide a link that proved your assertion. Anyway, that is another thread that can be addressed there, as somebody already answered it and you haven't responded.

Stick to this thread here.

[Stillriledup]

thank you Parx for making the 4th official w no change. Correct call.

[NY BRED]

this one is blatant and I own a horse in this race

Parx race 9 on May 7th

You need to watch the head on the this race, from the start
of this race.

This was a 100k race, My Juliet Stakes, a 100k race .

The winner, #8 veers in causing a severe bumpoing incidsent
with three horses.

Three objections,including a Stewards inquiry and zero action taken.

More to follow

[Stillriledup]

this one is blatant and I own a horse in this race

Parx race 9 on May 7th

You need to watch the head on the this race, from the start
of this race.

This was a 100k race, My Juliet Stakes, a 100k race .

The winner, #8 veers in causing a severe bumpoing incidsent
with three horses.

Three objections,including a Stewards inquiry and zero action taken.

More to follow

If it's out of the gate is the precedent is they don't make changes.

[no breathalyzer]

Can't see how this horse stays up at parx

[cj]

A pathetic all around display at Monmouth on the 8th race today. There were three separate incidents---one horse didn't leave the gate, another dumped the rider, and late stretch a horse checked out bad possibly costing second. Instead of showing replays, they fixed the camera on the tote and the always exciting "Inquiry" sign.

Watching the replay, the "head on" is more like a 45 degree angle, but even with that ridiculous view it was easy to see the 4 should have been DQed from 2nd. No replay, no explanation, no nothing. Monmouth looks like a bush league track doing stuff like this.

[SuperPickle]

A pathetic all around display at Monmouth on the 8th race today. There were three separate incidents---one horse didn't leave the gate, another dumped the rider, and late stretch a horse checked out bad possibly costing second. Instead of showing replays, they fixed the camera on the tote and the always exciting "Inquiry" sign.

Watching the replay, the "head on" is more like a 45 degree angle, but even with that ridiculous view it was easy to see the 4 should have been DQed from 2nd. No replay, no explanation, no nothing. Monmouth looks like a bush league track doing stuff like this.

Obviously you didn't see the Feature yesterday. They DQed the winner you ran the entire length of the stretch straight as a string on the lead. They claim he crowded the horses behind him when he clear at the quarter poll.

Now here's the kicker. They never post an inquiry. Paco Lopez objected against the top two finishers and the DQed the winner to LAST.

So CJ you've seen a million races like I have. When's the last time you saw a horse DQed from first in a stake on an on objection with no inquiry and placed last. Because I can say prior to yesterday I'd never seen it.

[cj]

Obviously you didn't see the Feature yesterday. They DQed the winner you ran the entire length of the stretch straight as a string on the lead. They claim he crowded the horses behind him when he clear at the quarter poll.

Now here's the kicker. They never post an inquiry. Paco Lopez objected against the top two finishers and the DQed the winner to LAST.

So CJ you've seen a million races like I have. When's the last time you saw a horse DQed from first in a stake on an on objection with no inquiry and placed last. Because I can say prior to yesterday I'd never seen it.


I saw the result but not the race. I did think it was odd. I'll check out the replay. Maybe it was an early message to Jorge?

[parlay]

not really complaining about the call, i guess it could have gone either way. just sick about what it cost me, .20 super

[BCOURTNEY]

2016-05-15 SA R4 -

Stewards: ".. the horse veered out and cost the chance of a better placing by causing the other horses to steady.."

Then they provided a replay of the tape to support the call.

Just about the worst freaking call ever. The horse didn't make contact, no bother, just cost them a chance at a better placing? :lol:

[Stoleitbreezing]

2016-05-15 SA R4 -

Stewards: ".. the horse veered out and cost the chance of a better placing by causing the other horses to steady.."

Then they provided a replay of the tape to support the call.

Just about the worst freaking call ever. The horse didn't make contact, no bother, just cost them a chance at a better placing? :lol:

I agree it was an awful call. The :2: took the turn for home wider than he would have wanted, but he never hit or impeded the :5: he still went outside with him. That's not interference.

Also the 1/2 chalk :5: basically on level terms with that one thereafter, had the length of the stretch to run on by the 50/1 :2: and couldn't get by. Bad DQ. I knew the longshot players were doomed after the 8 or so minute Inquiry.

[SuperPickle]

I saw the result but not the race. I did think it was odd. I'll check out the replay. Maybe it was an early message to Jorge?

I'm telling you it's worth a look.

Basically stuff that Gordon in every race.

Btw... People who were there described it as a near riot.

[SuperPickle]

not really complaining about the call, i guess it could have gone either way. just sick about what it cost me, .20 super

Yeah I watched it in real time and it looked like six just won. But the head on was pretty bad.

Btw... That's at least the four time I can count Junior getting taken down on a horse on the lead drifting in the last year or two.

[Stillriledup]

I saw the result but not the race. I did think it was odd. I'll check out the replay. Maybe it was an early message to Jorge?
Was a message to me got DQD out of the tri. Small money though but money's money. I thought of this when they took him down, the message sending.

[Stillriledup]

2016-05-15 SA R4 -

Stewards: ".. the horse veered out and cost the chance of a better placing by causing the other horses to steady.."

Then they provided a replay of the tape to support the call.

Just about the worst freaking call ever. The horse didn't make contact, no bother, just cost them a chance at a better placing? :lol:

Easiest call in racing, if the winner stays straight the 5 beats him easy. You can carry someone out but you'd better beat the horse you herd 9 paths out by more than a billionth of a millimeter.

[cj]

What does Irad have to do to get DQed? At this point I assume a gun has to be involved. He was on the best horse today but simply fouled the 2 horse to get out of a tight spot he put himself into. (Race 8, Belmont, 5-18-2016)

[EMD4ME]

What does Irad have to do to get DQed? At this point I assume a gun has to be involved. He was on the best horse today but simply fouled the 2 horse to get out of a tight spot he put himself into. (Race 8, Belmont, 5-18-2016)

You're starting to sound like me ;) :lol:

That was nothing :D He's done much worse. When comparing that to his other actions, he looks like a saint on May 18. Hence, no change.

[cj]

You're starting to sound like me ;) :lol:

That was nothing :D He's done much worse. When comparing that to his other actions, he looks like a saint on May 18. Hence, no change.

Yeah, I just don't get it. If you are on the best horse, why not just save every inch of ground every race and simply bull your way out when the time comes? That seems to be acceptable in New York if you are one of the top guys. I guess once somebody goes down and gets seriously hurt they'll change course.

[EMD4ME]

Yeah, I just don't get it. If you are on the best horse, why not just save every inch of ground every race and simply bull your way out when the time comes? That seems to be acceptable in New York if you are one of the top guys. I guess once somebody goes down and gets seriously hurt they'll change course.

That is exactly what it would take CJ. Mike Venezia at the 1/8 pole on a herd for some reactionary BS actions.


However, if Mike Luzzi/Dylan Davis herd Irad out, LOOK OUT. DQ in 47 seconds.

[deelo]

Horsemen's Park Omaha R6 on 5/21

I need someone to convince me why the stewards didn't have money on the 6 in the 6th.

I don't think I've ever seen a horse with a noticeable objection from another be awarded a win off a separate unclear objection later...

If you have access to replay, lemme know your thoughts.

Needless to say, I had a good day's work to gain on 7 to win & a lil but nice $1 ex w/ 7-10. On the turn, 10 gets checked and lodges an objection against 6 driving through who comes up to meet 7 who's been w2w thus far and when met, they bump, both give the whip, and 7 draws clear.

They throw out that the 6 wouldn't even be there without interfering 10 and give him the win over 7 who's lead throughout....

Wat?

Tell me why I shouldn't put on the conpiracy hat please, i'm pissed...need petting

Edit: This was a 6-race card where we already seen 1 DQ earlier and also a board change after further photo finish review((??))...seems like a lot of action for a 3-day meet. I think they walked into a bar and said Who wants to be a steward?

[cj]

Horsemen's Park Omaha R6 on 5/21

I need someone to convince me why the stewards didn't have money on the 6 in the 6th.

I don't think I've ever seen a horse with a noticeable objection from another be awarded a win off a separate unclear objection later...

If you have access to replay, lemme know your thoughts.

Needless to say, I had a good day's work to gain on 7 to win & a lil but nice $1 ex w/ 7-10. On the turn, 10 gets checked and lodges an objection against 6 driving through who comes up to meet 7 who's been w2w thus far and when met, they bump, both give the whip, and 7 draws clear.

They throw out that the 6 wouldn't even be there without interfering 10 and give him the win over 7 who's lead throughout....

Wat?

Tell me why I shouldn't put on the conpiracy hat please, i'm pissed...need petting

Edit: This was a 6-race card where we already seen 1 DQ earlier and also a board change after further photo finish review((??))...seems like a lot of action for a 3-day meet. I think they walked into a bar and said Who wants to be a steward?

I had no idea you could even bet HPO other than in Nebraska (or maybe that is what you did!). Are replays available somewhere?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Horsemen's Park Omaha R6 on 5/21

...

First, thanks for the fifteen minute replay complete with ten minutes spent meeting the entire population of Nebraska in the winner's circle for the big raffle drawing. "the...ehhh...prize...mmm...guy" :lol: :lol: I love Nebraska racing, that entire replay is classic footage future generations will watch to laugh at.

I don't know if I'd go ballistic thinking the judges cashed on the six, but that's mainly because there's pretty much zero way to have any idea what the hell is going on. The track announcer can't be much less helpful - at one point talking about how "...he comes away from the gate and actually comes over maybe three or four lanes riding the six horse..." and forcing me to rewind to the break in search of a foul at the break that never happens. Worse than that, the video room is providing replays of the alleged incidents as though it were Nad al-Sheba, with cuts from one angle to another in mid X100 Super Slo Mo just after suffering through nine strides in three minutes and just upon finally reaching the penultimate frame before the incident.

Anyway, I know who won the trip to the casino, and I know how much they got to spend, and I know who gives the prizes out, and the guy that told me all that sounded like he might have been having a good time all day. But I'm still not real clear and what everyone's problem was in the race and what the reason for doing anything at all was.

The ten checks out, looked like he ran out of horse at a bad time in the turn and got the squeeze. Sorry pal, can't claim a stake to that spot if your horse can't hold onto it. Objection laughed at. Especially with the angles we have to work with.

I think I saw the incident that causes the DQ, but for all the talking the announcer does saying a whole lot of stuff that either doesn't seem to match the visual he is describing or otherwise just distracts you from seeing little to nothing, I still think maybe something else happened and we all just keep missing it. I mean, he comes over a couple of paths or so midstretch and they make a little bump (more of a brush) which he certainly causes, but there isn't much else going on and never really looked on the pan during any replay like the six was en route to victory and was somehow impeded or had his momentum slowed. It looks like the six makes a really early move and by the time they brush, he's pretty much had it.

I'd say it was just a bad call - that there is a trivial foul and with everything going on, last race, two separate objections, part-timer judges probably - and that they just got a little wound up and felt the need to do something and call it a day. But I'm still not entirely sure I know what even happened during all of that.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I had no idea you could even bet HPO other than in Nebraska (or maybe that is what you did!). Are replays available somewhere?

Twinspires has them.

[SG4]

I can't believe nobody posted a complaint on this race, I expected an outcry all over the place on this. 3-5 shot wins & is taken down moving a 40-1 up to finish off the day. Personally I thought the chances of a DQ were near zero having watched the replays & based on other NYRA precedent, I thought the winner was clear enough during his swerving.

[EMD4ME]

I can't believe nobody posted a complaint on this race, I expected an outcry all over the place on this. 3-5 shot wins & is taken down moving a 40-1 up to finish off the day. Personally I thought the chances of a DQ were near zero having watched the replays & based on other NYRA precedent, I thought the winner was clear enough during his swerving.

Stewards took down a Kimmel BOMB the Sunday prior in race 9 for drifting out late.

Maybe they felt bad for Kimmel and put him up?

I agreed with the DQ as the 3/5 was a psycho (never changed leads, drifting, running sideways) type of horse who wasn't clear as he crossed over.

[SG4]

Stewards took down a Kimmel BOMB the Sunday prior in race 9 for drifting out late.

Maybe they felt bad for Kimmel and put him up?

I agreed with the DQ as the 3/5 was a psycho (never changed leads, drifting, running sideways) type of horse who wasn't clear as he crossed over.

Kimmel horse last week made a move an offensive lineman would've been proud of. If stewards start feeling bad for people they DQ then Paco Lopez is gonna win every objection for the next several years.

Either way for the DQ this Sunday, do you think the behavior of the winner cost the runner-up the victory? It just seemed like he was going to be a length & a quarter or so behind the whole stretch either way, and that type of deficit is always hardest for me to determine a proper DQ - you're technically clear, but actions of the horse ahead still bother the one behind it. We all know we've seen a lot worse not even reviewed at times.

[EMD4ME]

Kimmel horse last week made a move an offensive lineman would've been proud of. If stewards start feeling bad for people they DQ then Paco Lopez is gonna win every objection for the next several years.

Either way for the DQ this Sunday, do you think the behavior of the winner cost the runner-up the victory? It just seemed like he was going to be a length & a quarter or so behind the whole stretch either way, and that type of deficit is always hardest for me to determine a proper DQ - you're technically clear, but actions of the horse ahead still bother the one behind it. We all know we've seen a lot worse not even reviewed at times.

I'm not going to argue with you. Why? Because I see you're points. I called last week's DQ as a "bulldozer" move.

Stewards shouldn't feel bad for people, just make the right unbiased call. I didn't say it's ok. Just saying MAYBE they did.........

No, I don't think the 6 was winning. I actually bet the 6 off of Kimmel's recent (DQ of last week) improvement with a similar type of horse. I didn't think he was getting by in the last 1/8.

BUT......the winner needed to stay somewhat straight. I told the whole track he was a psycho hanger with poor action in the lane. In a way, I did predict that he could win and be DQ'd. I can see the stewards punishing the horse for being such a whacko. Not being funny. Keep a straight path, especially as the runner up is running hard and well behind you.

[SG4]

I just hope people file this one in their memory bank since the DQ was done on a pretty ho-hum day, if this sort of action was done with a mega-carryover potential on the line the conspiracy theorists would be out in major force.

This horse Cloontia is becoming a major handicapping thorn, several nice figs, burning a lot of $ lately but last race at least shows he will pass every horse in the right situation, type of big fave to keep betting against or is he just far better than these NYB fields when he stays straight?

[SandyW]

Gulfstream just DQ'ed a horse Amapola in race 3 that won by 10 lengths who did next to nothing in the race. Came over coming out of gate which is allowed at most tracks with no DQ. Inconsistent rulings by stewards continue to ruin the sport.

[cj]

Gulfstream just DQ'ed a horse Amapola in race 3 that won by 10 lengths who did next to nothing in the race. Came over coming out of gate which is allowed at most tracks with no DQ. Inconsistent rulings by stewards continue to ruin the sport.

I'll watch later, but I'm surprised to see it was a 2yo maiden race. Those horses are usually given a lot of leeway.

[Fox]

Gulfstream just DQ'ed a horse Amapola in race 3 that won by 10 lengths who did next to nothing in the race. Came over coming out of gate which is allowed at most tracks with no DQ. Inconsistent rulings by stewards continue to ruin the sport.

You left out the part of him setting a track record.

[Fox]

From what I think I heard the commentator saying, he keeps the record regardless of the DQ.

[SuperPickle]

Gulfstream just DQ'ed a horse Amapola in race 3 that won by 10 lengths who did next to nothing in the race. Came over coming out of gate which is allowed at most tracks with no DQ. Inconsistent rulings by stewards continue to ruin the sport.

This one looks like a clear safety issue. He clearly comes over on both the :2: an the :3:. The guy :2: almost went down. The problem is its not out of the gate. Like Vic says they'll give you 1-3 strides out of the gate depending on the track but this was about a furlong in.

It's a crappy DQ and they normally give two-year-olds a lot of leeway but my guess is the fact that someone almost got dropped made them make the change. My hunch is the jockey may have thought there was only one horse inside of him and not two.

[overthehill]

I dont think the stewards had much choice. the #2 horse looked and was bet like a contender and was completely taken out of the race when the winner came in on the #3 which the #3 reacted to by completely squeezing the #2 out of the race. very bad riding by the rider of the winner who must have known he had a ton of horse under him. the only time i ve seen a horse do what the winner did and not be taken down was bayern in the breeders cup.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I think I'm ready to gripe about one for once.

I don't get upholding the order of finish in race four at Belmont.

Surely there isn't much debate over whether or not a foul had been committed. The guy drives left-handed across half the width of the turf course right in front of the six, who clearly steadies and isn't grandstanding.

So it didn't affect the order of finish?

Granted, I don't think either the six or the five likely get by the winner at the wire, but the runner-up and third place finisher are running basically in tandem for most of the stretch run and the runner-up is beaten a head. There can be almost no doubt that Franco's move impeded Ortiz and I have to say that it takes some extreme confidence to conclude that he would have never gotten by either horse that finished in front of him with certainty.

Edited - Andy already disagrees. :)

[the little guy]

I think I'm ready to gripe about one for once.

I don't get upholding the order of finish in race four at Belmont.

Surely there isn't much debate over whether or not a foul had been committed. The guy drives left-handed across half the width of the turf course right in front of the six, who clearly steadies and isn't grandstanding.

So it didn't affect the order of finish?

Granted, I don't think either the six or the five likely get by the winner at the wire, but the runner-up and third place finisher are running basically in tandem for most of the stretch run and the runner-up is beaten a head. There can be almost no doubt that Franco's move impeded Ortiz and I have to say that it takes some extreme confidence to conclude that he would have never gotten by either horse that finished in front of him with certainty.

Edited - Andy already disagrees. :)

Believe me, a DQ there would have been GREAT for me, and I can see an argument for it, but overall we are better off as players if in those kinds of situations, the result stands....at least in my opinion.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Believe me, a DQ there would have been GREAT for me, and I can see an argument for it, but overall we are better off as players if in those kinds of situations, the result stands....at least in my opinion.

I always root against DQs whenever possible. I just didn't really see the justification there unless you think like us and just don't want to see them. I wouldn't have been surprised if it were at TuP where they DQ'ed maybe a dozen horses in seven months and set the standard early for the required severity. I was glad Franco did what he did because I did not use the six and really thought he had about as much a shot as the five mid-stretch just prior to the foul.

[cj]

Believe me, a DQ there would have been GREAT for me, and I can see an argument for it, but overall we are better off as players if in those kinds of situations, the result stands....at least in my opinion.

These are such tough calls. I really hope the rider gets fined and/or suspended in these spots. As long as that happens, I think the bettor is, as you say, better off.

[depalma113]

The Stewards at Belmont are insane. You cant' DQ the 3 for that. Garbage!

[whisperlunch]

One of the worse dq's ive seen

The 3 did nothing

[johnhannibalsmith]

Different day, different standards. Sorry I missed it live and didn't catch if these guys thought this one affected the order of finish or if a foul results in a DQ today. Maybe they can get Andy, Mig, and Maggie to do that too and then pretty much everything will be just about top notch there.

[EMD4ME]

Ortiz bro's bulldozed 2 horses in similar races earlier in the meet. In pocket at 3/16 - 1/8, trying to get out. BOTH were left up. Now, for a much smaller "infraction" we have Jose claiming to get Irad up.


These 2 should be banned from NYRA for the good of the integrity of the game.

If they do nothing wrong, the perception they cause is terrible.

[no breathalyzer]

One of the worse dq's ive seen

The 3 did nothing
i didn't see it .. but it must be bad for a guy that has 2 post in 8 yrs to post in this thread

[whisperlunch]

Very funny 😂 Actually it did cost me a win bet.
I've been here every day since then just forgot my log in
I entered that free tourney offered by pace and decided to get my log in to thank them.
I grew up very good friends with Jim the hat Bradshaw. When he passed away I just read but never posted.


Peace

[EMD4ME]

Very funny 😂 Actually it did cost me a win bet.
I've been here every day since then just forgot my log in
I entered that free tourney offered by pace and decided to get my log in to thank them.
I grew up very good friends with Jim the hat Bradshaw. When he passed away I just read but never posted.


Peace

Welcome to the posting side :) Enjoy!

[Parkview_Pirate]

One of the worse dq's ive seen

The 3 did nothing

I had a <small> win and <smaller> place bet on the 3 in the 12th at Belmont yesterday, and I saw him "make room" to get out in the stretch during the live running of the race. I switched the video feed to another track, and was not surprised to see the inq/obj in progress when I switched back.

It was definitely not in the category of an "easy" call IMHO and it did take about 10-12 mins or so, but per the rules of North American racing a case could be made for costing the 1 a placing. I've seen worse calls, and more ticky tack ones, but the poor resolution of the online video made it difficult for me to tell exactly how much interference occurred.

What I did come away with was:

- the 3 was the best horse in the race, as far as the finish goes
- the ruling required assumptions to be made on the effect of the contact between the horses, which appeared to be initiated by the 3, but then the 1 bumped back too
- in Australia or Hong Kong, there would NOT have been an inquiry, and most likely not even an objection

About a month ago I got DQ'ed at GG with a 19-1 shot in the last race, and I thought that was worse than this one, but I know that betting in North America is risky - where every race is in the hands (and minds) of the stewards for their interpretation of the outcome....

[whisperlunch]

Park view I agree. I'm used to the Cali circuit making dq's on the simplest of contact . Ny I thought was a little more relaxed. But I agree when I watched the 3 I said oh no but he had horse and needed to make his move. It should have been left alone. I only had 10 bucks to win and I didn't realize the dq until later
I've always said leave the results alone and withhold the purse from owners. Plus fine the jockeys. Don't punish the bettors.

[EMD4ME]

Great acting job by C Rosier in race 4 at CBY. He caused all the trouble in the lane and he was elbowing the rider of the winner in the lane.

He didn't win his objection but that's the kind of jock I want on my horse!

The head on replay was terrible (lights were in the way) but there was 1 shot from the infield that clearly shows his elbowing.

[Robert Fischer]

Great acting job by C Rosier in race 4 at CBY. He caused all the trouble in the lane and he was elbowing the rider of the winner in the lane.

He didn't win his objection but that's the kind of jock I want on my horse!

The head on replay was terrible (lights were in the way) but there was 1 shot from the infield that clearly shows his elbowing.

:D Probably why i have Canterbury on ''hide'

they have the replay up already... HA! some aggressive riding there.


- Charlestown R7 could be interesting - Montano is going to try to take the last out mdn winner :9: Blixt to the front and cross over.

Not a minus pool so CT will likely let it stand ;)

[Robert Fischer]

:D nope he got hung out wide

if he wins this , he's MUCH the best

[Robert Fischer]

2nd to a last move by the 1 (pretty good price on the $13 2nd choice in a race that figured to need a cross-over from a last out mdn - i didn't capitalize)

not going to be all that good price, and his gate speed isn't great, but Blixt should bury a field of a similar class next out

[EMD4ME]

In one of the most repulsive races that I have ever watched in 35 years, NYRA continues to employ some of the most obviously CROOKED and CORRUPT stewards in the world.

Race 2 at Belmont today.....

WHY DID THEY EVEN PUT UP AN INQUIRY????

If there just going to watch the dirtiest rider in the country, bump a horse TWELVE TIMES down the lane (with not 1 bump back by Franco) AND then leave it up anyway (probably because their wagering along with the boys) THEN just make it a quick official and stop pretending to actually be watching the races with a neutral eye.

I regret even betting almost $200K with NYRA in June. They don't deserve it with their integrity.


A BLANKEN JOKE.

[pandy]

I don't believe that was an inquiry, jockey's objection. I agreed with Matty on TVG, I didn't see anything that would warrant a disqualification. Just because horses make contact doesn't mean that there was interference.

[EMD4ME]

I don't believe that was an inquiry, jockey's objection. I agreed with Matty on TVG, I didn't see anything that would warrant a disqualification. Just because horses make contact doesn't mean that there was interference.

So, you're ok with a rider smashing the horse to their inside TWELVE time from the 1/4 to the wire?

[cj]

I don't believe that was an inquiry, jockey's objection. I agreed with Matty on TVG, I didn't see anything that would warrant a disqualification. Just because horses make contact doesn't mean that there was interference.

I do believe it was an inquiry.

[EMD4ME]

I do believe it was an inquiry.

I'm on track. He said Stewards Inquiry. I never heard "jockeys objection" and the board said Inquiry-without the obligatory jockey's objection.

Makes you wonder......you get hit TWELVE times in the lane and you didn't immediately claim foul?

[pandy]

So, you're ok with a rider smashing the horse to their inside TWELVE time from the 1/4 to the wire?


Taking a horse down is a serious decision, the interference has to be obvious and clear. This wasn't a situation where the horse should have been dq'd, in my opinion. But people see things differently, obviously. Both guys on TVG didn't think it was close to interference.

[EMD4ME]

Taking a horse down is a serious decision, the interference has to be obvious and clear. This wasn't a situation where the horse should have been dq'd, in my opinion. But people see things differently, obviously. Both guys on TVG didn't think it was close to interference.

Siding with TVG is not a good thing :lol:

Did you watch the head on in HD?

[pandy]

Siding with TVG is not a good thing :lol:

Did you watch the head on in HD?

Yes. Horses bump lightly like that all the time, it's a horse race. I called charts and I'm an expert on watching races and that was not close to interference in my opinion. If they took horses down for that you'd have riots.

[EMD4ME]

Yes. Horses bump lightly like that all the time, it's a horse race. I called charts and I'm an expert on watching races and that was not close to interference in my opinion. If they took horses down for that you'd have riots.

We agree to disagree.

Nevertheless, another example of the dirtiest rider in the game, getting away with whatever he wants.

[pandy]

We agree to disagree.

Nevertheless, another example of the dirtiest rider in the game, getting away with whatever he wants.


Does Irad get a lot of suspensions? I don't see him as a rough rider. Paco Lopez, yes. Angel Cordero, yep. Irad?

[EMD4ME]

Does Irad get a lot of suspensions? I don't see him as a rough rider. Paco Lopez, yes. Angel Cordero, yep. Irad?

I feel like I am wasting my time. No offense.

If I need to point out the risky (like, he can kill another rider) games that Irad plays, this interaction will go no where.

That was a DIRTY ride from the 1/4 to the wire. Not by far his dirtiest of tactics but dirty.

He just came off a suspension for his dirty riding. (1 week ago to answer your question).

[pandy]

I feel like I am wasting my time. No offense.

If I need to point out the risky (like, he can kill another rider) games that Irad plays, this interaction will go no where.

That was a DIRTY ride from the 1/4 to the wire. Not by far his dirtiest of tactics but dirty.

He just came off a suspension for his dirty riding. (1 week ago to answer your question).

No offense taken. Nothing wrong with an honest debate. Many top riders "race ride". Angel Cordero and Eddie Arcaro were two of the most fined and suspended jockeys in the history of the sport because they were so aggressive. I guess some would call it dirty, but others would call it race riding. They both ended up wealthy and in the Hall of Fame, which is where Irad Ortiz, Jr. is headed.

The thing is, Irad will win you a lot of bets doing that, but of course, sometimes he may cost you a bet by putting another rider in a tough spot. You take the good with the bad but I know when Cordero was riding, he was my bread and butter and Irad doesn't owe me anything either.

[EMD4ME]

No offense taken. Nothing wrong with an honest debate. Many top riders "race ride". Angel Cordero and Eddie Arcaro were two of the most fined and suspended jockeys in the history of the sport because they were so aggressive. I guess some would call it dirty, but others would call it race riding. They both ended up wealthy and in the Hall of Fame, which is where Irad Ortiz, Jr. is headed.

The thing is, Irad will win you a lot of bets doing that, but of course, sometimes he may cost you a bet by putting another rider in a tough spot. You take the good with the bad but I know when Cordero was riding, he was my bread and butter and Irad doesn't owe me anything either.

I loved Angel. For some reason Angel didn't irk me. Irad does. Very obnoxious and my gut says he's the schoolyard bully/orchestrator out there. He doesn't race ride IMHO, he's just dirty. You don't see much intelligence out there from him (race riding strategically against a certain foe). It's just risky moves that endanger other jockeys big time.

I still wish Rosario's bump last year would've knocked him off his seat, in that late spring turf route at Belmont.

Maybe he would've lost some of his brazenness.

[PaceAdvantage]

I feel like I am wasting my time. No offense. Oh no, why would he take offense to something like that... :lol:

[EMD4ME]

Oh no, why would he take offense to something like that... :lol:

I was being polite :blush: and I couldn't beat around the bush.

Plus, I respect him, so I said what I felt :ThmbUp:

[pandy]

I don't get offended that easily. You can't, especially in today's society.

[Pensacola Pete]

FL race 4 had no disqualification. Both #3 and #5 crowded #6 in the stretch. I can understand not taking action against #3, since #5 did the first crowding (e.g. if #5 hadn't crowded #6, it wouldn't have been in the path it was when #3 came over). I suppose the stewards figured that #6 was going to finish 4th anyway, since it was quitting against the top two and got beat about 2 lengths by #2. I don't agree with their decision, but I'm not unhappy with it, as it kept my horizontal ticket alive.

[Equifan]

Where was the Inquiry??
Geroux kept glancing at the board as he came back. I reckon everyone thought there would be one. The riders on the 2&3 were probably speechless.

I suppose you can rationalize that Chatterbox's antics at the start didn't cost Paid Up Subscriber the race but I don't think you should be able to wipe out half the field at the break with no penalty.

[NY BRED]

drum roll...

Delaware Park Handicap Stakes race 9 on 07/16 for Fillies and Mares
I'm a Chatterbox .#4, effectively wipes out the 1/2/3 entries.

We have discussed before bumping from the gate is usually
overlooked by the stewards, can't believe this isn't an instance
where the winner should have been disqualified.

:ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[no breathalyzer]

That mickey mouse bridge jumper is happy... horse should of been place behind the inside 3 horses.. but lets get real there was no way in that situation that horse was getting took down.. if that was a 5k clm on a Monday good chance DQ

[Dahoss9698]

The objection in the 6th at Saratoga is classic. Castellano shouldn't be objecting to anything. But, if anything, the winner came over on the runner up. Who in turn came over as well.

I guess Castellano is afraid to claim against Pletcher

[EMD4ME]

The objection in the 6th at Saratoga is classic. Castellano shouldn't be objecting to anything. But, if anything, the winner came over on the runner up. Who in turn came over as well.

I guess Castellano is afraid to claim against Pletcher

100% correct.

[thespaah]

The rejections of the foul claims today in both races 6 and 10 were good no calls....
There was no evidence of a result changing incident.

[cj]

The rejections of the foul claims today in both races 6 and 10 were good no calls....
There was no evidence of a result changing incident.

I was 1000% behind the 10th race no change.

[EMD4ME]

Canterbury Race 7. 20 Minute stewards inquiry. Horse almost went down at the 3/16, they show the foul 74 times and leave it up. :bang:

I can't hear audio while at AQU but that was frustrating. I though they took 20 min to decide who to take down. :bang: They made no change.

[Dahoss9698]

If there's no DQ here at Saratoga I might not play the rest of the meet

[SuperPickle]

If there's no DQ here at Saratoga I might not play the rest of the meet

I'm dying to see if Javier gets days because in watching it he did everything right. He never went left hand and when the horse shifted our hard at the sixteenth he immediately corrected and stopped whipping. The horse was just exhausted and drifting out.

By comparison if Irad was on that horse someone is on the ground. He would have never corrected.

A clear DQ but he shouldn't get days.

[SandyW]

Every race at SAR yesterday horses were slipping and sliding in that slop.
I was surprised that they took Javier down.

[EMD4ME]

Made my first foray into Delmar land today. Played a pick 5.

Singled the 6 in race 1. 6/1 winner.

Singled the 4 in race 2. 1/9 (everyone had him)

Used the 7 in race 3. DQ'd at 8/1. So, in the land of we can pull out a SHOTGUN and murder a horse at the start AND leave him up, we DQ horses who at best, were slightly at fault for tapping a FRIED horse who was sure to finish OFF THE BOARD at the 1/4 pole????????

Was I the only 1 who saw that the 6 folded over, intimidated the tiring 4, who in turn came in and also helped the 3 stumble?

I don't care if a foul happened......Leave all runners up as the 3 WAS DEAD ANYWAY.

It wasn't some vicious foul where the rider of the 6 or 7 were malicous.

It WAS A COLLAPSE AT THE 1/4 with all runners bunching.



WHAT 3 BLIND MICE ARE OUT THERE IN CALI LAND.

Do you think I will wager another buck at that craphole again this meet?

No way. Only reason I did was because I'm off today and took a peak at their card.

You lost my handle, you stupid 3 blind mice.

[no breathalyzer]

Made my first foray into Delmar land today. Played a pick 5.

Singled the 6 in race 1. 6/1 winner.

Singled the 4 in race 2. 1/9 (everyone had him)

Used the 7 in race 3. DQ'd at 8/1. So, in the land of we can pull out a SHOTGUN and murder a horse at the start AND leave him up, we DQ horses who at best, were slightly at fault for tapping a FRIED horse who was sure to finish OFF THE BOARD at the 1/4 pole????????

Was I the only 1 who saw that the 6 folded over, intimidated the tiring 4, who in turn came in and also helped the 3 stumble?

I don't care if a foul happened......Leave all runners up as the 3 WAS DEAD ANYWAY.

It wasn't some vicious foul where the rider of the 6 or 7 were malicous.

It WAS A COLLAPSE AT THE 1/4 with all runners bunching.



WHAT 3 BLIND MICE ARE OUT THERE IN CALI LAND.

Do you think I will wager another buck at that craphole again this meet?

No way. Only reason I did was because I'm off today and took a peak at their card.

You lost my handle, you stupid 3 blind mice.

nope... very poor DQ.. top candidate for worst of the yr

[RunDustyRun]

Had the :7: as well and would have hit the pick 5 if he would have stayed up...dq made absolutely no sense as the :3: was completely done and would never had hung in for even fourth, which i believe is the rule....i had more bad beats and bad luck today than ive had in years...this was just the topper...tough game without ABSOLUTELY CRAP syewards...call me tilt...

[EMD4ME]

I hear ya Dusty


I didn't have the energy to post how the late scratch destroyed me out of picks at the SPA earlier. I hear ya boys.

With the 6 "winning" I was alive 138 to the eventual winner to the last eventual winner.

If the 1 wins, I had all in race 4.

Extremely annoying.

What I found more annoying was not giving me much time to play additional pick 4's in race 3 after the 1A was scratched. God forbid we have time to wager .....It;s not like it's a wagering game or something. :bang:

[Parkview_Pirate]

I would agree the :7: was much the best, and the :3: was tiring. But since there was an outside chance the :3: might have hung on for a piece, I can see why the stewards made the DQ. Definitely a gray area call though.

I had a small bet on the :3: , and so no vested interest. It's a great example of why I prefer the Hong Kong and Aussie circuits, where it's doubtful there would have even been an inquiry, let alone a DQ.

[theiman]

Just curious, if the :3: who supposedly had no chance at that point goes down, would it have been okay to DQ the :7: ? After all he was going to finish 6th or last.

I won't argue the stewards are inconsistent, they are, but that was a foul, IMO.

[EMD4ME]

Just curious, if the :3: who supposedly had no chance at that point goes down, would it have been okay to DQ the :7: ? After all he was going to finish 6th or last.

I won't argue the stewards are inconsistent, they are, but that was a foul, IMO.

If the argument is a foul is a foul, then take the 6 and the 7 down. 6 was not innocent there.

Common sense, 100 out of 100 intelligent people, leave that as is.

To answer you, if he went down, i'd still leave the result as is. Why? Horse (3) was not placing no matter what.

IF, the 7 or the 6 were super negligent (which to me, neither was at all) then maybe fine them but don't punish the ONLY people who pay for these purses:


You, me and all horseplayers.

[salty]

I hear ya Dusty


I didn't have the energy to post how the late scratch destroyed me out of picks at the SPA earlier. I hear ya boys.

With the 6 "winning" I was alive 138 to the eventual winner to the last eventual winner.

If the 1 wins, I had all in race 4.

Extremely annoying.

What I found more annoying was not giving me much time to play additional pick 4's in race 3 after the 1A was scratched. God forbid we have time to wager .....It;s not like it's a wagering game or something. :bang:


I agree they left no time to make additional wagers. Nothing like singling the 1a then scratching it, giving me 30 seconds to run from the rail to the window and then announcing the 1 is in for purse money only then the gates open and the 1 runs away with the race no problem.

Did the 1 in race 5 really deserve to be taken down? I really feel like they favored Jose in that ruling. I thought that if you are on the rail with not much room to get through then too bad. So now anybody should be allowed to just charge through a tight hole because it's not their fault. BS takedown.

[EMD4ME]

I agree they left no time to make additional wagers. Nothing like singling the 1a then scratching it, giving me 30 seconds to run from the rail to the window and then announcing the 1 is in for purse money only then the gates open and the 1 runs away with the race no problem.

Did the 1 in race 5 really deserve to be taken down? I really feel like they favored Jose in that ruling. I thought that if you are on the rail with not much room to get through then too bad. So now anybody should be allowed to just charge through a tight hole because it's not their fault. BS takedown.

I ask you rewatch that one closely. The 1 vacated the rail to try and herd the outside horse, Rosario created an opening for the 9. When the 9 shot up the opening (his legal space now) the 1 reclosed the hole.

100% automatic to me. AND....it cost the 9 a placing 100%. No brainer on that one.

[salty]

Alright on second look I guess it was a no brainer. But everybody having to throw away winning tickets kind of puts up a veil of sheer madness. :mad:

It's ok though the next race me and my cousin went balls to the wall on the 1 and 8. If you were standing Outfront of the grandstand you might have witnessed the high 5's from the finish line to our seats. That was some easy money.

The lows and highs of a day at the track. :rolleyes:

[SG4]

nope... very poor DQ.. top candidate for worst of the yr

I usually think the CA stewards do a pretty fair job, especially enjoy that they give detailed notes & reasoning behind a DQ, but this one is hard to swallow indeed on so many levels. If anything, let the results stand and give Kent D a day or something for careless riding, but even that shouldn't be warranted since he had a hole & the outside pressure tightened it up. Seems to me like Kent is usually an exaggerator when it comes to explaining his troubled trips, wonder if that rep gets him in deep when something might not actually be his fault.

Side note - I thought Saratoga take down in the 5th was a textbook example of a horse to be DQ'ed, honestly couldn't understand why TVG folks were saying it was a toss up. There's space (albeit only like a path & a half), horse gets up in there about 3/4 length behind & closing, door is shut too late, definitely cost that horse a shot at a better placing.

[EMD4ME]

I still can't believe those 3 blind mice took that 7 down at Delmar .

How those mice actually watch a race is beyond my comprehension. :bang:

[chenoa]

Check out Del Mar Sunday Race 4. Iggy on :5: claiming foul on :1: for stretch run drifting out. 3rd decided by inches.

Claim disallowed. Stewards say both horses drifting out.

Unbelievable.

[EMD4ME]

Check out Del Mar Sunday Race 4. Iggy on :5: claiming foul on :1: for stretch run drifting out. 3rd decided by inches.

Claim disallowed. Stewards say both horses drifting out.

Unbelievable.

Gallop racer at it's finest.

Cant blame the jock on the 1, that horse was getting out SO bad on the far turn. BUT I can blame the horse and DQ the horse for taking the 5 out about 8 paths in the lane.

I agree. Should've come down for carrying him 8 paths out.

My reply to the 3 blind mice out there.......Hey 3 blind mice, OF COURSE BOTH HORSES DRIFTED OUT, ONE OF THEM DRIFTED THE OTHER OUT 8 PATHS!!!!! We get that MOTO (masters of the obvious), that is WHY we're CLAIMING FOUL you idiots.

[chenoa]

Totally agree about not blaming the jock but the horse.
And to consider the photo between them was inches even makes the stewards decision more baffling.

Don't know why I am still surprised by these guys in California.

[EMD4ME]

Totally agree about not blaming the jock but the horse.
And to consider the photo between them was inches even makes the stewards decision more baffling.

Don't know why I am still surprised by these guys in California.

I tried to bet Delmar a few days ago. After I got DQ'd in a total Bullcrap call, never again.

Give me my minor league B tracks and let's roll.

[chenoa]

I tried to bet Delmar a few days ago. After I got DQ'd in a total Bullcrap call, never again.

Give me my minor league B tracks and let's roll.

I'm with you there and add Canterbury to my list after what I saw in their Thursday night 10th a few weeks back.

[no breathalyzer]

THEY TAKE THIS 3 DOWN AT ARLINGTON I 'M NOT BETTING FOR A MONTH

[no breathalyzer]

:ThmbDown: WHATEVER in NY they wouldn't even look at it.. Castellano does this every chance he gets.

[cj]

I bet the 3 and I have no problem with that DQ.

[no breathalyzer]

After cooling down i still think it could of went either way.. the messed up part is i had a hefty exacta box 3/11 on top of betting the 3 .. so getting nothing is extra bitter.. there wasn't even any contact there. in NY it would of stayed more times then not

[cj]

After cooling down i still think it could of went either way.. the messed up part is i had a hefty exacta box 3/11 on top of betting the 3 .. so getting nothing is extra bitter.. there wasn't even any contact there. in NY it would of stayed more times then not

I was hopeful but I just knew in my heart, even watching the pan live through the stretch, that there was a problem. Yes, if it was New York maybe they leave it but we both know they weren't in New York. That comes down most places 95% of the time.

It is frustrating seeing a horse rewarded that really didn't deserve it.

[no breathalyzer]

I seen it live too... i thought it was good race riding. but i had that feeling in my heart too as the mins gone by i knew i was in trouble :ThmbDown: . Game doesn't seem fair sometimes why punish the horse there for digging in and showing heart. to me he floated the horse out to make sure he didn't get hooked and to make sure he saw the 9 and the horse dug in with all he had. More importantly why punish the bettor there if you backed the 9 there u still don't get rewarded

[upthecreek]

Anybody catch race 2 Sat @ Dmr? Another non DQ at the gate issue The horse seemed to compromise 2-3 horses and there was no change I was listening to TVG, both Todd & Loduca thought the horse should come down ,but Simon said he thought it would stay up based on what the Ca. stewards have done in the past It did

[EMD4ME]

Anybody catch race 2 Sat @ Dmr? Another non DQ at the gate issue The horse seemed to compromise 2-3 horses and there was no change I was listening to TVG, both Todd & Loduca thought the horse should come down ,but Simon said he thought it would stay up based on what the Ca. stewards have done in the past It did

Well everyone knows that ANYTHING that happens at the gate has zero impact on a horse race :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

There's so much wrong with this game, I many times wonder what I'm doing here.

[Quesmark]

8/14
Woodbine R1
#6 rolls late after a stalking wide trip is going past the leader #2 a little greenly,and makes brief contact with him.Inquiry/objection unwarranted? DQ,the best horse loses...

[thespaah]

Sunday, Race 9 Sar...Saratoga Special. Stews are looking at this. Take down the :5: or not?
Update....The Stews took down :5: Recruiting Ready and placed the horse 4th for interference at the 3 furlong pole.
Watch video....Add comments.
I think its the correct call.
The 5 took a bad step or ducked in body checking the :3: which nailed the :2:
The :3: momentarily lost its action and had to check.

[SG4]

Surprised not even a look from the stewards in the 1st at Saratoga today...I thought the winner came in very late, pushed the runner up over a path or two & cost the horse behind them the 3rd place finish as that horse checked late. This would've been the type of DQ bettors loathe as the winner was clearly best, but I have to think his actions cost another horse a better placing & that's often enough to bring on the DQ. I might've been too biased on this replay having bet the runner-up, but anyone else see this similarly?

[formula_2002]

flx r1 08-16-2016
6 dq'd what's your call?

I think it could have almost gone either way, say 60 40 no dq

[overthehill]

i thought this dq. i think in the fifth was very questionable. . the horse did come over but it looked like it was clear. the other horses altered course but i didnt see either of them checked or really even steadied. looked like a fairy routine maiden race except for the DQ,

[thespaah]

Late on this one because I just got home from my trip to Saratoga..
Please look at the video of Sat 8/20 race 8...
https://www.nyra.com/saratoga/racing/calendar/2016-08-20
Watch the stretch run inside the 1/16 pole.
To me it appeared as though the :4: was going to be the one drawing the attention of the Stewards. BTW, myself an 7 others had invested $290 each into a show parlay pool. We had hit the previous race and had nearly $400 to show on the :4: ....I thought the Inquiry was on the :4: , when actually it was on the 4th place finisher , :6: was the horse drawing the Inquiry.....
Looking at the video on both the pan and head on, I see the :4: be steered left taking advantage of a hole. To the left was the tiring :3: . The rider of that one took up and lost momentum.
The Stewards ruled interference on the :6: for interfering with the :5:. No mention of the incident with the :4: at all.
Anyway...Please view video and comment. Thanks.

[EMD4ME]

Late on this one because I just got home from my trip to Saratoga..
Please look at the video of Sat 8/20 race 8...
https://www.nyra.com/saratoga/racing/calendar/2016-08-20
Watch the stretch run inside the 1/16 pole.
To me it appeared as though the :4: was going to be the one drawing the attention of the Stewards. BTW, myself an 7 others had invested $290 each into a show parlay pool. We had hit the previous race and had nearly $400 to show on the :4: ....I thought the Inquiry was on the :4: , when actually it was on the 4th place finisher , :6: was the horse drawing the Inquiry.....
Looking at the video on both the pan and head on, I see the :4: be steered left taking advantage of a hole. To the left was the tiring :3: . The rider of that one took up and lost momentum.
The Stewards ruled interference on the :6: for interfering with the :5:. No mention of the incident with the :4: at all.
Anyway...Please view video and comment. Thanks.

The 3 had no shot at a placing in deep stretch. Maybe it was a foul but they wisely let that go.


DQ on the 6 was ticky tacky, seen horses get hit with a bulldozer and they stay up but it could've cost the 5 4th, so a justifiable DQ as the jock did not correct his horse in a timely mannor.

[thespaah]

BTW,$290 was a typo..The amount was $20 each.....

[EJXD2]

Horrible DQ on Tuesday at Fairmount.

[thespaah]

The 3 had no shot at a placing in deep stretch. Maybe it was a foul but they wisely let that go.


DQ on the 6 was ticky tacky, seen horses get hit with a bulldozer and they stay up but it could've cost the 5 4th, so a justifiable DQ as the jock did not correct his horse in a timely mannor.
Yeah..I realized the :3: was out of gas from the get go. What caught my eye was the reaction by the rider when he snatched up the horse.
I am well aware of jockeys who embellish to get a reaction from the Stewards.
After looking at the head on, I saw the :6: carry the :5: out several paths and continue taking an outward course with no real effort to straighten...

[camourous]

I watched the 5th at Canterbury today(8-28) the original order was 3-6-9-1. The objection goes up and they flash the 9 and 1.

The 1 got squeezed in between the 9 and 8 in the stretch, the 8 clearly came over into him and the 9 pretty much held his path.

They take the numbers down and make it 3-9-1........

They said the 6 caused the 8 to drift out, the 6 moved one or 2 paths to the outside in the lane, but was at least 2 lengths clear of the quitting 8, who made a sharp move to the right well after the 6 already straightened out..

[arw629]

August 29 northfield race 3...complete disgrace

[EMD4ME]

STUPID CASTELLANO HITS THE RAIL (by whipping right handed on a baby in tight quarters), BOUNCES INTO THE WINNER AND THEN CLAIMS FOUL??????????


HE SHOULD BE FINED AND SUSPENDED FOR THIS BS FOUL CLAIM.

Please tell me he didn't claim foul and that was just the 3 blind mice wanting to look at it.

Then I take my comments back (about his foul claim). He is still stupid for whipping right handed on a baby while in tight quarters.

[rsetup]

Terrible DQ in the 1st @ SAR. Horse just collapsed.

[thespaah]

:6: comes in....bang.. :1: comes out bang. Then they both come together. bang.
Dead Heat.
I say leave it alone. Watch head on
BTW Exactas pay 47 with the :6: on top, 43 with the :1: on top...Of course those will be chopped
Update. Stewards deemed no change in order. And rightly so

[johnhannibalsmith]

:6: comes in....bang.. :1: comes out bang. Then they both come together. bang.
Dead Heat.
I say leave it alone. Watch head on
BTW Exactas pay 47 with the :6: on top, 43 with the :1: on top...Of course those will be chopped
Update. Stewards deemed no change in order. And rightly so

On that exchange I agree. Drifting across the track inside the quarter-pole to impede and force the :6: to find something resembling a path to run in I'm not so sure about.

[thespaah]

On that exchange I agree. Drifting across the track inside the quarter-pole to impede and force the :6: to find something resembling a path to run in I'm not so sure about.
IMO this resembled a case of "pay for your own damages".....You're both at fault.
Neither filly took a very straight path.
Quite frankly, the rules seem to be somewhat different for two year olds.

[johnhannibalsmith]

IMO this resembled a case of "pay for your own damages".....You're both at fault.
Neither filly took a very straight path.
Quite frankly, the rules seem to be somewhat different for two year olds.

I bet on it and wanted the one to come down so I'm not very objective. But in the case of the one clearly coming out before the bumping exchange near the wire, that was all the one. She drifted out steadily and deprived the six of the path she had been running in. Once the one finally corrects and the six has a clear path again, she runs right up to her. I'm not sure that I really disagree with the decision (in part because they are inexperienced two-year-olds), but given it was a dead-heat and I find it almost impossible to believe that the six doesn't win outright if that interference never occurs, it's pretty hard to really agree with the decision as well.

[NJ Stinks]

IMO this resembled a case of "pay for your own damages".....You're both at fault.
Neither filly took a very straight path.
Quite frankly, the rules seem to be somewhat different for two year olds.

You and I were not watching the same race. The #6 lost big-time because the #1 drifted out so far.

Castellano won't never learn to stop this BS because he keeps getting away with it. Reminds me of Perret at Monmouth years ago - that stunk too.

[cj]

Anybody that thought this was coming down doesn't really pay much attention to New York racing.

[EMD4ME]

On the shutter cam, the 1 won the race.

I think the stewards saw a tough decision coming up, so they photo shopped and created a dead heat, knowing full well they would not make any changes.

Go ahead, call me crazy.

I still think they use multiple photos as they cross the supposed finish area and pick the one they want.

The one totally had a clear solid nose in front on the shutter cam.

To make everyone happy, let's make it a dead heat.

[cj]

On the shutter cam, the 1 won the race.

I think the stewards saw a tough decision coming up, so they photo shopped and created a dead heat, knowing full well they would not make any changes.

Go ahead, call me crazy.

I still think they use multiple photos as they cross the supposed finish area and pick the one they want.

The one totally had a clear solid nose in front on the shutter cam.

To make everyone happy, let's make it a dead heat.

You think stewards know how to use Photoshop? GTFOOH! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Fager Fan]

Anybody that thought this was coming down doesn't really pay much attention to New York racing.

That was my first thought. Everyone chalked it up to "kidding" when Jones complained about Chatterbox coming down last year because it was Pletcher in New York, yet that was exactly my thought waiting for the call on this inquiry.

I thought the 1 should come down for multiple reasons, including the bump that the 1 gave the 6 that knocked that one's hind end out. But I knew it'd stand. It's Pletcher in NY.

[johnhannibalsmith]

On the shutter cam, the 1 won the race.

I think the stewards saw a tough decision coming up, so they photo shopped and created a dead heat, knowing full well they would not make any changes.

Go ahead, call me crazy.

I still think they use multiple photos as they cross the supposed finish area and pick the one they want.

The one totally had a clear solid nose in front on the shutter cam.

To make everyone happy, let's make it a dead heat.

The photo that I saw in crappy resolution showed a dead heat and unless it looks differently in big, high-res view, I'll defer to that.

But, I do think that had the :1: gotten the nod outright then the decision to leave her up might have been a little tougher. Hard to say that it potentially cost her a better placing when she won. Or rephrased differently, she got there first in spite of it so what's the point on a tough call where the rider never really quit riding but the filly sure looked like she was bothered having a horse run sideways in front of her for no reason.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Anybody that thought this was coming down doesn't really pay much attention to New York racing.

I posted in another thread that it was the longshot of the meet to have her come down, but I was hoping. I wouldn't rate NY stews as terribly consistent or predictable in general. But this one probably was.

[Fager Fan]

You think stewards know how to use Photoshop? GTFOOH! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Or that they can photoshop that quickly.

There is only one shutter exactly on the wire.

[SuperPickle]

So the general compliant on this board is they need to let them play. They let them play and it was a dead heat.

I don't see anything to get worked up about.

[thespaah]

You and I were not watching the same race. The #6 lost big-time because the #1 drifted out so far.

Castellano won't never learn to stop this BS because he keeps getting away with it. Reminds me of Perret at Monmouth years ago - that stunk too.
Ok..Looking at the pan shot, when the :1: drifts out, the :6: is well back by more than a length. In other words, the track was clear all around the :1: .
Add the fact that the rider on leader did switch to right hand whipping in an effort to straighten his mount. I think that may have scored points with the Stewards.
Finally, the two final bumps which were one horse going in, the other out, may have sealed the decision as a no change.

[thespaah]

You think stewards know how to use Photoshop? GTFOOH! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Classic!!!!!

[NJ Stinks]

Ok..Looking at the pan shot, when the :1: drifts out, the :6: is well back by more than a length. In other words, the track was clear all around the :1: .
Add the fact that the rider on leader did switch to right hand whipping in an effort to straighten his mount. I think that may have scored points with the Stewards.
Finally, the two final bumps which were one horse going in,that's it the other out, may have sealed the decision as a no change.

If you don't think all that drifting by the #1 cost #6 an inch or more, that's it. Time to move on.

[Fager Fan]

The first couple of brushes were that - brushes. But then the 1 bumped the 6 hard. That is why I think the 1 should've come down. That bump definitely cost the 6 as she had legs bumped out from under her. The two brushes earlier didn't cost either filly momentum.

[SuperPickle]

If you don't think all that drifting by the #1 cost #6 an inch or more, that's it. Time to move on.

We all agree on that its the question of whether it's enough to take the horse down.

[cj]

We all agree on that its the question of whether it's enough to take the horse down.


Agree here. In the real world, I think it is a DQ. But the NY stewards have set a precedent, kind of like the Bayern rule in California.

[cj]

Or that they can photoshop that quickly.

There is only one shutter exactly on the wire.

I do think they were generous in calling it a dead heat.

[burnsy]

If they took :3: Street Fashion down, I would of quit for the day. WTF kind of objection was that? Johnny V should be fined for that ride and call.

[bello]

If they took :3: Street Fashion down, I would of quit for the day. WTF kind of objection was that? Johnny V should be fined for that ride and call.

Quit for the day? That would have been the worst dq in history. Stewards aclled the INQ first and JV than claimed foul. At least that was the order they announced it. And then they view what was a non event for 10 minutes.

Losing more and more confidence in these guys in the judges booth at NYRA.

[EMD4ME]

Quit for the day? That would have been the worst dq in history. Stewards aclled the INQ first and JV than claimed foul. At least that was the order they announced it. And then they view what was a non event for 10 minutes.

Losing more and more confidence in these guys in the judges booth at NYRA.

I can't believe someone of your ilk actually had some confidence in them to begin with :lol: :lol: :lol: (meant as a compliment my twin)

[EMD4ME]

I do think they were generous in calling it a dead heat.

I'm telling you. They wanted to avoid the decision, so they just called it a dead heat. (Dead serious)

[cj]

I'm telling you. They wanted to avoid the decision, so they just called it a dead heat. (Dead serious)

I think there is definitely room for improvement in the process after the Del Mar thing and this one. No doubt some liberties can be taken with that line.

[burnsy]

Quit for the day? That would have been the worst dq in history. Stewards aclled the INQ first and JV than claimed foul. At least that was the order they announced it. And then they view what was a non event for 10 minutes.

Losing more and more confidence in these guys in the judges booth at NYRA.

thanks I thought it was the other way around but They ended up leaving it up there would've been a travesty

[Dahoss9698]

They would never DQ Irad in favor of Francisco Arrieta anyway but why was Irad allowed to herd so severely in the 1st?

If Arrieta does not push his mount out as he was being herded he would have run right into the winner who was coming over on him.

I guess I'm trying to understand what Arrieta is supposed to do. Check?

[rsetup]

At some point, some jock will object to being herded and collide with the herder. Chances are, someone will be severely hurt or killed. This isn't race riding. It's gaining an unfair advantage by playing chicken.

On the flip side, the runner up took out the rest of the field (the two others) out of the gate.

[cj]

Not a peep on the horrendous non DQ at Los Al today?

[EMD4ME]

They would never DQ Irad in favor of Francisco Arrieta anyway but why was Irad allowed to herd so severely in the 1st?

If Arrieta does not push his mount out as he was being herded he would have run right into the winner who was coming over on him.

I guess I'm trying to understand what Arrieta is supposed to do. Check?

Solid point. I think it would taken poor Arrieta keeping straight, clipping heels and going down hard. If he made sure the ambulance came to get him, played dead and/or out of it, then maybe he'd have a good shot at being up. Not because it wasn't a foul but because of who he is and who the herder was.

It's a real joke out there.

Plus to boot, Irad was riding a horse that is (right now) incapable of a "rebrake/new energy into the lane, sustaining his speed". He rode a need the leader that was best suited speed popping and holding on late. Rating and trying to outsprint the weak horses behind him was the wrong move IMHO.

However, I called it before the race. He will over rate, be passive and then when he realizes he doesn't have a rebrake, he will herd to death to get this chalk home.

Not patting myself on the back, believe me, more like telling myself: Why do I even bother in these types of races.

[SuperPickle]

Not a peep on the horrendous non DQ at Los Al today?


"Stewards Luis Jauregui, Kim Sawyer and Tom Ward ruled in a majority decision that Evolve did drift out, but did not so do enough to keep Dawn of the Empire from a better placing. Evolve finished a half-length in front of Dawn of the Empire in the five-furlong race."

Personally I think the :5: gets up but it would have been close.

Majority decision means one of them thought he should have been DQed. It was a 2-1 vote.

Neither the best nor the worst work I've seen.

[cj]

"Stewards Luis Jauregui, Kim Sawyer and Tom Ward ruled in a majority decision that Evolve did drift out, but did not so do enough to keep Dawn of the Empire from a better placing. Evolve finished a half-length in front of Dawn of the Empire in the five-furlong race."

Personally I think the :5: gets up but it would have been close.

Majority decision means one of them thought he should have been DQed. It was a 2-1 vote.

Neither the best nor the worst work I've seen.

I don't like stewards playing God. It was as clear a foul as you'll ever see and certainly could have cost the 5 a position. Do we really need stewards splitting hairs like this when the foul is obvious?

(I didn't bet the race)

[SuperPickle]

I don't like stewards playing God. It was as clear a foul as you'll ever see and certainly could have cost the 5 a position. Do we really need stewards splitting hairs like this when the foul is obvious?

(I didn't bet the race)

Agreed. My only theory is I've always thought stewards are conservative when a horse drifts into another horses path versus THROUGH their path which is the case here.

[WP1981]

Imagine being the guy alive to the 5-8-9 to scoop the Delaware P5. Sweat out a 10 min plus inquiry/obj and then have the 1 put up. Good times. :bang:

[EMD4ME]

Imagine being the guy alive to the 5-8-9 to scoop the Delaware P5. Sweat out a 10 min plus inquiry/obj and then have the 1 put up. Good times. :bang:

I got DQ'd out of $20,000 worth of Pick 4's once. To this day, I know in my heart the stewards DQ'D the wrong horse. I was in between and the 3 wide horse leaned in, causing my horse to bump the rail horse in a 3 way stretch duel.

To this day, I won't forget it. BUT....what's weird is, I'll misplay a ticket/lose by a nose and lose $100,000 and forget that in 1 NY minute as you need to, to survive.

I feel terrible for this player.

[v j stauffer]

I got DQ'd out of $20,000 worth of Pick 4's once. To this day, I know in my heart the stewards DQ'D the wrong horse. I was in between and the 3 wide horse leaned in, causing my horse to bump the rail horse in a 3 way stretch duel.

To this day, I won't forget it. BUT....what's weird is, I'll misplay a ticket/lose by a nose and lose $100,000 and forget that in 1 NY minute as you need to, to survive.

I feel terrible for this player.

The word duel means two. Not possible to have a 3 way "duel"

[EMD4ME]

The word duel means two. Not possible to have a 3 way "duel"

I know, we've covered that. I prefer 3 way duel, instead of a threesome coming home in tight/ threesome nip and tuck to the wire etc. :lol:

[EMD4ME]

July 2nd, 2016 Race 2, Irad totally bullies Franco in the lane with 12 disgustingly proactive bumps. Franco just keeps a straight line, hoping to get a DQ, I guess. No change.


Today, Race 7, Irad bullies Franco again. Not as severe as July 2nd. No DQ. An inch seperated them.

At least the NYRA "Stewards" are consistent.....

[the little guy]

I have no idea how the Stewards didn't DQ the first finisher in today's 7th. It's utterly baffling to me.

[rsetup]

Hard to believe Franco never switched the whip to his left.

[threegoldstars]

I know, we've covered that. I prefer 3 way duel, instead of a threesome coming home in tight/ threesome nip and tuck to the wire etc. :lol:

It's "triel". :)

[cj]

I have no idea how the Stewards didn't DQ the first finisher in today's 7th. It's utterly baffling to me.

Chart guy tells a different story than the video I saw too. He seems to put the blame on both.

[ReplayRandall]

Chart guy tells a different story than the video I saw too. He seems to put the blame on both.

Hmmmm...Here's the head-on of Race#7, the body-lean by Irad is laughable, and the stewards didn't see this?:

https://www.nyra.com/belmont/racing/replays

[cj]

Hmmmm...Here's the head-on of Race#7, the body-lean by Irad is laughable, and the stewards didn't see this?:

https://www.nyra.com/belmont/racing/replays


It is honestly disgusting that is allowed to stand. It is a foul and it is dangerous. But the stewards working at NYRA tracks have painted themselves into a corner because this has been allowed for years.

I have no idea what kind of oversight there is on these guys but it sure must not be much.

My point was the chart caller was way off base too.

[ReplayRandall]

It is honestly disgusting that is allowed to stand. It is a foul and it is dangerous. But the stewards working at NYRA tracks have painted themselves into a corner because this has been allowed for years.

I have no idea what kind of oversight there is on these guys but it sure must not be much.

My point was the chart caller was way off base too.

Maybe the chart-caller recalls by memory what he writes, and doesn't watch replays....:lol:

[Tara73]

I have no idea how the Stewards didn't DQ the first finisher in today's 7th. It's utterly baffling to me.
You had a dog in this fight. It could have gone either way.

[cj]

You had a dog in this fight. It could have gone either way.

Obviously easy to say after the fact since you know the outcome, and of course you will be negative towards Andy, but that was a horrible call.

(you didn't fool anyone with your other thread about Andy, by the way)

[EMD4ME]

Obviously easy to say after the fact since you know the outcome, and of course you will be negative towards Andy, but that was a horrible call.

(you didn't fool anyone with your other thread about Andy, by the way)

I'm a Tara 73 fan BUT...... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[EMD4ME]

I have no idea how the Stewards didn't DQ the first finisher in today's 7th. It's utterly baffling to me.

I'm offering to take the elevator up (right next to the NYRA BETS PLAYERS LOUNGE) and take a walk with you and ask them.

The elevator gang knows us both every well.

What day shall we meet?

[overthehill]

just venting. yes the DQed horse bumped the runner up , but for one thing i thought the runner up iniitated it by different out several paths into the winner and more importantly the foul did not impact the race. there is no way the runner up was beating the winnner and the runner up stayed second. and i always thought stewards justified not taking horses down for bumping and even impediing with their ability to discern whether or not the final outcome was affected by the alleged trangresssion. I continue to believe that the fair thing is to let results stand for bettng purposes but if they want to alter the outcome for purse distribution and fine the jockeys or suspend them have at it. I have seen at least three instances of winning horses drifting out in the stretch many paths and forcing other horses wide and not one of them was taken down. BTW there was another DQ today at delaware park for bumping in the stretch.

[Tara73]

Yes, there was blame on both so how could you expect a change given the history of the NYRA stewards. It was the right decision.

[EMD4ME]

Yes, there was blame on both so how could you expect a change given the history of the NYRA stewards. It was the right decision.

What is your expert opinion of the July 2nd, 2nd race?

Do you mind rewatching that one and telling me your honest thoughts?

[menifee]

These stewards have to be kidding me. The 1 won by 8 lengths. It did not impact the finish. The problem was created by the 10 that came out, not the 1. How you could dq a horse that won by that many lengths is banana land.

[EMD4ME]

These stewards have to be kidding me. The 1 won by 8 lengths. It did not impact the finish. The problem was created by the 10 that came out, not the 1. How you could dq a horse that won by that many lengths is banana land.

I agree. It was a foul but the horse was blowing by, by 8 lengths.

No placings really impacted.

[no breathalyzer]

I bet this horse and i knew he was going to come down.. i didn't even leave the feed on after i took a look at replay.. Sucks horse was the best by a mile .. but you can do that shit. the 6 was finishing up and was compromised a higher placing in the race

[dilanesp]

Stewards correctly took down the 6 in the 8th race yesterday (9/23) at Los Al, but there was no stewards inquiry despite the obvious interference in a race won by a nose! The jockey actually had to claim foul! Stewards were sleeping.

[menifee]

In the Belmont Second Race, the 4 horse on the turn takes out two horses, makes physical contact and costs them a placing. No inquiry - result stands.

In the Belmont Fourth Race, the 6 horse drifts out - no contact is made. They throw up the inquiry sign and take the 6 down. Unclear whether the drifting costs the 4 horse a placing.

So physically bumping a horse is fine, but drifting is not allowed. I'm just trying to understand the rules.

[EasyGoer89]

In the Belmont Second Race, the 4 horse on the turn takes out two horses, makes physical contact and costs them a placing. No inquiry - result stands.

In the Belmont Fourth Race, the 6 horse drifts out - no contact is made. They throw up the inquiry sign and take the 6 down. Unclear whether the drifting costs the 4 horse a placing.

So physically bumping a horse is fine, but drifting is not allowed. I'm just trying to understand the rules.

I was on the wrong end of both I needed the 4 to come down in race 2 I was shocked no inquiry. The last 5 times Ortiz herded me, he stayed up, I needed him to be 2nd to hit the tri, on wrong end again in race 4. Ortiz carried a guy 10 lanes wide in the first at spa (think maybe sept 5 but not sure) and he stayed up and that cost me a pretty big pick 5. Lack of consistency is a killer.

[Track Phantom]

I've seen bad DQ's in my life but the DQ at Santa Anita in the last race (8th) today (10/21/16) is an absolute disgrace. No way in hell should the winner have been disqualified. No way!

There might have even been a bit of tightening caused by the 5 but the video doesn't support it (bad angle). I cannot believe what I just saw.

Unbelievable!

[EMD4ME]

I've seen bad DQ's in my life but the DQ at Santa Anita in the last race (8th) today (10/21/16) is an absolute disgrace. No way in hell should the winner have been disqualified. No way!

There might have even been a bit of tightening caused by the 5 but the video doesn't support it (bad angle). I cannot believe what I just saw.

Unbelievable!

I don't play Cali but in the couple of times I have, I have seen the DUMBEST DQ'S/NON DQ'S that I have seen in my life.

These stewards don't EVEN KNOW HOW TO SPELL STEWARDS.

How do you take down a horse who (got the perfect trip and was obvious to the world was winning as the race developed) at best impacted a horse who was destined to not hitting the super, no matter what at the 1/4.

They might've been so obsessed with the super high 5 spot BUT you don't punish/alter a top 4 for a horse who maaaaayyyybbbeeee might've been 5th at BEST.

PLUS, there was no clear angle to determine the fault.

WTF do these IDIOTS think happens in a collapse???????????? Horses drift and tire.

If I were in charge, those stewards, would be FIRED Immediately, with no hearing.

Pension taken away too.

[EasyGoer89]

I don't play Cali but in the couple of times I have, I have seen the DUMBEST DQ'S/NON DQ'S that I have seen in my life.

These stewards don't EVEN KNOW HOW TO SPELL STEWARDS.

How do you take down a horse who (got the perfect trip and was obvious to the world was winning as the race developed) at best impacted a horse who was destined to not hitting the super, no matter what at the 1/4.

They might've been so obsessed with the super high 5 spot BUT you don't punish/alter a top 4 for a horse who maaaaayyyybbbeeee might've been 5th at BEST.

PLUS, there was no clear angle to determine the fault.

WTF do these IDIOTS think happens in a collapse???????????? Horses drift and tire.

If I were in charge, those stewards, would be FIRED Immediately, with no hearing.

Pension taken away too.

and jocks on tiring horses panic, like the guy on the 6 did.

[Track Phantom]

I know it's easy to throw arrows at the stewards and rip on people in the public eye but, in my opinion, that was corrupt and disgraceful. I have no idea what their agenda is but I do know that the #5 did not deserve to come down.

Like I mentioned, there may have been something that occurred to warrant a DQ but all of the angles were obscured and so conjecture had to be instituted as to whether the 5 caused anyone a "better placing" (the most idiotic statement ever uttered by the way).

MLB, NFL have instant replay and do not overturn a call unless there is indisputable evidence. Apparently no one sent that memo to these ass-clowns that common sense and fairness is to only DQ when it is an absolute certainty.

In full disclosure, I had the p3 for $4 and didn't have the #3 (only had a small win bet as a cover), so I am mad about the outcome. Think about those who had the p4 for $25k and were flat out robbed.

I really don't understand this at all. Why on earth would you DQ a horse when the action is not indisputable? Yet, when there is blatant action and a no-brainer, horses stay up. I honestly think this was corrupt. No other explanation. None!

[EMD4ME]

and jocks on tiring horses panic, like the guy on the 6 did.

These stewards must be the same STUPID idiots who enter a highway and dart 4 lanes over to the left lane in 2 seconds, meanwhile the 3 lanes that they crossed, had not a car in front of them. All the while, going just at or under the speed limit.

The dumbest of the dumb OR as track phantom said.....DELETED

[rsetup]

Just to be clear, what exactly is the disagreement about:

1) the horse didn't do anything --- not true

2) the bothered horses weren't contending

[stringmail]

I can't speak to Track Phantom's frustrations. He clearly feels there was little impact and perhaps Pedroza overreacted on the 6 and his overreaction affected the 8. The maddening part of this is that if Van Dyke had waited, it all might have been avoided.

It is the same old song with the So Cal stewards, though.

In race 1, yesterday, virtually the same thing occurred with 1 horse drifting out on the turn for home to affect a rival. There was an inquiry and poor Michael Wrona had to explain away some non-sensical decision making.

Virtually the same thing happens in today's 8th and a change is made.

No consistency that I can see.

I benefited today. I did not benefit yesterday

[Track Phantom]

They take down the winner of the last race on Friday for impossible to find infraction but leave up the Baffert/Bejarano winner of race 8 on Saturday despite the horse floating out and cascading 4 runners and hindering all of their chances. How can anyone take this garbage seriously?

Anyone who watches those two races and is told one was DQ'd and the other wasn't, would have had to believe it was the Baffert horse DQ'd.

In my opinion, there is no possible way these stewards are acting in good faith. It's too random and inconsistent. No one can be that bad.

[EasyGoer89]

They take down the winner of the last race on Friday for impossible to find infraction but leave up the Baffert/Bejarano winner of race 8 on Saturday despite the horse floating out and cascading 4 runners and hindering all of their chances. How can anyone take this garbage seriously?

Anyone who watches those two races and is told one was DQ'd and the other wasn't, would have had to believe it was the Baffert horse DQ'd.

In my opinion, there is no possible way these stewards are acting in good faith. It's too random and inconsistent. No one can be that bad.

There is more leeway on the hill, horses fan out coming off the dirt crossing while switching surfaces twice in a few strides while turning and running downhill, you get leeway, as it should be.

[EMD4ME]

So at Turf Paralyzed, they just DQ'd a horse because his jockey ELBOWED the runner up's jockey.

Maybe NYRA's 3 scarecrows could take a lesson and learn from these 3, normally incompetent idiots?

I know of races that come to mind where Iherd Ortiz leaned his body and elbow onto Manny Franco in stretch drives.

Of course, the stewards saw no foul in those cases.