The DQ (or non-DQ) complaint thread

[Track Phantom]

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.
That DQ at Turf Paradise was a disgrace to the game. Stupid, overreaching, finger to the bettors bullshit. The runner-up was whipping left-handed and came into the winner, who's rider was also whipping left-handed, thus his elbow would be up when the runner came into him. I now believe the stewards are just f'cking with the public.

[EMD4ME]

That DQ at Turf Paradise was a disgrace to the game. Stupid, overreaching, finger to the bettors bullshit. The runner-up was whipping left-handed and came into the winner, who's rider was also whipping left-handed, thus his elbow would be up when the runner came into him. I now believe the stewards are just f'cking with the public.

I was referring to the NYRA stewards and Iherd's tactics more than this 1 specific Turf Paralyzed incident BUT I hear and see your point.

P.S. If one asked for my opinion on that DQ, I'd say it was total BS as well. There was not any intentional or unintentional elbowing there.

One can see intentional elbowing by just watching Iherd do his thing.

[Exotic1]

That DQ at Turf Paradise was a disgrace to the game. Stupid, overreaching, finger to the bettors bullshit. The runner-up was whipping left-handed and came into the winner, who's rider was also whipping left-handed, thus his elbow would be up when the runner came into him. I now believe the stewards are just f'cking with the public.

Agree. What did they see in minute 10 (?) of the review that they didn't see in the first 9 minutes? Phantom DQ. I was involved monetarily, but at this point I have to laugh. It's so ridiculous you can only laugh. It's either cry or laugh. If anything, the #6 leans into the #7 in the stretch. They didn't post any Objection, you'd figure the jock on the #6 would have claimed. Jock on #6 has to throw the stews a bone. Maybe the #7 tightened the #6 going into the turn, but how can you definitively know? I don't want the racing gods to hear, so we must talk quietly. The key is to live for another 1000 years with a perpetual bankroll b/c it all evens out in year 950.

[EMD4ME]

Agree. What did they see in minute 10 (?) of the review that they didn't see in the first 9 minutes? Phantom DQ. I was involved monetarily, but at this point I have to laugh. It's so ridiculous you can only laugh. It's either cry or laugh. If anything, the #6 leans into the #7 in the stretch. They didn't post any Objection, you'd figure the jock on the #6 would have claimed. Jock on #6 has to throw the stews a bone. Maybe the #7 tightened the #6 going into the turn, but how can you definitively know? I don't want the racing gods to hear, so we must talk quietly. The key is to live for another 1000 years with a perpetual bankroll b/c it all evens out in year 950.

About 5 years ago, I saw a DQ at Turf Paralyzed for a horse who was never near another horse. 2 horse in a Turf Route. I quit playing seriously at that point.

I'll play some peanuts there but that's it.

They definitely play with "house" rules.

[Exotic1]

About 5 years ago, I saw a DQ at Turf Paralyzed for a horse who was never near another horse. 2 horse in a Turf Route. I quit playing seriously at that point.

I'll play some peanuts there but that's it.

They definitely play with "house" rules.

I should have just played the 5th to 6th double but I extended the risk by playing p4's, with minimal upside. Not so smart but I'll never learn.

[EMD4ME]

I should have just played the 5th to 6th double but I extended the risk by playing p4's, with minimal upside. Not so smart but I'll never learn.

As a P5 P4 player, I learned to NOT trust those Stewards there. I don't blame you.

After I googled the owner and asked around, I found out why......

[Track Phantom]

...If anything, the #6 leans into the #7 in the stretch.....

The official reason for the DQ was the rider of the winner put his elbow in the face of the rider of the runner-up. I shit you not. That was the reason. The winner (horse that is) never did a thing to the other runner. It was the rider who apparently was so skilled that he could control this 1000 pound animal and give an elbow to a rider on another horse in order to win the race.

What's next, a DQ for a rider raising his voice during the race?

[Robert Fischer]

bad one just now r3 parx

helped me out, because it turned a losing ticket into a winning ticket :ThmbUp:

always good to have some fortuitous randomness

anyway, the :5: Our Country was already beaten when he was fouled by the winner. There's the whole "well we never know what would have happened" argument, but I think a competent race-watcher can see that he was beaten, and 'know'.
I really should know the exact guidelines concerning interpretation, but I don't. I simply chime in with certainty and ignorance.


side point- Our Country was experiencing an issue in the stretch. Have to re-watch for his next race, but he was either violently swishing his tail because of an aversion to the whip, or because of infirmity. Worth reviewing and considering when he faces winners next time.

[menifee]

bad one just now r3 parx

helped me out, because it turned a losing ticket into a winning ticket :ThmbUp:

always good to have some fortuitous randomness

anyway, the :5: Our Country was already beaten when he was fouled by the winner. There's the whole "well we never know what would have happened" argument, but I think a competent race-watcher can see that he was beaten, and 'know'.
I really should know the exact guidelines concerning interpretation, but I don't. I simply chime in with certainty and ignorance.


side point- Our Country was experiencing an issue in the stretch. Have to re-watch for his next race, but he was either violently swishing his tail because of an aversion to the whip, or because of infirmity. Worth reviewing and considering when he faces winners next time.

This was a horrible DQ. The 5 was well well beaten and the 2 was much the best. The 5 jockey acted quite a bit on this as well. Parx Stewards are incompetent.

[DeoVolente]

Lopez was whipping left handed and made contact with Our Country causing that horse to lose stride. The horse had to come down.

[pele polo]

Casse ships into Mahoning Valley and wins a 200k stake by an easy 3 lengths.

Home field advantage on the objection? Leading trainer Radosevich and jockey Luis Colon get bumped up and what looked like an easy no call.

[arw629]

I live in the area and I'm a big fan of Ohio racing ...i was on track last year for this day and wanted to make it there today but work didn't permit me...i was thinking of placing a bet early on awesome banner but figured he'd be odds on and didn't want short odds on a horse who hasn't raced outside of Florida ..anyway I just got off work and saw the results and was stunned to see Mo Don't No on top and a fat 4.00 to place on awesome banner to place....just watched the replay and the objection and I just can't believe they took that horse down...I'm a big fan of Ohio racing but that paints a bad image right there in their biggest race of the year to boot....sympathies out to the connections and bettors of Awesome Banner who was much the best and should have never come down...I saw on Mahoning ' s website a few months ago they were looking to hire a steward..
Not sure if they hired someone new or not for the team but come on that was awful

[arw629]

Also I am glad I didn't bet bc that would have been a hard one to get over at 3-1...i mean how did this horse go off at 3-1? I understand why the 5 and 7 took money but Awesome Banner looked every bit the horse on paper to beat in this race

[EMD4ME]

I live in the area and I'm a big fan of Ohio racing ...i was on track last year for this day and wanted to make it there today but work didn't permit me...i was thinking of placing a bet early on awesome banner but figured he'd be odds on and didn't want short odds on a horse who hasn't raced outside of Florida ..anyway I just got off work and saw the results and was stunned to see Mo Don't No on top and a fat 4.00 to place on awesome banner to place....just watched the replay and the objection and I just can't believe they took that horse down...I'm a big fan of Ohio racing but that paints a bad image right there in their biggest race of the year to boot....sympathies out to the connections and bettors of Awesome Banner who was much the best and should have never come down...I saw on Mahoning ' s website a few months ago they were looking to hire a steward..
Not sure if they hired someone new or not for the team but come on that was awful

That was a terrible DQ. Just watched it multiple times. Was it a minor irrelevant foul? Yes. Ridiculous to take that horse down, 2nd horse was never winning. No one cost a placing.

Repulsive.

[ultracapper]

Also I am glad I didn't bet bc that would have been a hard one to get over at 3-1...i mean how did this horse go off at 3-1? I understand why the 5 and 7 took money but Awesome Banner looked every bit the horse on paper to beat in this race

You got 3-1 because big money knew the fix was in.

[FakeNameChanged]

I actually picked Mo on NorCalGreg's Spot plays thread and said to myself after watching race, No Way he's going Up.

[ultracapper]

If this poster in another thread was talking about the same horse, the ultimate winner was 10/1 ML and opened at 6/5. Is that right? Paid $13.80. Same horse?

What a rig.

[FakeNameChanged]

If this poster in another thread was talking about the same horse, the ultimate winner was 10/1 ML and opened at 6/5. Is that right? Paid $13.80. Same horse?

What a rig.
That was me who posted that. I saw race live and said, well I'll settle for 2nd, and went outside with grandson to ride his bike. Had to watch replay later. I've had these go against me many times.

[cj]

That was a terrible DQ. Just watched it multiple times. Was it a minor irrelevant foul? Yes. Ridiculous to take that horse down, 2nd horse was never winning. No one cost a placing.

Repulsive.

These bush league tracks sure seem to discourage out of town shippers from taking the money with them. Seen it many times in the past and only worse with bush league racinos.

[EMD4ME]

These bush league tracks sure seem to discourage out of town shippers from taking the money with them. Seen it many times in the past and only worse with bush league racinos.

I agree. Happened at NYRA once as well. I'll never forget. I had a Michael Gill trained horse about to win, when his foe's jock, trained by Richie Dutrow, hit my horse in the face with the whip.

My horse's head went straight up in the air and he lost his action 70-100 yards out. No doubt the whip hit his face and cost him the race.

Jockey's objection and inquiry went up. No brainer.......

Stewards said because the race went off near 4:30 and darkness had ensued, it was too hard to definitively tell if there was an infraction.

Gill was screwed.

So was I, out of a massive pick 4.

But I agree, it seems more likely at a bush league slot track.

[rrpic6]

Many accused the Stewards at Santa Anita of the same thing when they didn't DQ Bayern in the 2014 B C Classic. Since it was Baffert's horse, they wouldn't take it down, since he's the Hometown Big Man. No proof of Stewards playing favorites then or today.

The head-on view clearly shows Awesome Banner lugging to the right at least 3 paths after left hand whipping by Tyler Gaffalione. Since he was not yet clear of Mo Dont No and Luis Colon, the Stewards were within their rights to declare interference. Most likely Mo Dont No wasn't fast enough to go by Awesome Banner but certainly had his momentum impeded. The Stewards in Ohio as in California or any other State, have no agenda when making calls. To think otherwise is foolish.

RR

[cj]

They are humans. Even if they don't know they are biased to local runners in the biggest race of the year, they probably are. No reasonable person could really believe that impacted the order of finish unless they wanted to believe it...IMO of course.

[SuperPickle]

You got 3-1 because big money knew the fix was in.

This post is why we can't have nice things.

[SG4]

Laurel's 7th today, eventual winner bulls his way out with a bump against the eventual runner up, and pushes him a little more during the stretch run too. Runner-up loses by the slightest of noses, thought it was an automatic DQ but they left the winner up. To make it even worse, they show the win photo & I don't see the winners' nose in front. A reverse angle/close up would've been nice on the simulcast, but I didn't see one.

I had no financial interest in this race whatsoever, but definitely won't be counting on anything with these officials going forward.

[FakeNameChanged]

Laurel's 7th today, eventual winner bulls his way out with a bump against the eventual runner up, and pushes him a little more during the stretch run too. Runner-up loses by the slightest of noses, thought it was an automatic DQ but they left the winner up. To make it even worse, they show the win photo & I don't see the winners' nose in front. A reverse angle/close up would've been nice on the simulcast, but I didn't see one.

I had no financial interest in this race whatsoever, but definitely won't be counting on anything with these officials going forward. I had the bumpee, #7. I've had three DQ's go my way in the last couple weeks and said, well I'm due to lose one of these.

[cj]

They made the right call at Del Mar, no way that should be a no contest.

[EasyGoer89]

They made the right call at Del Mar, no way that should be a no contest.

I wonder if there's precedent for debris on the track I don't remember a situation like that before at any track. I thought they would make it a no contest myself I'm surprised at the decision.

[cj]

I wonder if there's precedent for debris on the track I don't remember a situation like that before at any track. I thought they would make it a no contest myself I'm surprised at the decision.

First, you have to consider that they really don't want to give money back. I'm not being jaded, it is a business.

I've seen much worse be allowed to stand, including loose horses causing all kinds of trouble. Even the Pimlico race where a guy ran on the track was allowed to stand, with only Artax (I believe) being refunded.

[EasyGoer89]

First, you have to consider that they really don't want to give money back. I'm not being jaded, it is a business.

I've seen much worse be allowed to stand, including loose horses causing all kinds of trouble. Even the Pimlico race where a guy ran on the track was allowed to stand, with only Artax (I believe) being refunded.

This happened many moons ago at Del mar, I don't remember if it was no contest or not

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WrYuZtG2MqI

[CincyHorseplayer]

First, you have to consider that they really don't want to give money back. I'm not being jaded, it is a business.

I've seen much worse be allowed to stand, including loose horses causing all kinds of trouble. Even the Pimlico race where a guy ran on the track was allowed to stand, with only Artax (I believe) being refunded.

I remember that. Think it was my first season. He was swinging at the horse. What an idiot! :D

[SuperPickle]

They made the right call at Del Mar, no way that should be a no contest.

My thought exactly.

However they lucked out because of the amount of debris. It was so much it affected every horse. If it had affected some and not others it would have been an issue.

[no breathalyzer]

This happened many moons ago at Del mar, I don't remember if it was no contest or not

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WrYuZtG2MqI



holly shit! never seen that video before.. they were very lucky there

[ReplayRandall]

GP- race#3....Paco on the 4, cuts off the 3 down at the rail, then herds the 5 at least 8 paths out to mid-track. If this isn't a DQ, it's going to be a long meet for me at GP....

EDIT.....There was NO DQ.....long meet for me unless I quit giving GP any action...:ThmbDown:

[cj]

GP- race#3....Paco on the 4, cuts off the 3 down at the rail, then herds the 5 at least 8 paths out to mid-track. If this isn't a DQ, it's going to be a long meet for me at GP....

EDIT.....There was NO DQ.....long meet for me unless I quit giving GP any action...:ThmbDown:

I'm convinced they flip coins are throw darts at Gulfstream. Other times they DQ for very little.

[rsetup]

The 3 wasn't going anywhere and absolutely nothing there to warrant a look, even.

Waited till the headon as it appeared he severely herded the 5 in the lane. But it wasn't anywhere near as bad as it appeared in the pan shot. What disappoints me is the way Rosario seems to just accept being herded. His horse was on the wrong lead but the never aggressively tried to ride the horse and didn't offer any resistance to the herding. Unfortunately, this is how he rides. Hard to reconcile an otherwise very aggressive rider with one that meekly accepts being herded.

[SG4]

GP- race#3....Paco on the 4, cuts off the 3 down at the rail, then herds the 5 at least 8 paths out to mid-track. If this isn't a DQ, it's going to be a long meet for me at GP....

If Paco already has his # being left up it's gonna be open season for riders to do whatever they want down there! Watching this replay though, I didn't think that would've been a DQ. Here's the reason why, and if anyone has evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it - for all the complaints about herding, is there any jurisdiction who DQ's for herding when there isn't any actual contact? That's what puts the other rider, in this case Rosario, in such a difficult situation, because either he keeps a straight path & gets bumped & threatens to clip heels or knock his horse about, or he goes with the herding and isn't touched but loses his best chance to win.

With all the twitter access to jocks & other communication tools available, has anyone asked some of them for some comprehensive thoughts on herding & how it's being handled by the stewards & other jocks? If it was as much a concern of theirs as it is of bettors, don't you think it'd be enforced more by now, or are the stewards simply giving them the middle finger?

[SuperPickle]

GP- race#3....Paco on the 4, cuts off the 3 down at the rail, then herds the 5 at least 8 paths out to mid-track. If this isn't a DQ, it's going to be a long meet for me at GP....

EDIT.....There was NO DQ.....long meet for me unless I quit giving GP any action...:ThmbDown:


I bet the :5:

I'll say this. The :4: was going to win the race. The :5: looked like a open length winner off the turn and hung. Yeah Paco hearded him and intimidated him but he had zero excuse not to go by.

As much as I would have liked to cash the stuff Paco did wasn't the reason he lost.

[SuperPickle]

I'm convinced they flip coins are throw darts at Gulfstream. Other times they DQ for very little.

I think they buy into jockey reactions. If Rosario steadies he has a decent shot of getting put up.

[EasyGoer89]

Bizarre dq at golden gate in the 4th, hard to wrap my head around this one

[SG4]

Bizarre dq at golden gate in the 4th, hard to wrap my head around this one

Agreed. I asked yesterday for an example of a horse doing herding without contact getting DQ'ed, perhaps I found the jurisdiction which does not allow for this move finally.

[EasyGoer89]

Agreed. I asked yesterday for an example of a horse doing herding without contact getting DQ'ed, perhaps I found the jurisdiction which does not allow for this move finally.

Watch the 1st race from Saratoga this past Sept 5th. No change.

[SG4]

Gulfstream's 1st today, from what camera angle did they determine the winner fouled the runner up? Unless the jock got off that horse & went to the stewards & said oops my bad, I can't see what evidence there was to ever make this call. Bettor beware down there for certain.

[EasyGoer89]

Laurel's 7th today, eventual winner bulls his way out with a bump against the eventual runner up, and pushes him a little more during the stretch run too. Runner-up loses by the slightest of noses, thought it was an automatic DQ but they left the winner up. To make it even worse, they show the win photo & I don't see the winners' nose in front. A reverse angle/close up would've been nice on the simulcast, but I didn't see one.

I had no financial interest in this race whatsoever, but definitely won't be counting on anything with these officials going forward.

I just watched this replay as the winner of this race is racing tomorrow at Laurel, man, this sure looked like an automatic DQ , the winner slammed out and pushed the runner up and beat him by the smallest possible margin, and like you say, it looked like the outside horse might have gotten up, awfully bad beat if you needed the runner up here, what appeared on the head on was that the runner up lugged in a bit and at the initial moment of contact, the runner up was coming in slightly at that point, i think you can make a case both were at least a little at fault for the first bump, however, there was a secondary bump by the winner.

No inquiry either, just a jocks objection according to the in house feed that just showed the word 'objection'

[menifee]

DQ - Delta Race 1 - December 22nd. Worst DQ i can recall. The stewards there are by far the worst in the industry.

[EMD4ME]

DQ - Delta Race 1 - December 22nd. Worst DQ i can recall. The stewards there are by far the worst in the industry.

I watched that over and over and over and over and over and over and over from the pan and head on.

I 100% agree. :ThmbUp: :bang:

To me, if a steward is able to make that call, they should be fired immediately and not allowed to work anywhere in the industry, where they can make such a negative impact again.

[cj]

DQ - Delta Race 1 - December 22nd. Worst DQ i can recall. The stewards there are by far the worst in the industry.

Worse than Gulfstream R1 today? There was a lot of tooth gnashing over that one, though not on PA apparently.

[EMD4ME]

Worse than Gulfstream R1 today? There was a lot of tooth gnashing over that one, though not on PA apparently.


Since you say so.....


gn7VFeRoi7k

[EMD4ME]

That is a TOUGH one to swallow.....to say the least. Really soft.....WOW... :bang:

[menifee]

Worse than Gulfstream R1 today? There was a lot of tooth gnashing over that one, though not on PA apparently.

Both bad. Delta was worst.

[SG4]

Both bad. Delta was worst.

That Delta DQ is frighteningly bad. They might as well just draw numbers out of a hat if that's how cavalierly race results will be changed.

I was going to complain about the GP one earlier in the day as well, but I'm getting the feeling GP issues like that one are going to be a broken record. There will come a time shortly when a race at GP of notable importance will have either a DQ on a ticky-tack foul (if the stewards are consistent) or they will let something go that was clearly worse than many DQ's done earlier in the meet, and everyone will have a deserved conniption.

[EasyGoer89]

Worse than Gulfstream R1 today? There was a lot of tooth gnashing over that one, though not on PA apparently.

That was a bizarre dq.

One of the things about Gulfstream is that dq's at that place never have any relationship with other DQs in other words they don't use precedent, they dq on whims, whatever mindset or whim they have on a particular day is the way they go, they dq according to how the wind is blowing.

Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that if this was a 10 million dollar race there is no dq for the same exact situation.

[EasyGoer89]

I have a 95 exa in the 8th at Charlestown and the winner blinks for bothering the 1 at the top of the lane, he certainly cost the 1 a placing and yet, no dq from stewards who are known to make the odd dq on occasion. Meanwhile, over at Gulfstream the other day, a horse bothers another horse very very slightly, if at all, and doesn't cost that horse a board spot and he comes down. It seems like I'm on the wrong end of these all the time, the standard set by the gulf judges the other day in the first race was so extreme that they gave themselves zero wiggle room, anything that's even remotely borderline must now come down, they have put themselves in a rough position here by this standard.

Unless of course they are just taking down horses on whims with no standard, a similar situation could occur in the next racing card and they'll leave it up, is this the judging we want in our great game at a major race track?

[bello]

Yes I am pissed....$20 P3 with the 5 at Charlestown,,,,7 almost puts him over the fence down the land....NO CHANGE...save with the 4 to add insult to injury

[EMD4ME]

Yes I am pissed....$20 P3 with the 5 at Charlestown,,,,7 almost puts him over the fence down the land....NO CHANGE...save with the 4 to add insult to injury

100% agree Bello. You got screwed.

The 7 proactively came in and took his path. No question. If I were in charge, all stewards would be subject to a fine of the entire pool that didn't get paid (wagers on the 5).

I am not being sarcastic. There is no other way for "this" to stop.

[bello]

They didnt even put up an inquiry...Jock objected and they looked at it for 2 minutes. 7 was 4 wide entering lane. Had the 5 tried to squeeze throughhe would have gone down. They just appear to want to go home. That was also the stary of the p4 and p3....I was right in the middle of rolling the card.

[EMD4ME]

They didnt even put up an inquiry...Jock objected and they looked at it for 2 minutes. 7 was 4 wide entering lane. Had the 5 tried to squeeze throughhe would have gone down. They just appear to want to go home. That was also the stary of the p4 and p3....I was right in the middle of rolling the card.

Not patronizing you. I totally get it. Brutal Brutal Brutal.

It makes a normal person grind their teeth. Makes a peace lover smash a fist into the ground.

Brutal.

Again, if I were in charge, the stewards would have a $50,000 loss of paycheck. You want this job? You are now personally liable for egregious decisions that are black and white wrong.

[EasyGoer89]

Not patronizing you. I totally get it. Brutal Brutal Brutal.

It makes a normal person grind their teeth. Makes a peace lover smash a fist into the ground.

Brutal.

Again, if I were in charge, the stewards would have a $50,000 loss of paycheck. You want this job? You are now personally liable for egregious decisions that are black and white wrong.

This is why it's better off to just pay the winners and keep the jock infractions separate, judges aren't responsible enough to understand that they are not being consistent with assigning 'severity' and knowing that if you take down something that's a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10 as far as severity (for example) you can't leave up an '8' the next racing day. It appears to me that each racing day is judged completely independent of the previous day, we all have had plenty of situations where we got disqualified on a ticky tack call (like the one a week or two at gulf in the first race that is talked about here a few posts above this) and then the next day something worse than what happened the day before gets left up.

This is why I always advocate only taking down the most severe infractions, judges should be viewing races under the idea that they're going to try their hardest to leave the results alone, too many of them take the opposite approach and specifically look for ways to take horses down.

Dq's are an extra 'vig' for elite players, no, it doesn't even out.

[SuperPickle]

This is why it's better off to just pay the winners and keep the jock infractions separate, judges aren't responsible enough to understand that they are not being consistent with assigning 'severity' and knowing that if you take down something that's a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10 as far as severity (for example) you can't leave up an '8' the next racing day. It appears to me that each racing day is judged completely independent of the previous day, we all have had plenty of situations where we got disqualified on a ticky tack call (like the one a week or two at gulf in the first race that is talked about here a few posts above this) and then the next day something worse than what happened the day before gets left up.

This is why I always advocate only taking down the most severe infractions, judges should be viewing races under the idea that they're going to try their hardest to leave the results alone, too many of them take the opposite approach and specifically look for ways to take horses down.

Dq's are an extra 'vig' for elite players, no, it doesn't even out.


Funny there was a guy who used to post the exact same thing to the word on here last year. Went by the initials SRU.

You two should meet up. You have a lot in common.

[picojim]

WOW very bad DQ Santa Anita 9th race today,
if the 12 had actually won I would have taken him down

[EMD4ME]

I ABSOLUTELY DETEST THE CALIFORNIA STEWARDS. I don't ever want to tinker with CALI again.

STUPID can't describe them. Had the pick 4 with the 9. Got punished for winning by STUPID people in charge.

[SandyW]

Another phony DQ at Santa Anita, both the 9 and the 12 were equally at fault in a bumping incident under very sloppy conditions in the last race. I wonder which one of of the friends of the stewards benefited from the over $300,000 gift.
You have to be out of your mind to be betting the races at Santa Anita.

[EMD4ME]

Another phony DQ at Santa Anita, both the 9 and the 12 were equally at fault in a bumping incident under very sloppy conditions in the last race. I wonder which one of of the friends of the stewards benefited from the over $300,000 gift.
You have to be out of your mind to be betting the races at Santa Anita.

I keep being told to start betting CALI and to avoid the NYRA circuit. I tried to take some notes lately and look at it but I've been DQ'd there TWICE on horses who had a 10% chance of coming down and really a 1% chance of coming down if the stewards actually know what a horse race is.

Then I watch Can't Desormeaux stand up twice near the wire (in WIN PHOTOS).

No thanks. Give me my Portland, Sam Houston and Emerald soon.

I agree.

[Track Phantom]

I will admit when I watched the replay of the stretch run, I thought they would take down the 9. He did drift in slightly into the path of the 12 and it likely was the reason for the consistent knocking.

However, looking at it from a less myopic view, I thought there was equal bumping throughout the stretch and the initial infraction by the 9 was very slight. One would think the sloppy track should allow for a little leeway.

Not the worst DQ I've ever seen but these are the kinds of incidents I would not change.

[EasyGoer89]

I keep being told to start betting CALI and to avoid the NYRA circuit. I tried to take some notes lately and look at it but I've been DQ'd there TWICE on horses who had a 10% chance of coming down and really a 1% chance of coming down if the stewards actually know what a horse race is.

Then I watch Can't Desormeaux stand up twice near the wire (in WIN PHOTOS).

No thanks. Give me my Portland, Sam Houston and Emerald soon.

I agree.

DQs like this scream loud and clear that the horseplayer/customer is just a necessary evil, these are not 'horseplayer friendly' DQs I'm not sure what the need is to make changes in races unless you have 'no choice' seems like this was a classic example of a situation where they had a choice.

Inherently judges must feel if they aren't 'judging' they aren't doing their jobs, issuing a dq makes it FEEL like they're 'doing their job' more than blinking it and making no change. I guess my point is that anyone can make 'no change' but it takes a 'true expert' to make that dq, stewards feel smarter and more powerful when They are playing god with other people's money and livelihoods, little Napoleon dictators sitting up in gods country pointing the finger at the peasants and minions makes them feel strong, flexing muscles and playing policeman.

You're not a 'real policeman' unless you're writing tickets and or locking up bad guys. Right?

[rrpic6]

Great conversation between Todd Shrupp and Kurt Hoover before the final decision was made. They compared Stewards DQ's to officials of football games giving leeway to big name coaches and teams albeit subconsciously. Wish they just would have said Baffert and Bayern.

RR

[EMD4ME]

Still disgusted. Best horse won, taken down. No impact on outcome of race.

Runner up was herding back desperately in last 1/8 in an attempt to show more bumping.

They rewarded an actor.

Looked terrible on pan live but to an intelligent eye, the head on showed it wasn't bad and there was mutual bumping (more desperation from the 12 as the rider knew he wasn't on the better horse).

They simply rewarded a loser with a win.

This is the example of how stupid a steward is. They are like taxi drivers. They are supposed to be the best at 1 thing but ironically there is no one worse than a steward to decide an outcome of an inquiry.

Taxi drivers drive slow, sit in the left lane on a highway while 452 cars blow by them in the "righter" of lanes and as you go by them all you see on their face is: Doopty doooo and a blank deer like look.

[EasyGoer89]

Still disgusted. Best horse won, taken down. No impact on outcome of race.

Runner up was herding back desperately in last 1/8 in an attempt to show more bumping.

They rewarded an actor.

Looked terrible on pan live but to an intelligent eye, the head on showed it wasn't bad and there was mutual bumping (more desperation from the 12 as the rider knew he wasn't on the better horse).

They simply rewarded a loser with a win.

This is the example of how stupid a steward is. They are like taxi drivers. They are supposed to be the best at 1 thing but ironically there is no one worse than a steward to decide an outcome of an inquiry.

Taxi drivers drive slow, sit in the left lane on a highway while 452 cars blow by them in the "righter" of lanes and as you go by them all you see on their face is: Doopty doooo and a blank deer like look.

Great post, 100 pct agree.

Calif used to dq on placings affected and now I guess they're playing foul is a foul. it's amazing that the 'hand of God' has to keep reaching in and affecting results in borderline at best cases.

As a great man once said 'just pay the winners' ;)

[EasyGoer89]

I'm confused at Belmont dq in 6th didn't cost the 3 a board spot any thoughts on this?

[VeryOldMan]

I'm confused at Belmont dq in 6th didn't cost the 3 a board spot any thoughts on this?
I'm confused too - are we talking about Aqueduct? 6th today? The 3 came in 5th and was moved up to 4th with the DQ. What's the board spot here? Another horse should have been DQ'ed too? Could you flesh it out a little more, please.

[EasyGoer89]

I'm confused too - are we talking about Aqueduct? 6th today? The 3 came in 5th and was moved up to 4th with the DQ. What's the board spot here? Another horse should have been DQ'ed too? Could you flesh it out a little more, please.

Sorry I meant aqu, the 6th race the 3rd place finisher was placed 5th according to the announcer, not sure why only placed behind the 3, didn't cost that horse a spot, I guess nyra is disqualifying on fouls are fouls?

[Rise Over Run]

Sorry I meant aqu, the 6th race the 3rd place finisher was placed 5th according to the announcer, not sure why only placed behind the 3, didn't cost that horse a spot, I guess nyra is disqualifying on fouls are fouls?
The 8 completely eliminated the chances of the 3 horse, and to a lesser extent the 2 horse, to compete for the win in the race. It was a just DQ, and I expect Manny Franco to receive a suspension for dangerous riding.

I find it strange how infractions like this should be ignored, yet minor bumping nearing the wire (not talking about herding) should be "prosecuted" to the fullest by the stewards.

[EasyGoer89]

The 8 completely eliminated the chances of the 3 horse, and to a lesser extent the 2 horse, to compete for the win in the race. It was a just DQ, and I expect Manny Franco to receive a suspension for dangerous riding.

I find it strange how infractions like this should be ignored, yet minor bumping nearing the wire (not talking about herding) should be "prosecuted" to the fullest by the stewards.

They need to be a little more intelligent about this the 3 wasn't cost a placing he was beaten a long way.

[EasyGoer89]

Long inquiry and dq today at SA.

2nd place finisher taken Down in the 5th I believe.

Easy call? Bad call?

[dilanesp]

Long inquiry and dq today at SA.

2nd place finisher taken Down in the 5th I believe.

Easy call? Bad call?

It was a weird call, that's for sure. It was a chain reaction which clearly impeded the :3: . The chain reaction was started by the :2: , who finished third, bumping into the :1: , who finished 2nd, and who then bumped the :3: , who finished 4th, hard. The :6: , who finished 5th, was behind them and was bothered a little, but I didn't see it costing him a place.

So in my mind, the :2: should have come down, and maybe the :1: , and they should have not have moved up the :6: . So the result should have been 5-3-1-2-6, not 5-2-3-6-1.

[EasyGoer89]

It was a weird call, that's for sure. It was a chain reaction which clearly impeded the :3: . The chain reaction was started by the :2: , who finished third, bumping into the :1: , who finished 2nd, and who then bumped the :3: , who finished 4th, hard. The :6: , who finished 5th, was behind them and was bothered a little, but I didn't see it costing him a place.

So in my mind, the :2: should have come down, and maybe the :1: , and they should have not have moved up the :6: . So the result should have been 5-3-1-2-6, not 5-2-3-6-1.

I would have had the tri if the 6 got placed 3rd but I didn't use the 2 at all.

To me the tricky part of this dq is that while you can make the case that the 1 hit the 2 from behind and started the chain reaction, the 1 was essentially running in a straight line and only moved a hair to the inside, so the dq tells me that you're not allowed to move an inch either way which is a racing violation, but the
Standard of a perfect straight line isn't reasonable, nobody really expects horses to maintain exact straight lines yet sometimes racing rules require you to do so.

Did the 2 come out at all during the initial moment of contact? Because if he even came over an inch, he needed to come down and be placed behind the 6, I think you can make a case the 2 wasn't perfectly straight.

When I need Alex solis jr to come down and I'm sitting there watching things blink I do have to admit I wish his dad wasn't part of the CHRB. ;)

[Rise Over Run]

It was a weird call, that's for sure. It was a chain reaction which clearly impeded the :3: . The chain reaction was started by the :2: , who finished third, bumping into the :1: , who finished 2nd, and who then bumped the :3: , who finished 4th, hard. The :6: , who finished 5th, was behind them and was bothered a little, but I didn't see it costing him a place.

So in my mind, the :2: should have come down, and maybe the :1: , and they should have not have moved up the :6: . So the result should have been 5-3-1-2-6, not 5-2-3-6-1.

Watch the head on. The :2: maintained a straight path until the :1: was forced into a hole too narrow and contacted the rear end of the :2:. That forced the :2: over into the :1: and almost caused S. Elliot to come out of the saddle of the :3:. I still don't understand how the :1: was placed behind the :6: , because that horse really wasn't affected at all.

[EasyGoer89]

Watch the head on. The :2: maintained a straight path until the :1: was forced into a hole too narrow and contacted the rear end of the :2:. That forced the :2: over into the :1: and almost caused S. Elliot to come out of the saddle of the :3:. I still don't understand how the :1: was placed behind the :6: , because that horse really wasn't affected at all.

The 6 took up when the 3 came out after getting bumped, the 6 was bothered for sure.

[hopbet]

The INQUIRY LASTED a good 10 minutes. I bet the six ( Senior Investment) , the six was taken down for interference against (Bobby the Brain). In my opinion , Bobby the Brain was NOT going to win the race, plus the jockey went to spot (hole ) that was just not there. Any opinions

[EasyGoer89]

SA2 should be no change the 5 was done and being eased at wire he wasn't cost a board spot.

[cj]

SA2 should be no change the 5 was done and being eased at wire he wasn't cost a board spot.

Agree on no change, but Prat should get a good talking too, that was dangerous. Riding the rail doesn't entitle a rider to squeeze through holes that don't exist.

[EasyGoer89]

Agree on no change, but Prat should get a good talking too, that was dangerous. Riding the rail doesn't entitle a rider to squeeze through holes that don't exist.

I agree.

[dilanesp]

Agree on no change, but Prat should get a good talking too, that was dangerous. Riding the rail doesn't entitle a rider to squeeze through holes that don't exist.

I remember an incident from more than 20 years ago at Santa Anita.

Chris McCarron was on a horse named Book Collector. He did an even more egregious version of what Prat did, basically using his horse's body to open up a hole that wasn't there, and then riding through it for the win. Unsurprisingly to anyone, they took his number down.

The next race was a 1 1/2 mile turf race, and McCarron was riding Pay the Butler. He took the horse to the lead and was out in front by 4 or 5 lengths as they passed the stands the first time. As soon as Trevor announced that it was Chris McCarron on Pay the Butler in front as they passed the stands, the entire crowd booed him until he got to the clubhouse turn.

It's the only time I have ever seen that happen.

[ultracapper]

Prat gets DQ'd today in the 2nd on the bridge-jumped 1/5 unofficial show finisher.

If you refer to the BCC held there a few years ago, you would think Prat's actions in an effort to straighten his horse in the very first steps out of the gate would have avoided a DQ.

Another example of steward's inconsistency.

Disclaimer: I had no dog in that fight. I was just a spectator, an interested one when the inquiry sign went up, but still just a spectator.

[SG4]

Prat gets DQ'd today in the 2nd on the bridge-jumped 1/5 unofficial show finisher.

If you refer to the BCC held there a few years ago, you would think Prat's actions in an effort to straighten his horse in the very first steps out of the gate would have avoided a DQ.

Another example of steward's inconsistency.

Disclaimer: I had no dog in that fight. I was just a spectator, an interested one when the inquiry sign went up, but still just a spectator.

Unfortunately any time for the next X number of years any time a horse makes a turn out of the gate at Santa Anita people are going to be yelling about Shared Belief.

The DQ today was absolutely shocking, whether based on history from Breeders' Cup events or every single race card since. Doing this to a 1-5 favorite so they're pushed out of the money (bye bye minus pool) was not the best idea if they were trying to keep their inconsistency on the DL. This stinks to high hell & unfortunately will either set a bad precedent going forward, or will just be a one-off horrible decision.

[dilanesp]

Unfortunately any time for the next X number of years any time a horse makes a turn out of the gate at Santa Anita people are going to be yelling about Shared Belief.

The DQ today was absolutely shocking, whether based on history from Breeders' Cup events or every single race card since. Doing this to a 1-5 favorite so they're pushed out of the money (bye bye minus pool) was not the best idea if they were trying to keep their inconsistency on the DL. This stinks to high hell & unfortunately will either set a bad precedent going forward, or will just be a one-off horrible decision.

Agreed.

Intellectually I understand it-- the :2: just missed 4th so you could argue the start cost him that much (which wasn't true with Shared Belief, who was well beaten by the third horse in the BCC). But this is a DQ that basically almost never happens in Southern California and the stewards will get a fair amount of criticism for being inconsistent.

[dilanesp]

Yesterday they took down the :4: for interference in the 2nd race. It actually took them forever to even post the inquiry sign (stewards inquiry, not jockey's objection)-- the :4: was literally about to go into the winner's circle when they called the inquiry.

[HorsemenHeist]

Check out Race 6 at Golden Gate today, I benefited from the DQ but it was disgraceful that they took down the winner for drifting half a path with the 7 tiring and yanking the 2 off the board.

[SG4]

Check out Race 6 at Golden Gate today, I benefited from the DQ but it was disgraceful that they took down the winner for drifting half a path with the 7 tiring and yanking the 2 off the board.

Agreed. Head-scratching decisions across the country continue

[horseracing101]

Tampa 2/25/2017 Race 1
The :2: Horse Side Slams the :6: in the turn goes on to win over the :1: horse. Inquiry but the :2: stays up. I had the :1: horse to win.

[horseracing101]

Tampa 2/25/2017 Race 1
The :2: Horse Side Slams the :6: in the turn goes on to win over the :1: horse. Inquiry but the :2: stays up. I had the :1: horse to win.

Sorry should have been the :2: side slams the :4:

[dilanesp]

Double-DQ in the 7th yesterday at SA. That doesn't happen very often.

[no breathalyzer]

Hawthorne Race 6 stewards took almost 20 mins to come up with that bs :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: they must of been drunk

[no breathalyzer]

Last race at AQU yesterday was bs

[EasyGoer89]

Last race at AQU yesterday was bs

This is why I preach no dq's, if they're not going to take that one down they may as well just leave them all up and pay the winners.

[no breathalyzer]

That was the start of my downfall yesterday.. that bs cost me the pick 4.. it was all downhill after that

[menifee]

Last race at GP - May 3 - Race 9. I have no clue when a horse should be DQ'd and when a horse shouldn't. That seemed pretty blatant.

[commentatorfan]

Hello Everyone,

First time poster

Long term ghoster....

As I am learning about these wonderful beasts called Thoroughbreds
I often understand more about the horses than the humans who are connected
to them.

Could someone explain the stewards ruling of the objection in the 8th race at Gp today. Just for fun I won't tell you which side of call i was hoping for.

I honestly don't understand the call and many others like it where the judge's final call hinges on lane interference.

thank you,
Commentator Fan in MN

[jay68802]

Don't feel bad, more than a few people are confused by this issue. By the way check out the DQ (or non-Dq) complaint thread in this forum.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Hello Everyone,

First time poster

Long term ghoster....

As I am learning about these wonderful beasts called Thoroughbreds
I often understand more about the horses than the humans who are connected
to them.

Could someone explain the stewards ruling of the objection in the 8th race at Gp today. Just for fun I won't tell you which side of call i was hoping for.

I honestly don't understand the call and many others like it where the judge's final call hinges on lane interference.

thank you,
Commentator Fan in MN

The rules can vary by jurisdiction, but this is the common rule of racing.

Fouls: A leading horse, when clear, is entitled to any part of the track. If a leading horse or any other horse in a race swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with or intimidate or impede any other horse or Jockey, it is a foul. If a Jockey strikes another horse or Jockey, it is a foul. If, in the opinion of the Stewards, a foul alters the finish of a race, any offending horse may be disqualified by the Stewards.

1. Was the 1 clear of the 7 when he decided to close the hole?

2. Was the leading horse ridden to either side so as to interfere with or intimidate or impede the 7?

3. Did the 7 horse drifting out in deep stretch intimidate or impede the 7?

4. Did the actions of the 1 cost the 7 a placing?

Is it that unreasonable that the answer to question 1 is "no," or the answer to 2 or 3 or 4 is "yes?" Any one of those answers is enough to knock the horse down.

[commentatorfan]

I didn't mean to put my question in the wrong place folks.

please excuse me. I have been watching these 2 for awhile now

Figaroa and Gafflione. Something tells me they have beef.

I have never hung out with a Jockey ever.

I have see them cuss one another on the super slow mo replay.

Am i wrong to think that these Jocks sometimes let what happened in the bar that one time spill out into the track?

I did see that one wicked replay about the love triangle from down under.

[thaskalos]

How does the winning :5: not get disqualified in today's 6th race at Finger Lakes?

[parlay]

WOW, HOW DO THEY LEAVE THIS HORSE UP? LOVE TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION.

[SuperPickle]

WOW, HOW DO THEY LEAVE THIS HORSE UP? LOVE TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION.

I think they ruled it didn't cost anyone a placing. Basically if there's no contact it's still 3-8-9-7

[PaceAdvantage]

SA Race 1 today...they took down the winner? Really?

It helped me, but really...can't believe they were able to come to that conclusion based on the video evidence...

[Andy Asaro]

SA Race 1 today...they took down the winner? Really?

It helped me, but really...can't believe they were able to come to that conclusion based on the video evidence...

Typical. I had the 2 and the 2 was tiring. No way on earth anyone should have come down. Ridiculous call.

[cj]

SA Race 1 today...they took down the winner? Really?

It helped me, but really...can't believe they were able to come to that conclusion based on the video evidence...

I have no idea how that call was made, probably based on jockey "interviews". Can't these guys plead the fifth?

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/DRFvideo/status/873297176956461056

Peter Miller really lays into them and he's 100% right.

[SuperPickle]

So I've already spent about an hour talking about this DQ today. I ran third so I had no skin in the game.

Basically its the type of DQ I hate. It looks like something on the pan but the reality is the :5: of horse was out of horse and couldn't keep up with the other two. He also slide out a path.

The only possible exception that would make this DQ remotely ok is this. Some tracks have unique rules with unique setups. This is a unique setup in that its not only 6.5 down the hill but the rail is also extended. If you look at the head on the temporary rail off the turn and the regular rail do not aligned. The regular rail comes out farther. So there could be a rule that when the rails are at that setting you can't rail slide at the gap which is what Arroyo did. So it could be a simple case as when the rails are extended on the main course you're not suppose to slide up the rail at the gap because its a safety issue. If they took him down under that logic I'm fine with it. If they're actually saying he interfered with the horse its an awful DQ.

This is why you need stewards interviews on the in house feed to explain these things. What Arroyo did was ballsy at the least, reckless at the most. If they took him down because of a safety issue I'm fine with it because Talmo almost went down. He objected and he appeared rather saucy. If they actually believe he interfered with the horse that's b.s. :5:caused his own problems. But if rail sliding at the gap with extended rails is a no-no than its a no.

Curious what the ruling says on paper. This one is not as cut and dry as it looks.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/CHRBMike/status/873330302289977345

[AltonKelsey]

Just looked at this for the first time.

If not for the 5 on the outside, causing some tight quarters, I don't think the 2 ever has to check.

The winner was simply running faster. He came out 1/2 a lane, but not in a
way that could be considered abnormal.

Had I bet the winner , I'd have a few choice words for the stewards, and maybe a few of their close relatives .

[SuperPickle]

https://twitter.com/CHRBMike/status/873330302289977345

That's not how I saw it. Nor do they address the rail settings which I think is the problem. Basically you come off the turn and there's the temporary rail, then the gap, then the main rail which is out further than the temporary rail. Not to mention maybe in the year 2017 we should have a straight rail the length of the stretch with no gaps?

It's easy to blame the stewards since they make the call. It's easy to blame the jockeys since they ride the horses.

But here's a hot take. How about in 2017 all race tracks have straight rails from the turn to finish. Take a look at the last at Golden State. The second place runner gets nailed late when the temporary rail ends and he drifts two paths to the other rail setting. The margin of lose is basically the exact distance he drifts in. Maybe with a true rail he wins. You see races at places like Golden Gate, Monmout, Tampa and other tracks where the temporary rail ends late on the turf, horses drift and lose placing by a inchs.

Yet in 2017 no one can fix this?

[oughtoh]

I had the winner that was taken down and to me after they turned for home that the 2 and 5 both came over on the winner. Then the 5 kept coming over through the stretch. The jock on the winner was whipping with his right hand and looked like they kept the staightest line.

[cj]

Not sure what is worse, the DQ or the explanation of the DQ.

[Andy Asaro]

Not sure what is worse, the DQ or the explanation of the DQ.

They always seem to add insult to injury when they explain stuff.

[cj]

They always seem to add insult to injury when they explain stuff.

Pickle is right about the rail too. Asking horses to hold a perfectly straight path when the path to the wire isn't straight is a bit much.

[johnhannibalsmith]

https://twitter.com/DRFvideo/status/873297176956461056

Peter Miller really lays into them and he's 100% right.

I don't know who was doing the interview but the guy is doing everything he can muster to give you a way better interview, repeatedly segueing back to how awful he thinks the SA stews are, and the interviewer stays right on script about Super Roy S or whatever the actual topic was supposed to be. Come on now, give the man a nudge and the floor, don't sweep him back into another dull look into nothing interesting.

[Andy Asaro]

I don't know who was doing the interview but the guy is doing everything he can muster to give you a way better interview, repeatedly segueing back to how awful he thinks the SA stews are, and the interviewer stays right on script about Super Roy S or whatever the actual topic was supposed to be. Come on now, give the man a nudge and the floor, don't sweep him back into another dull look into nothing interesting.

First time I've ever seen the CHRB put out that message about reviewing the call. I have a feeling that at least one steward is gonna go and maybe two.

[Gander36]

I had the winner that was taken down and to me after they turned for home that the 2 and 5 both came over on the winner. Then the 5 kept coming over through the stretch. The jock on the winner was whipping with his right hand and looked like they kept the staightest line.
One thing that the stewards NEVER seem to understand is that if a horse is a half length behind and actually initiates the contact (hitting the hindquarters of the one a half length in front), it will make it appear as if the leading horse turned into the horse behind. If you watch the Santa Anita race closely, the 5 horse causes the 2 to move slightly into the 6's hindquarters, which turns the 6 horse out ever so slightly. This was a "no change" race if ever their was one.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/874331536681705475

[SuperPickle]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/874331536681705475

I don't buy that. I think a more logical argument is this. If you look at human condition when you pay someone to do a job they often feel required to take action or actions to justify having the job and taking the money. It's how bureaucracy is born.

I've long believed the longer they go without a DQ the tighter they get and more likely a DQ becomes.

[jay68802]

https://twitter.com/DRFvideo/status/873297176956461056

Peter Miller really lays into them and he's 100% right.

He better be careful, the President of Horse Racing is going to fine him and maybe even give him a 1 day suspension.

[Track Phantom]

Not sure what is worse, the DQ or the explanation of the DQ.
I had Vending Machine in a p5 (which I wouldn't have hit anyway). Oddly, I wasn't really surprised when he came down. I moved on and never went back to watch the replay, until now. After hearing and reading everything, I really expected this to be bad. I know I'm in the minority here, but I think it was not a terrible call. In my opinion, the 6 did come out, just enough, to cause tightening. I also think the 2 wasn't completely done and it cost him 3rd, at least. I've seen sooooo much worse.

If you watch, in slow motion, the line the 6 takes, he does come out on the 2. It's slight but it was there.

To this day, the worst non-dq (and actually no inquiry or objection either) was this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODSRxsop_7I

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/876530465716314114

http://www.drf.com/news/faypien-makes-summertime-oaks-first-graded-stakes-win
========================================

These Stewards expect every runner to maintain a perfectly straight course in deep stretch.

It was bad racing luck and not a foul!

[cj]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/876530465716314114

http://www.drf.com/news/faypien-makes-summertime-oaks-first-graded-stakes-win
========================================

These Stewards expect every runner to maintain a perfectly straight course in deep stretch.

It was bad racing luck and not a foul!

I thought it was yet another bad DQ in SoCal. Riders shouldn't think they are entitled to a clear path up the rail, even Mike Smith. Of course once the DQ is made they have to issue the suspension, CYA.

[cj]

Ridiculous non-DQ of the 2nd finisher in the 6th at Belmont today.

[cj]

Should be interesting, no way they can DQ in the feature after as is in the other race, right?

[cj]

Should be interesting, no way they can DQ in the feature after as is in the other race, right?

Inquiry and they don't even show the head on?

[cj]

Here is the chart comment on the horse in the sixth that DIDN'T get DQed:

[thaskalos]

Here is the chart comment on the horse in the sixth that DIDN'T get DQed:

And then we wonder why there is diminished interest in this game.

[johnhannibalsmith]

And then we wonder why there is diminished interest in this game.

You'd think it would captivate an aspiring writer or two. That chart of one horse is just shy of literary classic.

[menifee]

I thought for sure the second place horse was coming down in that Belmont 6th.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/876962762802450432

Just put up.

[NJ Stinks]

3rd race at Woodbine. I got the 7. Tell me why I shouldn't believe the stewards just screwed me.

[Jeff P]

re: Sat 07-01-2017 Woodbine R3

Why have stewards at all if they are going to make calls that are that bad?


-jp

.

[cj]

re: Sat 07-01-2017 Woodbine R3

Why have stewards at all if they are going to make calls that are that bad?


-jp

.

Horrendous.

[cj]

Belmont finale 7-7

Apparently it is anything goes in the stretch. If that is not a DQ, what is?

[oughtoh]

Belmont finale 7-7

Apparently it is anything goes in the stretch. If that is not a DQ, what is?

I had the winner and thought he should have been taken down.

[menifee]

I had the winner and thought he should have been taken down.

I had the winner and disagree. I don't think the 9 was ever going by. Plus, NYRA has allowed herding.

CJ, I'm surprised you were not on the "winner". If you throw out the last due to the stumble, he had the best time form dirt figures and was projected to be on the lead.

[cj]

I had the winner and disagree. I don't think the 9 was ever going by. Plus, NYRA has allowed herding.

CJ, I'm surprised you were not on the "winner". If you throw out the last due to the stumble, he had the best time form dirt figures and was projected to be on the lead.

I actually was on him, just thought I was going to get DQed. I knew deep down they wouldn't change it, but it is getting ridiculous what they allow.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/TheRaiderFan/status/883733249075425280


Looks like the one in Ca to me but I guess it applies at a lot of tracks.

[NJ Stinks]

Arlington Race 7 today. Air Turbulence's jockey was not Goddess of Kip's jockey.

What else explain's Air Turbulence coming down?

[formula_2002]

07-19-2017

"Thistledown
Race
2

I think the 7 should come down and 4 win

[formula_2002]

07-19-2017

"Thistledown
Race
2

I think the 7 should come down and 4 win

7 remains the winner
I felt the 7 at one point, did not hold his path and came over on the 4

[Andy Asaro]

Terrible call at Saratoga.

[Robert Fischer]

Terrible call at Saratoga.

Guess they wanted Jose to burn his horse into the rail and snatch up the reins for an acting award.

He kept riding in a dangerous spot. He almost got through.

You don't want to see herding change the results. You don't want to lose a rider or a horse.

Right now the stewards have riders in a position, where they have to herd close finishes. Greshams Law in effect.

[GMB@BP]

Guess they wanted Jose to burn his horse into the rail and snatch up the reins for an acting award.

He kept riding in a dangerous spot. He almost got through.

You don't want to see herding change the results. You don't want to lose a rider or a horse.

Right now the stewards have riders in a position, where they have to herd close finishes. Greshams Law in effect.

if one thing is for sure the stewards sure as heck of made it clear in NYRA that herding is acceptable, even when bumping occurs. There was no bumping here but yea, west coast rider watches the east coast replays, lol

[classhandicapper]

I thought it was unquestionably the correct call.

I can see how someone that bet Elate feels like they didn't get a fair run inside, but Smith was trying to make it tight enough that the horse and/or rider might not go all out, but without fouling. I think he accomplished that perfectly. They barely brushed and Elate never hit the rail.

I'll have to examine the pace better, but it looked like he gave Abel Tasman two different rides. I thought it was a mistake to move so strongly prematurely because the pace was not extremely slow. All he needed to do was stay reasonably close, but he made up for it because the stretch drive was Hall of Fame worthy.

Poor Salty can't get a break.

[GMB@BP]

I thought it was unquestionably the correct call.

I can see how someone that bet Elate feels like they didn't get a fair run inside, but Smith was trying to make it tight enough that the horse and/or rider might not go all out, but without fouling. I think he accomplished that perfectly. They barely brushed and Elate never hit the rail.

I'll have to examine the pace better, but it looked like he gave Abel Tasman two different rides. I thought it was a mistake to move so strongly prematurely because the pace was not extremely slow. All he needed to do was stay reasonably close, but he made up for it because the stretch drive was Hall of Fame worthy.

Poor Salty can't get a break.

I need to review the chart, you wonder if he doesnt make that move and Elate is in front, assuming he has to rally wide, if he ends up catching her on what I think is a very good rail.

[classhandicapper]

I need to review the chart, you wonder if he doesnt make that move and Elate is in front, assuming he has to rally wide, if he ends up catching her on what I think is a very good rail.

I need to review the replays and charts again also.

I guess you could make the case a couple of horses ran better than expected inside, but quite a few horses ran well despite spending significant time outside and some inside horses didn't move up at all.

I have a different definitions for this stuff anyway. To me, the rail is supposed to be an advantage due to saving ground. So unless a lot of inside horses are moving up beyond that geometry advantage, I consider the track honest. When running outside 3 wide doesn't seem to be much of a disadvantage but the rail is not dead either (which is a lot of days at a lot of tracks) to me that's something else.

[GMB@BP]

I need to review the replays and charts again also.

I guess you could make the case a couple of horses ran better than expected inside, but quite a few horses ran well despite spending significant time outside and some inside horses didn't move up at all.

I have a different definitions for this stuff anyway. To me, the rail is supposed to be an advantage due to saving ground. So unless a lot of inside horses are moving up beyond that geometry advantage, I consider the track honest. When running outside 3 wide doesn't seem to be much of a disadvantage but the rail is not dead either (which is a lot of days at a lot of tracks) to me that's something else.

I agree it was not as bad as yesterday, I feel like the riders started catching on and thats why we started seeing much more aggressive riding today, and then you have some racing with real setups.

[Dahoss9698]

I thought it was unquestionably the correct call.

I can see how someone that bet Elate feels like they didn't get a fair run inside, but Smith was trying to make it tight enough that the horse and/or rider might not go all out, but without fouling. I think he accomplished that perfectly. They barely brushed and Elate never hit the rail.

I'll have to examine the pace better, but it looked like he gave Abel Tasman two different rides. I thought it was a mistake to move so strongly prematurely because the pace was not extremely slow. All he needed to do was stay reasonably close, but he made up for it because the stretch drive was Hall of Fame worthy.

Poor Salty can't get a break.

Since you thought it was the correct call, what would have warranted a DQ in your opinion?

Had Ortiz actually gone over the rail and got seriously hurt would that have been enough? Because another few inches and that's what happens. Smith did everything but put him over the rail.

Eventually it's going to happen and I hope we don't get a lot of "prayers for the fallen rider" posts from people who have been okay with this reckless, dangerous riding in the past.

[ReplayRandall]

if one thing is for sure the stewards sure as heck of made it clear in NYRA that herding is acceptable, even when bumping occurs. There was no bumping here but yea, west coast rider watches the east coast replays, lol

West coast rider you say? How about this, Smith is an all-world at any track money-rider, period. How many thousands of mounts and wins has Mike Smith had in his career at NYRA tracks? You are talking about HOF'er Mike Smith, aren't you??...LOL..:bang:

[Dahoss9698]

West coast rider you say? How about this, Smith is an all-world at any track money-rider, period. How many thousands of mounts and wins has Mike Smith had in his career at NYRA tracks? You are talking about HOF'er Mike Smith, aren't you??...LOL..:bang:

Randall, he knows all about Mike Smith. Probably better than anyone here. I think his comment was more talking about how Smith knew what he could get away with in NY.

[ReplayRandall]

Randall, he knows all about Mike Smith. Probably better than anyone here. I think his comment was more talking about how Smith knew what he could get away with in NY.

I'll take your word for it.....My bad.

[GMB@BP]

West coast rider you say? How about this, Smith is an all-world at any track money-rider, period. How many thousands of mounts and wins has Mike Smith had in his career at NYRA tracks? You are talking about HOF'er Mike Smith, aren't you??...LOL..:bang:

Yea was making a joke...more about how herding is so allowed in NY. Maybe its always been that way, not sure.

In socal PVAL was doing that crap for a while, led to some fistacuffs (Nakatani, Kent D, come to mind).

I understand coming closer to a horse, that was dangerously close to making contact today. I would have preferred a DQ for today, Lady Eli, etc....but its kinda an unwritten rule that its allowed on that circuit.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I thought it was the wrong call...Smith came in 3 paths in the stretch to jam Jose on the rail...if there was a brush, then a DQ is in order....from the head-on shot, it looked like it was enough to make that call....Just My Humble Opinion.

[thespaah]

That was not anything but good race riding/ There is no rule written or unwritten that states the leader must "make a hole".
There was np bumping or interference. Not that I could see.

[GMB@BP]

I thought it was the wrong call...Smith came in 3 paths in the stretch to jam Jose on the rail...if there was a brush, then a DQ is in order....from the head-on shot, it looked like it was enough to make that call....Just My Humble Opinion.

I assume u thought Lady Eli should have come down then? There definitely was worse contact and chain reaction contact in that race.

[Dahoss9698]

That was not anything but good race riding/ There is no rule written or unwritten that states the leader must "make a hole".
There was np bumping or interference. Not that I could see.

But there was a hole. Elate was occupying it. The horse was in a spot and then got herded to a few inches from the rail.

I'll ask the same question I asked earlier. In this case is the only thing warranting a DQ Ortiz going over the rail?

[Andy Asaro]

But there was a hole. Elate was occupying it. The horse was in a spot and then got herded to a few inches from the rail.

I'll ask the same question I asked earlier. In this case is the only thing warranting a DQ Ortiz going over the rail?

In addition to that if Oritiz stood up and acted a little he gets put up. The call promotes acting in situations like that.

[classhandicapper]

Since you thought it was the correct call, what would have warranted a DQ in your opinion?

Had Ortiz actually gone over the rail and got seriously hurt would that have been enough? Because another few inches and that's what happens. Smith did everything but put him over the rail.

Eventually it's going to happen and I hope we don't get a lot of "prayers for the fallen rider" posts from people who have been okay with this reckless, dangerous riding in the past.

I understand your point 100%.

Here's my view.

The rules allow for some degree of herding (or whatever you want to call it) and have a degree of safety built into them also. If a rider crosses paths without being clear he'll get DQ'd and if he's reckless in some way he'll get called in and suspended.

So what you are really arguing is that the rules suck. That's a different issue than whether they made the right call yesterday. I feel 100% sure they made the right call yesterday given the rules.

The one problem I'd have with changing the rules is that sometimes horses drift on their own and get the same result as when riders purposely do it.

So if the horse does it does that mean it's OK but if the rider does it purposely the horse should get DQ'd? Should they always get DQ'd?

I'm not so sure it's a good idea to give the stewards more room to make subjective calls like that.

I think the rules are fine as they are but I'd be very open to ensuring safer riding via more frequent suspensions or fines instead of potentially allowing 3 blind mice to make the DQ call.

[classhandicapper]

I'll ask the same question I asked earlier. In this case is the only thing warranting a DQ Ortiz going over the rail?

A significant enough bump to change the outcome or being forced into the rail would have gotten Smith taken down.

As to going over the rail, read my previous note to you on fines and suspensions.

[Dahoss9698]

A significant enough bump to change the outcome or being forced into the rail would have gotten Smith taken down.

As to going over the rail, read my previous note to you on fines and suspensions.

If you watch the head on, had they actually made contact, Ortiz would have went over the rail. As it was he was right on top of it, because he was herded.

I'm just saying that eventually someone is going to get hurt. No amount of fine or suspension will matter when someone loses their life or is paralyzed.

[classhandicapper]

I'm just saying that eventually someone is going to get hurt. No amount of fine or suspension will matter when someone loses their life or is paralyzed.

If people think the rules (as they exist now) are dangerous, the time to change them would be now. That way we can reduce the possibility of something tragic happening. Let the riders know that fines and suspensions are going to be handed out for this kind of thing. Then maybe they will stop.

[Robert Fischer]

If people think the rules (as they exist now) are dangerous, the time to change them would be now.


The current interpretation of the rules is dangerous and detracting.

This is jousting, not racing.
No amount of fine or suspension will matter when someone loses their life or is paralyzed.
And it will likely happen to one of best and bravest young jockeys. Someone like a Jose Ortiz yesterday, who opted to keep riding through a 'tight spot' rather than take-up and act, or simply take up for his own safety fears (You really think a Johnny V. or Joe Bravo would allow himself to stay in that situation?).

It's an awful, awful interpretation of the rules, and that is even before they are called out for allowing politics to enter their rulings.
If you have a much-beloved racehorse = "ohhh, taking her/him down is unthinkable"...
heavy chalk = "ohhh, a lot of people would be yelling..."
supertrainer-owner shipper = "ohhh, you don't want Baffert to stop shipping his mega-owners over here, do you?..."

[Robert Fischer]

2nd-tier jockey Kendrick Carmouche on a long shot smaller-barn ship-in :7: Rocky Policy gets taken down for herding. :D

I thought herding was just race ridin' ?

I thought you had to be guaranteed to get past the race-ridin' horse to move up?

[Hambletonian]

I had the 7 all ways to Sunday and was a little miffed...especially since the 8 was very unlikely to get a better placing.

My poor 18 year old son, enjoying the first day at the track when he could bet himself, had a $2 exacta box 5-7...the big spender took it pretty well all things considered :)

Just seems a little inconsistent with what Smith did and the no DQ there. There is no question the 7 came out....just a question of whether the 8 was impeded enough to cost the 8 a better placing.

[GMB@BP]

2nd-tier jockey Kendrick Carmouche on a long shot smaller-barn ship-in :7: Rocky Policy gets taken down for herding. :D

I thought herding was just race ridin' ?

I thought you had to be guaranteed to get past the race-ridin' horse to move up?

Well, when you go to herd a horse and you cut off another horse on the way I would imagine that changes the dynamic a bit.

So the lesson is dont cut off horses in any scenario.

The better question is was he clear when he came over and then the horse re rallied into the 7's butt.

I could by that one.

[Robert Fischer]

I had the 7 all ways to Sunday and was a little miffed...especially since the 8 was very unlikely to get a better placing.

My poor 18 year old son, enjoying the first day at the track when he could bet himself, had a $2 exacta box 5-7...the big spender took it pretty well all things considered :)

Just seems a little inconsistent with what Smith did and the no DQ there. There is no question the 7 came out....just a question of whether the 8 was impeded enough to cost the 8 a better placing.

The consistency is exactly what I am questioning.



To be honest, watching the replay this morning, and I was already typing out something to the effect of "hey, I let my emotions get the best of me, and it caused a biased judgement, maybe this wasn't the best example...",


but actually watching the replay again this morning, with a clear head, this is a great example.

Although it wasn't 100% certain, the :8: had a 'chance' to get by with a clean run (which I personally support 1000%, and think the :7: should come down), but is not consistent with the stewards' interpretation of the rules.

The only differences here =
JOCKEY REACTION = Irad Ortiz (jockey of the 8) took-up/stopped riding/checked, rather than dangerously continuing to ride his horse through the hole (like Jose Ortiz did with Elate, when Mike Smith fouled him),
and
POLITICS = The 7 was not a 'beloved' horse like Lady Eli, the 7 was not a heavy-chalk, the 7 was not a Baffert Grade 1(or other top trainer/owner shipper).

:confused:Some combination of those two factors (jockey reaction+politics) + randomness = Change in ruling. :confused:

[maliksealy210]

7/30 Emerald Downs Race 9

A double DQ off of a trainers objection. This is a first for me, if anyone else has seen that let me know. The 2 and 6 both broke in at the start, but I think the 2 caused most of the trouble. Took down the 6 from first and the 2 from third.

[Elliott Sidewater]

A trainer's objection usually carries about as much weight as a Trump tweet, but in this case the stewards got it right IMO. Why they didn't post an INQUIRY on their own is beyond comprehension, though. The horse that was placed 1st was tons the best, made a big run from last to just miss after being sandwiched from both sides and severely compromised. How a poster could blame it on just one of the two dq'd horses doesn't make sense once you've seen the head on replay. I believe this is the first trainer's objection I've ever seen upheld.

[maliksealy210]

A trainer's objection usually carries about as much weight as a Trump tweet, but in this case the stewards got it right IMO. Why they didn't post an INQUIRY on their own is beyond comprehension, though. The horse that was placed 1st was tons the best, made a big run from last to just miss after being sandwiched from both sides and severely compromised. How a poster could blame it on just one of the two dq'd horses doesn't make sense once you've seen the head on replay. I believe this is the first trainer's objection I've ever seen upheld.

I was simply saying the two broke in more than the six did and was also about a half length ahead which had a bigger factor in the four (who started a half length slower) to get steadied versus just squeezed. Both horses fouled but I think the 2 was the bigger fouler in this case.

[Elliott Sidewater]

Maybe so (I didn't see it that way) but the 4 deserved to win and the stewards knew it, so they did the right thing. Blaming the whole incident on the 2 would have done nothing to improve #4's placing. This is unbelievable, I'm actually giving the Emerald Downs stewards credit for a brave but correct call. Now when is the next sighting of Halley's Comet?

[maliksealy210]

Maybe so (I didn't see it that way) but the 4 deserved to win and the stewards knew it, so they did the right thing. Blaming the whole incident on the 2 would have done nothing to improve #4's placing. This is unbelievable, I'm actually giving the Emerald Downs stewards credit for a brave but correct call. Now when is the next sighting of Halley's Comet?

What we can agree on

•Befuddlement into why it took a Trainers Objection to look into the race (did the Jockeys not file anything, or did the Trainer beat them to the punch?)
•Amazement that once it was brought to their addition, the Stewards did the right thing in a reasonable amount of time

[cj]

So after the 3rd at Saratoga safe to say a jockey can do pretty much whatever he wants on the NYRA circuit?

[aaron]

So after the 3rd at Saratoga safe to say a jockey can do pretty much whatever he wants on the NYRA circuit?

In my opinion, it has been that way for awhile. The stewards, with their lack of action will eventually get a jockey hurt or even worse.

[cj]

In my opinion, it has been that way for awhile. The stewards, with their lack of action will eventually get a jockey hurt or even worse.

I agree, just hadn't seen it happen like that at the start any time recently.

[aaron]

I agree, just hadn't seen it happen like that at the start any time recently.

There was a race at Belmont where a horse took out 3 horses at the start and went wire to wire at about 15-1.I had a the exacta which was about 250-300. I remember thinking, am I going to get taken down on a foul, that they never call. Fortunately for me, they let the result stand, but it was an foul and should have come down.

[aaron]

CJ- I don't remember the horses name, but Joe Parker's horse won and David Don's horse as second.

[aaron]

CJ- I don't remember the horses name, but Joe Parker's horse won and David Don's horse as second.

If you can look at the 3rd race on 6/3/17 at Belmont. The winning horse was Buckwellspent. The 2nd horse was Lyrical Miracle.

[Robert Fischer]

So after the 3rd at Saratoga safe to say a jockey can do pretty much whatever he wants on the NYRA circuit?

The stewards don't seem to have any defined rules or understanding of what merits a DQ.

They seem to take trivial details into consideration such as whether the jockey or the horse caused the trouble, or whether or not the jockey who got fouled stops riding...

That's one reason you see the reigns being held up(as if pulling toward the rail) at the start in race 3, and we see the token whipping(as if whipping away from the horse they are intentionally herding).

Meanwhile, the victim gets rewarded for acting and punished for trying to win.

A foul is a foul. Leave out 'intent', leave out the reaction of the victim... This is a horse racing judgment, not a court of law for humans...
https://i.imgur.com/DPqvz7W.jpg

[picojim]

Finger Lakes 1st ...really?!?!

[Dahoss9698]

Saratoga 6th, the 5 hits the 11's back end around the turn causing her to lose stride momentarily. 5 wins with 11 3rd by neck and stewards make no change.

:lol::lol::lol:

What do you have to do exactly to get DQ'd?

On another note...I'd love to know what changed in the Linda Rice barn. She's Dutrowesque for 8 months now.

[ReplayRandall]

Saratoga 6th, the 5 hits the 11's back end around the turn causing her to lose stride momentarily. 5 wins with 11 3rd by neck and stewards make no change.

:lol::lol::lol:

What do you have to do exactly to get DQ'd?

On another note...I'd love to know what changed in the Linda Rice barn. She's Dutrowesque for 8 months now.

Real money paid, but FAKE RESULTS....:lol:

[cj]

Saratoga 6th, the 5 hits the 11's back end around the turn causing her to lose stride momentarily. 5 wins with 11 3rd by neck and stewards make no change.

:lol::lol::lol:

What do you have to do exactly to get DQ'd?

On another note...I'd love to know what changed in the Linda Rice barn. She's Dutrowesque for 8 months now.

Its ok, they fined Irad 3k for wiping out the field at the break the other day after not taking any action on the inquiry. I'm sure he'll be eating ramen for a few weeks after that steep penalty.

[burnsy]

Saratoga 6th, the 5 hits the 11's back end around the turn causing her to lose stride momentarily. 5 wins with 11 3rd by neck and stewards make no change.

:lol::lol::lol:

What do you have to do exactly to get DQ'd?



I was heated after that one. Some years they call it if someone gets breathed on..........this year everything goes. :11:Hannahs Smile got the worst of it but I had the :7:Avery Maeve on top. No action taken.......the :5: took the :11: out for a hot dog. The race ended by about a nose and neck and they have the nerve to say that move didn't cost :11: a thing? That's a freaking joke and a disservice to the public. Admit, I had the :7: to win, she fit my turf speed profile.......but c'mon, what do you have to do to get a call?

[Track Phantom]

Why do stewards do this? They DQ'd the winner for coming over on the runner-up but the infraction happened after the race was decided (in the final 50 yards). The runner-up, had he been caught for 2nd, should have been moved up. But he was never going to be the winner. So, apparently every horse player understands this is not warranted but they penalize the players anyway.

Seriously, it's shit like this that make me want to just forget this game.

[thaskalos]

The unscrupulousness of the trainers, coupled with the incompetence of the jockeys and the stewards...make it seem as if the horseplayer is battling a 50% takeout in this game.

[Dahoss9698]

Gotta be a DQ here in 5th at Del Mar, right?

[Dahoss9698]

Gotta be a DQ here in 5th at Del Mar, right?

:lol::lol::lol:

So you can knock a horse off stride by bumping it and end up only defeating said horse by a nose and that's okay!

I give up

[lamboguy]

where do they find these stewards in So. Cal? i got no involvement in the 5th race but those stewards need new glasses

[Track Phantom]

They made the right call in this case. The runner-up was slightly coming in at the same time the winner was coming out. I think the runner-up was partially at fault.

[Dahoss9698]

They made the right call in this case. The runner-up was slightly coming in at the same time the winner was coming out. I think the runner-up was partially at fault.

I disagree. Contact was made and initiated by the winner. Obviously the contact made more than a nose difference in race decided by said nose.

[SG4]

They made the right call in this case. The runner-up was slightly coming in at the same time the winner was coming out. I think the runner-up was partially at fault.

Agree with this one. One was coming in a little, one was coming out, I think the horse coming in actually banged into the inside horse's rear which made the inside react sharply & sideways. For all the CA stewards do to drive people nuts, this was not one of those times.

[Dahoss9698]

Agree with this one. One was coming in a little, one was coming out, I think the horse coming in actually banged into the inside horse's rear which made the inside react sharply & sideways. For all the CA stewards do to drive people nuts, this was not one of those times.

I must be watching a different race because the exact opposite happened. The outside horse was knocked off stride when the inside horse came out 2 paths.

[Track Phantom]

I must be watching a different race because the exact opposite happened. The outside horse was knocked off stride when the inside horse came out 2 paths.
It was ever so slight but at the key moment when the winner was coming over, the runner-up slid to the inside. Just enough to keep the result as was.

Now, I challenge you to watch EVD Race 8 on 8/3 (which I posted above) and tell me if that DQ is overreaching. The race was decided when the infraction occurred and it was an obvious non-dq but they dq'd the winner anyway.

[cj]

LOL Saratoga stewards.

[AltonKelsey]

LOL Saratoga stewards.

Not nice to make fun of the handicapped.

[ReplayRandall]

Not nice to make fun of the handicapped.

Absolutely laughable ride by Geroux in SAR 9- on the :2:......Trouble is, he takes out the :5: and burns me up...

[Pensacola Pete]

If you want to see an example of a country with crookeder racing than here in the states, check out the 5th race at Muswellbrook in Australia tonight (Australia 5C). No protest (inquiry), no disqualifcation, nothing. Australia goes on my Sam Houston list.

[SuperPickle]

If you want to see an example of a country with crookeder racing than here in the states, check out the 5th race at Muswellbrook in Australia tonight (Australia 5C). No protest (inquiry), no disqualifcation, nothing. Australia goes on my Sam Houston list.

So they had a race Sunday night. Maybe a 12 horse field. Gates open half way through load. Of the six or so that ran off they scratched two only because the jockeys fell off. The other four started.

This may shock you but the winner was a horse who had not loaded when the incident happened.

[cj]

Not a word about Faithfully today, hmmm.

This tweet said it best:

https://twitter.com/JoeT_OnTheSide/status/901257663589253122

[GMB@BP]

Not a word about Faithfully today, hmmm.

This tweet said it best:

https://twitter.com/JoeT_OnTheSide/status/901257663589253122

I think its set in stone, you cant get dq'd for a start.

[cj]

I think its set in stone, you cant get dq'd for a start.

Right, so why even bother, just dismiss anything immediately in move on. Seems odds it is always Baffert horses involved...or maybe that is just me.

[NJ Stinks]

I had the #7 in the 3rd at Saratoga. Do I feel like I got screwed? Damn right.

[cj]

I had the #7 in the 3rd at Saratoga. Do I feel like I got screwed? Damn right.

It always sucks to get taken down, but can't disagree with that call personally.

[NJ Stinks]

It always sucks to get taken down, but can't disagree with that call personally.

What bothers me the most is that Franco moved Paradise Island in and crowded Empiracally. So Gaffalione shifts Empiracally out away from the rail because he doesn't want to end up going over the rail.

As bad as I feel, Roy Lerman has got to be boiling. The poor guy is now 0 for 37 in 2017 and the winner's share of that purse would have been a real morale booster.

[GMB@BP]

Right, so why even bother, just dismiss anything immediately in move on. Seems odds it is always Baffert horses involved...or maybe that is just me.

I remember a Ortiz ridden horse at Saratoga that was just as bad, maybe worse.

[cj]

I remember a Ortiz ridden horse at Saratoga that was just as bad, maybe worse.

That is the downside, the lack of consistency. The Ortiz horse was more of a gradual herding if I remember right. There have been many just like it. It is the sudden veer like this one had that seems to actually get you DQed in New York. The bad thing is that when it is the horse causing problems, that gets penalized much more often than when the rider does it.

[Dahoss9698]

Still have no idea what a DQ is or isn't.

[GMB@BP]

That is the downside, the lack of consistency. The Ortiz horse was more of a gradual herding if I remember right. There have been many just like it. It is the sudden veer like this one had that seems to actually get you DQed in New York. The bad thing is that when it is the horse causing problems, that gets penalized much more often than when the rider does it.

I like what they do with some infractions in california, maybe not the starts but if there was a foul and a change is not made becasue a placing was not cost then at least they give the rider days.

[cj]

I like what they do with some infractions in california, maybe not the starts but if there was a foul and a change is not made becasue a placing was not cost then at least they give the rider days.

Curious what they do about the Travers yesterday. It was the right call, saying that even though I had a 3-10 which was paying $91. But the 10 was fouled twice. It didn't cost Irap 2nd most likely, but Zayas should get a fine and days.

[GMB@BP]

Curious what they do about the Travers yesterday. It was the right call, saying that even though I had a 3-10 which was paying $91. But the 10 was fouled twice. It didn't cost Irap 2nd most likely, but Zayas should get a fine and days.

speaking of days. I saw that move in the 10th DQ in 1998. It was a 30 day suspension, this was just as blatant. Man I am irritated watching that.

[Dahoss9698]

Had a $10 2-4 exacta in the Saratoga 7th. That's $1700 in DQ's in a 5 day span. Amazing.

[RunForTheRoses]

wtf? out of the P4, should not have come down.

[thespaah]

No call is the right call. Case closed. Bye bye...Next

[cj]

No call is the right call. Case closed. Bye bye...Next

Should have taken about 10 seconds to adjudicate that one.

[jay68802]

Indiana Grand Race #4, no objection or inquiry on the #4. Takes the 5 out at the gate, then bumps the 5 out on the final turn. ???

[GMB@BP]

I have no clue how you DQ the 2 in that race at Belmont, it was stupid riding by the chalk and then the horse gets rewarded.

The stewards in NY seem to have lost all sense of reasoning in what they care about and do not care about.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/907747274507218944

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/909442604399341568

[Afleet]

I didn't bet this race, but saw it and wanted to see the head on view of the DQ. Anybody lose money on the DQ?

I have to agree w/Watchmaker, this makes no sense

Per Watchmaker:

Ivy Bell, the 3-5 favorite in the Open Mind, slipped up on the rail inside of the pacesetter and second choice Mayla into the stretch, making what appeared to be a winning move. But Mayla, in response to that challenge, appeared to come in, appeared to put Ivy Bell in tight on the rail, and then Ivy Bell appeared to clip heels, causing her to stumble badly and toss jockey Brian Hernandez Jr. to the ground. Thank goodness Hernandez was uninjured, and Ivy Bell never actually fell.
There are a lot of “appeareds” in the above paragraph. Here’s why: I, and the vast majority of everyone else who watched the Open Mind, still do not have any idea of what really happened between Mayla and Ivy Bell in upper stretch because Churchill Downs never bothered to show the all-critical head-on shot of the stretch run.


http://www.drf.com/news/watchmaker-betting-public-deserves-see-critical-disqualification-replays

[Rise Over Run]

That was borderline criminal what happened in the 1st at Presque isle. Impossible to tell who really was at fault, no objection from jockey, didn't affect order of finish, yet they dq the 8. unreal.

[cj]

After the DQ at Belmont today, R5, I think I'm going to become one of those pretty horse fans. I don't need this aggravation.

[cj]

Sorry CJ, however I thought it was a 50-50 coin flip, it just seems to always go the wrong way when you really need it.

I just don't see where that horse was ever going by the 5. If the stewards had any consistency I could live with it, but they don't. Sometimes I wonder if they actually do flip a coin.

[ReplayRandall]

After the DQ at Belmont today, R5, I think I'm going to become one of those pretty horse fans. I don't need this aggravation.

Sorry CJ, however I thought it was a 50-50 coin flip, it just seems to always go the wrong way when you really need it....BTW, the stewards were considering placing the :5: horse in 4th, because of the chain reaction that had some effect on the :6: horse losing a placing to the :2:....They declined on that decision, as that's what took so long for the result to finally become a DQ of just one spot.

[jay68802]

I just don't see where that horse was ever going by the 5. If the stewards had any consistency I could live with it, but they don't. Sometimes I wonder if they actually do flip a coin.

Agree here, but when the race was over, the only thought i had was " they are going to flip this because it is Ortiz and Brown on the :4:. Ortiz has squeezed plenty of horses like that, and not been taken down. 0 consistency.

[cj]

Agree here, but when the race was over, the only thought i had was " they are going to flip this because it is Ortiz and Brown on the :4:. Ortiz has squeezed plenty of horses like that, and not been taken down. 0 consistency.

Exactly, flip connections and it is as is IMO.

[jay68802]

Exactly, flip connections and it is as is IMO.

But they were really nice and let Kenndrick win the next race on the front with 0 pressure.

[GMB@BP]

How in the world could there not have been an inquiry in the Kee 2yo race? Good thing an objection finally happened.

[cj]

How in the world could there not have been an inquiry in the Kee 2yo race? Good thing an objection finally happened.

That was amazing, the showed the head on replay on TVG and it was obvious DQ. Took forever before they announced there was an objection.

[dasch]

No inquiry or objection in the 5th race today(Monday) at Santa Anita?

The 8 came in some so it would have been a close call but it was obvious from the pan shot there was contact late stretch and they dont even call for an inquiry?

SERIOUSLY what are they paying these stewards in California to do?

[ronsmac]

No inquiry or objection in the 5th race today(Monday) at Santa Anita?

The 8 came in some so it would have been a close call but it was obvious from the pan shot there was contact late stretch and they dont even call for an inquiry?

SERIOUSLY what are they paying these stewards in California to do?The 8 lost. No need for an inquiry. There may have been one if the 8 had won. I thought he was 2/5 at the 1/8th pole.

[dasch]

The 8 lost. No need for an inquiry. There may have been one if the 8 had won. I thought he was 2/5 at the 1/8th pole.

If you think the 8 was the only one that caused interference you obviously didnt watch the head on replay. Like I said it could have gone either way.

If there is POSSIBLE interference its THEIR JOB to call for an inquiry, not only if the horse YOU THINK interfered doesnt win.

[dilanesp]

Coming up on 100 pages of complaints about stewards rulings. Well done PA users!

[willphorse]

How did they not DQ Bauti Boy today in the Objection with The X in Gulfstream R5. The race was a head bob photo finish. Coming into stretch, Nauti Boy bumps The X hard, pushing him out wide around turn. SHOCKED to see them not allow the objection!

[GMB@BP]

I am not complaining about the Los Al DQ but man that feels like the 5 caused the initial issue and the 3 was best, I just dont see it.

Heck I could have gone with a double DQ since it felt like the 5 and the 3 both caused the 1 to be bumped

[maliksealy210]

I am not complaining about the Los Al DQ but man that feels like the 5 caused the initial issue and the 3 was best, I just dont see it.

Heck I could have gone with a double DQ since it felt like the 5 and the 3 both caused the 1 to be bumped

The 5 and 3 both fouled the 1. How you disqualify the 3 to give the win to the 5 is something I will never in a million years understand. IMHO, there are east coast jurisdictions that wouldn't have even looked at that race.

[cj]

Preposterous DQ.

[stringmail]

It was painfully obvious it was going to occur because the horse that finished 2nd was named after a man near and dear to Los Al.

The cheer that erupted and the winner's circle photo was ridiculous. I think they had to wait until the 2 stewards that vote for DQ made it down to winner's circle before they could take the photo. There were probably only 15-20 left at the track that weren't in the winner's circle.

I agree that if the 3 comes down, the 5 has to come down as the 5 made the initial contact. I thought it would have been cool to seek both Bafferts DQ'd for squeeing the 1.

[cj]

It was painfully obvious it was going to occur because the horse that finished 2nd was named after a man near and dear to Los Al.

The cheer that erupted and the winner's circle photo was ridiculous. I think they had to wait until the 2 stewards that vote for DQ made it down to winner's circle before they could take the photo. There were probably only 15-20 left at the track that weren't in the winner's circle.

I agree that if the 3 comes down, the 5 has to come down as the 5 made the initial contact. I thought it would have been cool to seek both Bafferts DQ'd for squeeing the 1.

Normally I'd laugh this stuff off, but I think this call was so bad nothing would surprise me. Only in North America could a horse that was at the very least partially responsible for the traffic problems be ELEVATED to first.

[kevb]

Absurd DQ decision. Baffling, irrational, and incorrect.

[molson721]

Any thoughts on leaving the 7 as the winner and not placing him second to the 4 horse? Delta Downs is a joke and I will never bet it again. I just wonder if others watching the replay and head on replay agree that the 7 did not cost the 4 first place.

[upthecreek]

Someone with no dog in the fight take a look at R1 @Tam today and see if the #4 should of came down The pan view doesn't look bad, the headd on , maybe The horse was 8/5 tote , I had him @6-1 on NJX
Thanks

[dilanesp]

Did anyone else not like the non-starter ruling regarding the :1: ? It didn't look to me like anything other than she reared up at the start on her own accord. She was 2-1 though and the stewards might have been bailing out the bettors.

[dasch]

I thought for sure somebody would have posted about this DQ. I have watched the replay many times and have NO IDEA how they could make this call. It was even early in the race when they very seldom take down ANYTHING unless a rider or horse falls.

It didnt cost me anything in that race but makes me very worried moving forward. Incompetence has been screamed many times in the past regarding these California stewards and nothing ever happens.

[GMB@BP]

I thought for sure somebody would have posted about this DQ. I have watched the replay many times and have NO IDEA how they could make this call. It was even early in the race when they very seldom take down ANYTHING unless a rider or horse falls.

It didnt cost me anything in that race but makes me very worried moving forward. Incompetence has been screamed many times in the past regarding these California stewards and nothing ever happens.

cost me some money in a contest, I didnt understand it and TVG was too busy showing pacers in the snow to show us.

[dilanesp]

Stewart Elliott's :4: horse went to his knees and Elliott almost fell off. Apparently it was the :7: horse's fault.

The thing is, it was DEFINITELY rough and dangerous riding. I could totally see them imposing a fine or suspension on Guttierez. But there's no way in the world you could conclude there was enough evidence that this cost the :4: a placing. He was well beaten by the 4th place horse and had 6 1/2 furlongs to recover and get back into the race after this incident.

Yeah, a bad call, and not consistent with the way the California stewards usually operate (e.g., the non-call on Bayern in the BC Classic).

[dilanesp]

Did anyone else not like the non-starter ruling regarding the :1: ? It didn't look to me like anything other than she reared up at the start on her own accord. She was 2-1 though and the stewards might have been bailing out the bettors.

And now I have proof! In the 4th race yesterday (2/19), a longshot, the :3: Kennedie Sky at 42-1, did the exact same thing, and they didn't rule her a non-starter!

They are using the non-starter rule selectively to protect horses who get significant betting action.

[cj]

And now I have proof! In the 4th race yesterday (2/19), a longshot, the :3: Kennedie Sky at 42-1, did the exact same thing, and they didn't rule her a non-starter!

They are using the non-starter rule selectively to protect horses who get significant betting action.

Seems it would be the other way around. Scratching a horse after the fact that has significant betting action costs the track a lot more money.