Ugh..DQ

[WP1981]

Sick to my stomach about the Parx finale DQ. A few wins earlier in the card gave me the confidence to hit the 10 on a $50 win and place ticket.

Didn't watch the replays or head on because I can't stomach it. Last thing I saw was the 10 crossing the wire with some daylight behind him.

The $36 place is little consolation to me at this point. How often do you peg a 45-1? Fudge!

[Stillriledup]

Didn't see the Parx finale so i can't comment, but take a look at the last 2 posts by me in the DQ thread that's stickied to the top of the page in the racing section. I talk about the inquiries at Parx yesterday.

[duncan04]

It was a good DQ. Jockey on the ten cut off the 9 big time. Don't bitch if you didn't see it. Go back and watch it and you will see it was the right call. The jockey kept whipping right handed even though the horse was lugging in. Jockey of the 9 was coming up rail and had to check pretty badly, hence the "daylight" you saw. Smh you guys are something else

[Stillriledup]

Sick to my stomach about the Parx finale DQ. A few wins earlier in the card gave me the confidence to hit the 10 on a $50 win and place ticket.

Didn't watch the replays or head on because I can't stomach it. Last thing I saw was the 10 crossing the wire with some daylight behind him.

The $36 place is little consolation to me at this point. How often do you peg a 45-1? Fudge!

Tough DQ. Didnt seem like it affected the outcome, happened really late in the race.

[WP1981]

It was a good DQ. Jockey on the ten cut off the 9 big time. Don't bitch if you didn't see it. Go back and watch it and you will see it was the right call. The jockey kept whipping right handed even though the horse was lugging in. Jockey of the 9 was coming up rail and had to check pretty badly, hence the "daylight" you saw. Smh you guys are something else

Thanks for your input Duncan.

[parlay]

Tough DQ. Didnt seem like it affected the outcome, happened really late in the race.
disagree. he intimidated almost the full stretch, lugging in until the ultimate contact, which was late in the race. I WASNT cashing either way.

[duncan04]

Thanks for your input Duncan.


You're welcome. Was my observation. Thought you would like an explanation rather than whatever SRU had to chime in.

[Stillriledup]

disagree. he intimidated almost the full stretch, lugging in until the ultimate contact, which was late in the race. I WASNT cashing either way.

I didnt' realize intimidation was grounds for a DQ. You're saying that if he intimidates but otherwise stays in his lane without shifting over very late, hes still down?

[duncan04]

I didnt' realize intimidation was grounds for a DQ. You're saying that if he intimidates but otherwise stays in his lane without shifting over very late, hes still down?

The horse was steadily coming in the whole stretch. Did you even watch the race??

[Stillriledup]

The horse was steadily coming in the whole stretch. Did you even watch the race??

No, i didnt watch at all, i'm just going on tea leaves, osmosis and telepathy.

[duncan04]

No, i didnt watch at all, i'm just going on tea leaves, osmosis and telepathy.

Wouldn't surprise me since you said you didn't watch the race earlier

[appistappis]

this comes down to whose definition of a dq do you use.....did the 10 squeeze the horse on the rail...yes.....did he cost him a placing.....no.

[Stillriledup]

this comes down to whose definition of a dq do you use.....did the 10 squeeze the horse on the rail...yes.....did he cost him a placing.....no.

This is tricky, and i think this is kind of what Parlay is saying in post 6, that the DQ is based on the crowding and also the shift at the wire. If you view them as one in the same, it makes it a more compelling case for a DQ. If you view them separately, you can make a strong case that the shift in at the wire doesn't affect the outcome........some might suggest that if the winner wasn't
"in the way" of the runner up the entire lane, the runner up might have beaten him with a clear shot.

But is what the horse did the entire lane "illegal"? If you say he's in his right to "Raceride" the other horse, than you are making the DQ on the bump at the wire.....which didn't affect the outcome.

[thaskalos]

I had the 9 in that race...and I had the ticket ready for the garbage can up until I saw the jockey stand up nearing the wire. IMO...there was no way the 10 would have lost the race if it remained away from the rail. The DQ was justified, but the infraction did not affect the race's outcome.

[Some_One]

The DQ was justified, but the infraction did not affect the race's outcome.

That sentence makes no sense, there should never be a dq if the race outcome was not affected

[thaskalos]

That sentence makes no sense, there should never be a dq if the race outcome was not affected

Not all racing jurisdictions support the notion that a DQ is only warranted when the race outcome is affected.

[Some_One]

Not all racing jurisdictions support the notion that a DQ is only warranted when the race outcome is affected.

Then those jurisdictions are bush league

[Stillriledup]

Then those jurisdictions are bush league

If there's a DQ like this, the stewards need to have their reasoning and logic in the equibase chart....if they're making a "foul is a foul" call, they need to say that. I agree with the bush league stuff, if a track is just going to make DQs based on foul is a foul, those are tracks i'd avoid.

[thaskalos]

When the jockey is leading along the outside, and has the entire track open to him to maneuver in, but he manages to drift to the rail and crowd the trailing inside horse...then it's hard to say that the DQ wasn't justified.

In a perfect world, you could argue that the offending jockey should be punished, but the innocent bettors should be left alone...but horse racing is as far from a perfect world as you can get.

[appistappis]

if that was the breeders cup classic there would not have been a DQ. That's the way our game is played.

[duncan04]

If there's a DQ like this, the stewards need to have their reasoning and logic in the equibase chart....if they're making a "foul is a foul" call, they need to say that. I agree with the bush league stuff, if a track is just going to make DQs based on foul is a foul, those are tracks i'd avoid.

Come on its not like Parx has a stellar reputation. :rolleyes:

[SuperPickle]

DQ's happen all the time when it would not have affected a placing. First off there's automatic DQ's for stuff like striking another horse with a whip.

In the last couple of weeks we've had two notable DQ's in graded stakes in which the horse finishing second never would have gotten up to win.

If you look at the Grade 3 at Tampa on 1/31 Testa Rossi would have never passed Hard Not to Like but Hard Not to Like drifted and caused contact.

Similar deal in the Fountain of Youth, hence the outcry. There's no way the Pletcher horse gets up if Upstart stays straight but he was all over the track like Hard Not to Like and they took him down.

DQ's happen all the time when there's a foul but it didn't affect the outcome.

[Stillriledup]

Come on its not like Parx has a stellar reputation. :rolleyes:

They don't? :D

[duncan04]

They don't? :D

Especially from you. :D

[Stillriledup]

Especially from you. :D

You got me there mo! :D

[WP1981]

You can't make this up.. My 2nd bet since this thread started was on the 9 in the 7th tonight at Delta. 22-1.

I fear I may be cursed now.

I only caught the race near the wire. Judging from the 15 min inquiry I assume it was warranted.

[Stillriledup]

You can't make this up.. My 2nd bet since this thread started was on the 9 in the 7th tonight at Delta. 22-1.

I fear I may be cursed now.

I only caught the race near the wire. Judging from the 15 min inquiry I assume it was warranted.

If you need 15 mins to decide, maybe you should pay the winners.

Just a thought.