Stewards

[Tom]

Two outstanding interviews by Steve Byk this week, with the Mig and Tony Black.

My two cents, a mandatory requirement for any team of stewards should be at least one them be a former rider. No one can sit on their arse looking at TV screens and have a clue what it is like on the track.

The Mig was insulted by, I assume a local steward asking him what Steward's school he attended? Mig who rode over 30,000 races! That tells me all I need know about the NYRA officials! And Tony was denied a job in Mass. due to some nightclubbing in the 1980's!

From the Mig's accounts, things are not so kosher to this day. The stewards are not going their jobs and the racing is getting dangerous. Some riders are getting away with too much and it is the job of the official to maintain order.

Great interviews~! :ThmbUp:

[pandy]

The Breeders Cup Classic was a "classic" example of this. By not taking down Bayern, the stewards invited the jockeys to make a left turn out of the gate and go directly to the rail even if it means cutting off horses, and that makes the racing more dangerous. Migliore was outspoken about the classic and said that Bayern should have been taken down.

[thaskalos]

Since the stewards are obviously not doing their job...then someone should be hired to keep an eye on the stewards. Grade their performance the way they do with the NFL referees...and get rid of the bad ones.

The problem with this game, IMO, is that NO ONE in authority is doing a competent job. And no one is watching them...

[Tom]

The problem with this game, IMO, is that NO ONE in authority is doing a competent job. And no one is watching them...

I want this on my tombstone! :ThmbUp:

But...no big hurry about it! :eek:

[Tall One]

Two outstanding interviews by Steve Byk this week, with the Mig and Tony Black.

My two cents, a mandatory requirement for any team of stewards should be at least one them be a former rider. No one can sit on their arse looking at TV screens and have a clue what it is like on the track.

The Mig was insulted by, I assume a local steward asking him what Steward's school he attended? Mig who rode over 30,000 races! That tells me all I need know about the NYRA officials! And Tony was denied a job in Mass. due to some nightclubbing in the 1980's!

From the Mig's accounts, things are not so kosher to this day. The stewards are not going their jobs and the racing is getting dangerous. Some riders are getting away with too much and it is the job of the official to maintain order.

Great interviews~! :ThmbUp:


Rich considering one of the NYRA stews is Braulio Baeza.

[mountainman]

Never been sold on notion that an ex-jock is needed on every board of stews...give me a judge who has seen 100,000 races over one who's ridden 30,000..relating from hands-on experience to what transpires out there SOUNDS like unimpeachable argument for riders in the stand, but how, exactly, does that help determine degree of interference when looking at a pan or head-on????????????????? it may help spot intent, but what should intent have to do with a dq call??? either it was or wasn't a foul...to me, saying some stews should be ex-riders is akin to demanding that umpires be ex-players..or movie critics ex-directors, or actors..it just doesn't hold water

and, c'mon..if jocks were REALLY that sharp at watching races, would they keep making the SAME mistakes, or fail so miserably at detecting track bias, or refuse to work on their individual and visually apparent weaknesses???????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????

[PaceAdvantage]

The Breeders Cup Classic was a "classic" example of this. By not taking down Bayern, the stewards invited the jockeys to make a left turn out of the gate and go directly to the rail even if it means cutting off horses, and that makes the racing more dangerous. Migliore was outspoken about the classic and said that Bayern should have been taken down.Except when you watch the overhead, that's not really what happened...it was way more benign than you describe.

[Tom]

but how, exactly, does that help determine degree of interference when looking at a pan or head-on?????????????????

Two words - remember Allumeuse
Stewards really nailed that one. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

Rich considering one of the NYRA stews is Braulio Baeza.

So even having one is no guarantee they will get the job done. :D

[thaskalos]

I got an idea:

Since the stewards are having trouble detecting even the most obvious stiff-jobs...what if they pay the race announcers a little extra, so they could lend the stewards a helping hand.

I can hear Trevor Denman now:

"...and as the field traverses around the far turn, the favorite is being conspicuously restrained a good ten lengths off the lead."

That should get the stewards' attention...NO?

[Stillriledup]

I got an idea:

Since the stewards are having trouble detecting even the most obvious stiff-jobs...what if they pay the race announcers a little extra, so they could lend the stewards a helping hand.

I can hear Trevor Denman now:

"...and as the field traverses around the far turn, the favorite is being conspicuously restrained a good ten lengths off the lead."

That should get the stewards' attention...NO?

The only thing that seems to get their attention is a minor foul that should be left alone. They'll be heroes (when a hero comes along sing it Mariah!) and show you how important they are and "make that change" (sing it to em MJ!)

[SG4]

Which day was Migliore on the show talking about this? Can't find him listed as a guest on the archives

[Tom]

It was earlier in the week - before Tony. I think it was the third hour, after Dr. Allday. If not, then just before the Doc.

[v j stauffer]

Except when you watch the overhead, that's not really what happened...it was way more benign than you describe.

Exactly correct. I was 100% sure a take down was proper until days later I saw the shot from the blimp. That angle really helps Bayern's case and minimizes the amount of interference Shared Belief had to endure.

[dilanesp]

The Breeders Cup Classic was a "classic" example of this. By not taking down Bayern, the stewards invited the jockeys to make a left turn out of the gate and go directly to the rail even if it means cutting off horses, and that makes the racing more dangerous. Migliore was outspoken about the classic and said that Bayern should have been taken down.

Even if Bayern did what Migliore thought he did, that has never been grounds for disqualification in California because stuff at the start basically almost never can be held to cost a horse a placing. (The stewards aren't allowed to consider strategic issues like "Moreno would have gone out and tired Bayern".)

Migliore didn't know the California rule, or didn't care because he wanted Bayern to lose.

[v j stauffer]

Even if Bayern did what Migliore thought he did, that has never been grounds for disqualification in California because stuff at the start basically almost never can be held to cost a horse a placing. (The stewards aren't allowed to consider strategic issues like "Moreno would have gone out and tired Bayern".)

Migliore didn't know the California rule, or didn't care because he wanted Bayern to lose.

The stewards are allowed to consider whatever they feel is salient to the best possible decision.

However you are correct that in this instance it probably didn't get discussed.

For me that type consideration might only come into play if I was considering if the possible interference might have been deliberate.

[pandy]

Except when you watch the overhead, that's not really what happened...it was way more benign than you describe.


I don't believe they had the overhead shot when they made this decision. Based on the head on and the pan shot, I don't see how they left this horse up. I know people say that there is this so-called California rule that they leave interference at the start alone, but I do believe that they have taken horses down for interference at the start in the past. In any case, the voters dq'd Bayern when they voted California Chrome horse of the year. If Bayern hadn't caused that interference at the start, there is no way he loses horse of the year.

[Tom]

Which day was Migliore on the show talking about this? Can't find him listed as a guest on the archives

The date was July 17th, either hour 2 or 3.

[PIC6SIX]

Pletcher said a few years back and maybe more recent also that the stewards are not consist in their calls. Case in point, I saw two separate races (same card) with similar bumping at AQ or BEL a few years back and either Jr or Mig was involved. Same circumstances in two separate races with different calls by the stewards. Trainers, bettors, owners and the sport all suffer from this impropriety.

[PIC6SIX]

My remedy, and everyone on this board can call me crazy for suggesting this, but I do not think we even need stewards. We are in the age of computer technology and TRAKUS. Each horse has a running lane. Why not have simulated running lanes on the computer with trakus on each horse. Why not let artificial intelligence make the final judgement. A computer printout with the final decision based on artificial intelligence ruling parameters built into the program.

Now your comments good or bad.

Hey, how about Julie Krone thrown over the bushes at SAR some years back, big accident. Took 30 minutes to sort it out. They got it wrong. Few weeks latter they, NYRA, re-distributed the purse money. Correct bettors got nothing re-dist. though. Anyone remember this incident.

Some NYRA regulars at the track that day said if this had happened at AQ they would have burned the place down.

[castaway01]

My remedy, and everyone on this board can call me crazy for suggesting this, but I do not think we even need stewards. We are in the age of computer technology and TRAKUS. Each horse has a running lane. Why not have simulated running lanes on the computer with trakus on each horse. Why not let artificial intelligence make the final judgement. A computer printout with the final decision based on artificial intelligence ruling parameters built into the program.

Now your comments good or bad.

Hey, how about Julie Krone thrown over the bushes at SAR some years back, big accident. Took 30 minutes to sort it out. They got it wrong. Few weeks latter they, NYRA, re-distributed the purse money. Correct bettors got nothing re-dist. though. Anyone remember this incident.

Some NYRA regulars at the track that day said if this had happened at AQ they would have burned the place down.

You're going to keep a thousand-plus-pound horse inside running lines throughout a race---fictional running lines that aren't even on the track but just on a computer program---how, exactly? Even human athletes in 100-meter races have actual lanes to run in. They're not horses that don't understand what a "running lane" is, much less an invisible lane.

You're aware that only short sprints in track use running lanes throughout the race, right? The other, longer races also have staggered starts. What are you replacing the starting gate with?

[Tom]

MY suggestions - stewards are off site.
They get a B&W video with and no idea who the jockeys are.
They talk to no one.

[Stillriledup]

MY suggestions - stewards are off site.
They get a B&W video with and no idea who the jockeys are.
They talk to no one.

NHL has decision makers off site, why have judges w regional biases deciding races for that region? All their decisions are coming from videotape anyway, a central office could watch the same replay and talk to the jocks by phone if need be.

[PIC6SIX]

Who is talking about a fictional running lane? Never mind, you have no imagination and Einstein said something like "Imagination is the basis of intelligence".

[Hoofless_Wonder]

My remedy, and everyone on this board can call me crazy for suggesting this, but I do not think we even need stewards. We are in the age of computer technology and TRAKUS. Each horse has a running lane. Why not have simulated running lanes on the computer with trakus on each horse. Why not let artificial intelligence make the final judgement. A computer printout with the final decision based on artificial intelligence ruling parameters built into the program.

Now your comments good or bad.

Hey, how about Julie Krone thrown over the bushes at SAR some years back, big accident. Took 30 minutes to sort it out. They got it wrong. Few weeks latter they, NYRA, re-distributed the purse money. Correct bettors got nothing re-dist. though. Anyone remember this incident.

Some NYRA regulars at the track that day said if this had happened at AQ they would have burned the place down.

I don't believe you could remove the stewards entirely from the equation. There would still be the occasional ad hoc ruling needed (starting gate malfunction, jockey caught with buzzer, starting gate can't be moved and the race ruled a no contest, etc).

A couple of other posters have suggested a technical approach to determining whether or not a DQ is warranted. I may be wrong, but I don't believe the technology is good enough to provide the resolution of data that would be needed, and it would require something above and beyond what TRAKUS does today. Calculating distance traveled in feet is one thing, but movement in terms of fractions of an inch is another. A solution would also need to measure the impact from collisions, as well as somehow taking into account another rider's whip striking a horse, and so on. And then of course if would need to be secure and beyond hacking, similar to the tote systems.... :rolleyes:

And the way those chiclets move around on screen during the races today doesn't provide a whole lot of reassurance. I laugh when I see a horse and chiclet be totally out of sync, and then the chiclet repositions itself at a relative speed around 120 MPH to get back in line..... :D

[classhandicapper]

If Bayern hadn't caused that interference at the start, there is no way he loses horse of the year.

With the benefit of seeing Bayern run this year I think the arguments I made against him last year from a qualitative perspective can only seem stronger (on accomplishments it was a different story).

If you look at his record carefully he had an almost irrefutable bias and pace aided win in the Haskell and PA Derby. He had what I considered a mild bias in his favor and ultimately a merry go round race development in the Classic in part due to the interference at the start. When he didn't get everything his own way there's not much to rave about other than the Woody Stephens which was a Grade 2 sprint.

[onefast99]

MY suggestions - stewards are off site.
They get a B&W video with and no idea who the jockeys are.
They talk to no one.
And while we are at it each jock gets a red flag they can throw at an outrider to signal an objection. Keep the system the way it is just be more consistent.

[Tom]

Tough to do with human bias involved.

[classhandicapper]

I think you want very clear rules that take the stewards out of the process as much as possible. It's the decisions that are 50-50 or 60-40 that cause all the inconsistency that drives everyone crazy.

Rather than allow the stewards to be on either one side of that line or the other in an inconsistent fashion, you have to say unless it 90-10 do nothing. That's not perfect either, but any time reasonable people can debate a decision, the default should be do nothing.

[Stillriledup]

I think you want very clear rules that take the stewards out of the process as much as possible. It's the decisions that are 50-50 or 60-40 that cause all the inconsistency that drives everyone crazy.

Rather than allow the stewards to be on either one side of that line or the other in an inconsistent fashion, you have to say unless it 90-10 do nothing. That's not perfect either, but any time reasonable people can debate a decision, the default should be do nothing.

They could become much more consistent overnight if they would rarely make a DQ. Even come out and say that we believe in paying the winners so minor stuff won't be grounds for DQs

Once you start disqualifying horses willy nilly that's where u get into trouble.

[pandy]

With the benefit of seeing Bayern run this year I think the arguments I made against him last year from a qualitative perspective can only seem stronger (on accomplishments it was a different story).

If you look at his record carefully he had an almost irrefutable bias and pace aided win in the Haskell and PA Derby. He had what I considered a mild bias in his favor and ultimately a merry go round race development in the Classic in part due to the interference at the start. When he didn't get everything his own way there's not much to rave about other than the Woody Stephens which was a Grade 2 sprint.

I agree.

[Robert Fischer]

How about at the start, out of the gate?

There are some players who believe the stewards aren't doing enough in that case.

The potential foul would be coming from a failure to 'correct', not from a horse's initial inward or outward break.

It's debatable that jocks have adapted to the lack of enforcement at the start, and may not be as concerned about correcting their path if they are getting the best of it.

[pandy]

For the Breeders Cup, the stewards should not be the regular stewards for the track. They can be biased and I think you can make a case that they left Bayern up because he was trained by a man who is one of the most powerful figures in So. Cal racing. Pick three top stewards from three different areas of the country, set the rules for the Breeders Cup races and you'll avoid bias.

[v j stauffer]

How about at the start, out of the gate?

There are some players who believe the stewards aren't doing enough in that case.

The potential foul would be coming from a failure to 'correct', not from a horse's initial inward or outward break.

It's debatable that jocks have adapted to the lack of enforcement at the start, and may not be as concerned about correcting their path if they are getting the best of it.

For the purposes of determining whether a suspension is worthy for a gate incident we always give the same quote to the jocks. " The first jump is yours, the second ours" Translated horses can be very difficult to control. If you make an immediate attempt to straighten the rider will not be facing a suspension.

However this doesn't necessarily absolve the horse from potential DQ if the initial interference cost a rival an opportunity of a better placing.

[EMD4ME]

My remedy, and everyone on this board can call me crazy for suggesting this, but I do not think we even need stewards. We are in the age of computer technology and TRAKUS. Each horse has a running lane. Why not have simulated running lanes on the computer with trakus on each horse. Why not let artificial intelligence make the final judgement. A computer printout with the final decision based on artificial intelligence ruling parameters built into the program.

Now your comments good or bad.

Hey, how about Julie Krone thrown over the bushes at SAR some years back, big accident. Took 30 minutes to sort it out. They got it wrong. Few weeks latter they, NYRA, re-distributed the purse money. Correct bettors got nothing re-dist. though. Anyone remember this incident.

Some NYRA regulars at the track that day said if this had happened at AQ they would have burned the place down.


If the opportunity arises, I'd help burn down the racino :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hate the stepsister next door.

[EMD4ME]

How about at the start, out of the gate?

There are some players who believe the stewards aren't doing enough in that case.

The potential foul would be coming from a failure to 'correct', not from a horse's initial inward or outward break.

It's debatable that jocks have adapted to the lack of enforcement at the start, and may not be as concerned about correcting their path if they are getting the best of it.

NYRA jocks simply don't care if they go from the 1 path to the 4 path right out of the gate. There is zero to be afraid of, it happens almost every day and it's out of control.

There is ZERO accountability and in my opinion, YOU ARE 100 % correct. A failure to correct should be an automatic unplacing and suspension. That would fix a lot of sh*t that's going on out there. An initial break, to me, can sometimes be on purpose BUT I won't go down that route. Sticking to just "the attempt to correct" you can straighten LOL a lot of crap out.

[EMD4ME]

For the Breeders Cup, the stewards should not be the regular stewards for the track. They can be biased and I think you can make a case that they left Bayern up because he was trained by a man who is one of the most powerful figures in So. Cal racing. Pick three top stewards from three different areas of the country, set the rules for the Breeders Cup races and you'll avoid bias.

Extremely intelligent.............


Therefore it will NEVER happen

[Robert Fischer]

For the purposes of determining whether a suspension is worthy for a gate incident we always give the same quote to the jocks. " The first jump is yours, the second ours" Translated horses can be very difficult to control. If you make an immediate attempt to straighten the rider will not be facing a suspension.

However this doesn't necessarily absolve the horse from potential DQ if the initial interference cost a rival an opportunity of a better placing.

That's how I hear that rule is meant to be enforced.


NYRA jocks simply don't care if they go from the 1 path to the 4 path right out of the gate. There is zero to be afraid of, it happens almost every day and it's out of control.

There is ZERO accountability and in my opinion, YOU ARE 100 % correct. A failure to correct should be an automatic unplacing and suspension. That would fix a lot of sh*t that's going on out there. An initial break, to me, can sometimes be on purpose BUT I won't go down that route. Sticking to just "the attempt to correct" you can straighten LOL a lot of crap out.

pun excused :lol:

[EMD4ME]

pun excused :lol:

:lol: :D Pun was intended, what can I say :D The phrase naturally came out of my brain and it fit the topic.

[BMustang]

Referencing interference at the break - Didn't Walter Blum, while a steward in Florida years ago, write a dissertation on the "Hazards of the Start" which was the definitive thinking that other stewards across the country used for years to guide their judgement in regards to contact and interference at the break????

He basically echoed VJS's statement that so long as an immediate effort was made to steady/straighten your horse, that the effects of the "hazards of the start" were primarily an act of God or nature, and considered a condition of the game.

If you watch the head-on of every race, you will detect interference in most starts. Ruling on each incident out of the gate would open a HUGE can of worms.

[pandy]

Referencing interference at the break - Didn't Walter Blum, while a steward in Florida years ago, write a dissertation on the "Hazards of the Start" which was the definitive thinking that other stewards across the country used for years to guide their judgement in regards to contact and interference at the break????

He basically echoed VJS's statement that so long as an immediate effort was made to steady/straighten your horse, that the effects of the "hazards of the start" were primarily an act of God or nature, and considered a condition of the game.

If you watch the head-on of every race, you will detect interference in most starts. Ruling on each incident out of the gate would open a HUGE can of worms.

It's true you can't make changes that often because a lot of horses veer in our out and bump at the start. But sometimes the horse has to come down when it crosses over several paths and causes a chain reaction, as Bayern did. The people who have mentioned the overhead shot, that's a moot point because the judges use the pan and head shot and on both it appeared that Bayern should come down, and almost every racing writer and analyst in the country agreed.

[Stillriledup]

Referencing interference at the break - Didn't Walter Blum, while a steward in Florida years ago, write a dissertation on the "Hazards of the Start" which was the definitive thinking that other stewards across the country used for years to guide their judgement in regards to contact and interference at the break????

He basically echoed VJS's statement that so long as an immediate effort was made to steady/straighten your horse, that the effects of the "hazards of the start" were primarily an act of God or nature, and considered a condition of the game.

If you watch the head-on of every race, you will detect interference in most starts. Ruling on each incident out of the gate would open a HUGE can of worms.

It would be equivalent to calling holding in the NFL on every play.

[EMD4ME]

Referencing interference at the break - Didn't Walter Blum, while a steward in Florida years ago, write a dissertation on the "Hazards of the Start" which was the definitive thinking that other stewards across the country used for years to guide their judgement in regards to contact and interference at the break????

He basically echoed VJS's statement that so long as an immediate effort was made to steady/straighten your horse, that the effects of the "hazards of the start" were primarily an act of God or nature, and considered a condition of the game.

If you watch the head-on of every race, you will detect interference in most starts. Ruling on each incident out of the gate would open a HUGE can of worms.

I think that the 2nd thru 6th-10th etc. strides out of the gate need to be more scrutinized. I get that the 1st stride would be the equivalent of calling holding in the NFL, you can do it in every race. However, there are some egregious herds after the 1st stride that I have seen that are not even looked that.

All it takes is 1 accident and then people will scream "how could there not be repurcussions for this? Let's DQ jocks for gate infractions". Why wait for that?

The MOST IMPORTANT part of any race, is the gate break. Why is that off limits in terms of DQs suspensions and alike?

Again, I am NOT saying the 1st stride can be used against a jock but the 2nd stride on should be.

There should be an IMMEDIATE AND OBVIOUS attempt to correct. If there's not, you're DOWN, period. Regardless of any other details of the race, you are DQ'd.

If that's the case, you'd see many more clean breaks going forward.

[EMD4ME]

Anyone on here that has handicapped like a genius, benefitted from racing luck and then made it to the last leg of a HUGE sequence knows the feeling...

You know you bet the best horse. You know you will win....UNLESS, your horse is screwed at the gate.

Sometimes, it happens. You get whacked beyond belief out of the gate, your horse runs a tenancious second and you lose a heartbreaker where you KNOW you were best and deserve to cash for XXXXXX dollars but don't because there are ZERO repurcussions for gate/start infractions.

If jocks were forced to OWN the second stride, less crap would happen out there.

Right after Ramon got hurt, I watched I. Ortiz take a horse breaking from PP4 in a 1 70 yd route on the Inner Track at AQU and carry the horse to the 7 or 8 path before the clubhouse turn. Why did he do that? Because the chalk had PP 10. He herded the horse out and quickly ducked inward (while technically clear) and left the 10 out to dry.

Part of me screams, GREAT RIDE. But when I think of it logically, I see dirty written all over it. Jocks in pps 5678 all had to snatch as he purposely went super wide out of the gate.

That's the stuff that should never be tolerated.

[Grits]

http://www.americasbestracing.net/en/the-latest/abrv/2015/7/23/stewarding-at-saratoga-get-to-know-erinn-higgins/

Didn't know that one of the stewards at Saratoga is a 27 year old female, and new to the steward's stand. This is a tough spot for one with less experience than others. Maybe that she's an alternate allows her more time to gain experience possibly? She filled in during Belmont's Fall meet.

Please, don't feel I'm putting her down. No, I'm not. However, I'm surprised that one who is this new to the game is part of the decision process at the top summer race meet in the country.

[pandy]

http://www.americasbestracing.net/en/the-latest/abrv/2015/7/23/stewarding-at-saratoga-get-to-know-erinn-higgins/

Didn't know that one of the stewards at Saratoga is a 27 year old female, and new to the steward's stand. This is a tough spot for one with less experience than others. Maybe that she's an alternate allows her more time to gain experience possibly? She filled in during Belmont's Fall meet.

Please, don't feel I'm putting her down. No, I'm not. However, I'm surprised that one who is this new to the game is part of the decision process at the top summer race meet in the country.


When I was 27 I probably knew and understood more about racing than some of the stewards at major tracks, and I knew and worked with other people around the same age who would have been much better stewards than some of the people who were in that job at that time. You don't have to be old to know what you're doing.

[SG4]

Similar to the comments above, this is in no means a shot at Ms. Higgins, but who is making these decisions on appointing the stewards at NYRA tracks? Has it historically been people politically connected, or racetrack families? Would think the latter would have too much built in bias perhaps. I always figured some ex-jockeys would be considered at least. Either way, just the career arc of being hired as an assistant to the stewards at Finger Lakes, and then in a very short matter of time you're being called up from single A to the majors? Not to mention the accreditation course is all of 1 WEEK long! I always thought to get to a point of such power there would be a little bit more of a process than this. If this is what it's like at the premier track in the country then who knows what the credentials are like at the rest of them. Maybe some of the more angered people around here should start looking to apply, might be easier to get in the booth than we thought.

[PaceAdvantage]

It says she's the alternate state steward, does it not?

I don't really see anything to question.

[Grits]

It says she's the alternate state steward, does it not?

I don't really see anything to question.

I think I noted that she was the alternate. Maybe you can educate me..you know far more than I do. Does this mean that she only fills in when the NYSG steward is not available, or is she in the booth all day, each day, as well?

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm not an expert on this...but I would think, as the alternate, she fills in only when needed...if ever

[Ruffian1]

I'm not an expert on this...but I would think, as the alternate, she fills in only when needed...if ever
That is typically what the alternate State Steward does. Only there when needed to fill in. Cant say for sure in this case though.