Arlington Million BS...

[sq764]

All I have to say is if Bailey or Day was on the 10 horse, he stays up..

That was a horrendous DQ..

I wish I was there to bitch slap whiny Desormeaux..

[linrom1]

It's a total joke. The Europeans should stop coming here.

[cj]

My initial thought when seeing the head on was that he was coming down. I didn't bet the race, didn't really watch after the first couple head ons, but I could see a DQ.

[brdman12]

I respectfullt disagree. A horse gets pushed into the rail, someone should get disqualified. Hard to figure out who did what. But the 10 horse...wow...too bad the jockey drove him so far in so quick.

[sq764]

the 7 came over way before the 10 did and the 10 was past the 7 when he came over.. It was a damn joke, plain and simple...

Then idiot Desormeaux says "If I wasn't squeezed, I would have won easily"..WHAT?!?! the 10 horse destroyed the field.. They could have gone around 2 more times with the same finish..

[fmhealth]

If I've said it once I've said it 1,000 times. The stewards (aka three stooges) at AP are the WORST in the country.

Would there have been a DQ if this was THE DERBY? Absolutely not!! Sure it was tight, but they're racing for a ONE MILLION DOLLAR purse.

Wasn't at AP today nor were any of my picks involved in the DQ. You can rest assured, after a week at Delmar. I'll be back giving these incompetants apiece of my mind. They let far worst infractions go almost on a daily basis. Have to admit after 45 years, it's becoming very tiresome.

[IRISHLADSTABLE]

NTRA Pick 4 Sat 8/14/04
Today's Pick 4

Leg 1 Alfred G Vanderbilt ( Bel Pk R7)

Leg 2 Beverly D (Arl Pk R8)

Leg 3 The Sword Dancer (Bel Pk R8)

Leg 4 The Arlington Million (Arl Pk R9)

1,2/1,4,9/2,3/9,10

Good Luck All & Enjoy a Great Day Of Racing

Jimmy

Report this post to a moderator

08-14-2004 08:16 AM

All I know is I got screwed out of the Pk 4

Jimmy

[NoDayJob]

Pgm Comment
10 Powerscourt (GB): bothered start, off rail, rallied, lugged in stretch, driving
4 Kicken Kris: middle of pack, inside stretch, bumped-hit rail
12 Magistretti: middle of pack, 4 wide, rallied, belatedly
7 Epalo (GER): close up, 3 wide, bothered stretch, dropped back a bit
9 Vangelis: bothered start, no speed, 5 wide 1/4 pole, improved position
1 Mr O'Brien (IRE): middle of pack, inside, steadied backstretch, no rally
8 Senor Swinger: bothered start, middle of pack, inside, no factor
3 Sweet Return (GB): close up, just outside, tired
13 Mobil: middle of pack, 4 wide, tired
6 Mystery Giver: no speed, never prominent
5 Sabiango (GER): stalked pace, just outside, tired
2 Vespone (IRE): set pace, inside, tired
11 Hatif (BRZ): no speed, always outrun
Footnotes

POWERSCOURT (GB) raced far back for seven furlongs after being pinched back at the start, launched a rally from outside on the far turn, circled six wide while rapidly gaining at the top of the stretch, charged to the front nearing the furlong marker, drifted in under right hand whipping a sixteenth out then edged clear in the final seventy yards. Following a stewards inquiry into the stretch run, POWERSCOURT was disqualified from first and placed fourth for interference in deep stretch. KICKEN KRIS was shuffled back a bit in the early stages, raced in the middle of the pack along the backstretch, closed the gap between horses on the turn, rallied four wide to reach contention in upper stretch, made a run to threaten inside the furlong marker then checked in tight quarters while bumping the rail in the late stages. MAGISTRETTI raced well back early, worked his way forward from outside on the turn, advanced five wide into the stretch then rallied belatedly to gain a share. EPALO (GER) settled in good position along the backstretch, edged closer on the turn, rallied between horses entering the stretch, surged to the front in upper stretch, battled between horses in deep stretch then checked and altered course while being bumped in deep stretch. VANGELIS checked and was pinched back at the start, worked his way forward from outside on the turn, circled six wide entering the stretch then closed late in the middle of the track. MR O'BRIEN (IRE) tucked in along the rail in the early stages, steadied in traffic along the backstretch, gained a bit while saving ground on the turn then lacked a strong closing response. SENOR SWINGER was unhurried for seven furlongs after being pinched back at the start, made a run along the inside to reach contention at the top of the stretch and flattened out. SWEET RETURN (GB) steadied along the inside nearing the first turn, moved out on the first turn, stalked the leaders while four wide for a mile, dropped back on the turn and steadily tired thereafter. MOBIL raced in the middle of the pack while well off the rail to the far turn and faded at the top of the stretch. MYSTERY GIVER never reached contention. SABIANGO (GER) pressed the pace from outside along the backstretch, gained a slim lead on the turn then gave way in the stretch. VESPONE (IRE) set the pace under pressure to the turn and tired from his early efforts. HATIF (BRZ) checked at the start and was never close thereafter. (Race run in lane 5, rail at 0.) (c) Equibase

NDJ

[ceejay]

I think that the DQ was justified. Not because KK was impeded: He would not have won the race IMO. But, because Epalo I think that the interference cost Epalo a placing or two.

Disclaimer: I am biased becaue of my bets on KK.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by ceejay
Disclaimer: I am biased becaue of my bets on KK.

I was really pissed when he couldn't get thru on the rail........

cussing big time..........he was ready to go in the lane..........

then I got a serious gift.............boy......that one made up for a couple of times I got taken down this year...........

[depalma13]

The 10 never touched the 7, never caused the 7 to check. In fact, the jock on the 7 was still going to the right hand whip after the 10 passed him. He was hitting his horse at the exact time he claimed he had to check! It was an absolute BS call. The 4 got bumped after the 10 was long gone and just after the jock hit the 7 for the last time.

In the Santa Anita Derby, Castledale does the exact same thing the 10 does today, and the steward's there take Rock Hard Ten Down. Two identical situations, two entirely different decisions and it's the lack of uniform consistency that is what is so wrong the "judges" of horse racing.

[cj]

I'll stand by what I always say, all race results should stand for betting purposes. Let the stewards figure it out later for purses.

[sq764]

I was thinking after the race - what if Desormeaux was riding the 10 and Spencer was on the 4.. Does the 10 come down then?

Me thinks not :-)

[TOOZ]

Also got screwed out of a 1950 pick 4. My only question is if a rider makes a bold move by going inside and taking the rail, should you possibly pay the consequences for the move? The seven was done. How much of the DQ was caused because the
rider of the seven got spooked when the ten went in front of him?
Tough call. However, I wonder if the horse gets DQ'd in Europe.
When's the last time a million dollar race has DQ's two years in a
row? Looking at the replay I can say this, without the drift, the
ten wins easy.

[DBC]

I happily cashed on KK, but anyone could see the 10 was better. I do believe there was interference, but even if KK gets through cleanly on the rail I still think he loses by a length. Funny thing--I was going to box the two in the exacta and changed my mind at the last second, so I got lucky all around. I sympathize with those of you who lost serial bets because of the DQ--been there myself.

[Valuist]

I agree w/CJ in that the betting results should stand and let them decide how the purse should be allocated. I think Beyer initially came up with that idea and I think the public would approve. Nothing pisses off a bettor more than getting DQ'd. If we have money on the race, its difficult to be objective whether its warranted or not.

Irishlad-

I'm in the same boat as you. That was a $1985 P4.

[sq764]

I don't know if I agree with that idea.. Although I was pissed to lose on the 10 yesterday, I think there are legitimate situations where a DQ is needed to protect the public..

Let's say in the same race, the 4 gets through, THEN the 10 comes over so hard and slams into the 4, he ends up knocking the 4 over the fence...

The only think I ask for is consistency.. It's terrible that each instance doesn't only depend on the actions in the race, it also takes into account the jockeys, the trainers, owners, purse of race... None of that should matter, but it does.

[DJofSD]

I did not see Powerscourt as the cause of the bumping KK experience. And I say this as some one that benefited from the DQ.

Never having seen any rules or guidelines used by stewards, I have to ask: does bumping actully need to occur for there to be a DQ? Can a horse (jockey?) be "intimidated" by another runner w/o any actual contact?

And, in general, are there consistent rules that all states use to determine the results of an inquiry?

Since it seems like the group of stewards are 100% relying upon the video replays from various angles, maybe we can have a central office for the evaluation of inquiries. Have it in the midwest. Have all inquires be reviewed by them. Only have the most respected and well qualified people onboard. And I like the idea of no former jockies serving and I like the idea of DQ's only effecting the purse distribution.

DJofSD

[lefthandlow]

I worked at the track years ago and maybe someone who works there now can verify this but as I recall a horse can be dq'd
for failing to maintain a straight line during the stretch run and this type of movement caused problems in that stretch run.I watched the replay and the 10 did not run straight in the stretch
and that may be why he was dq'd.Bumping did not figure into the equation as i saw it So maybe that rule was violated..LL

[linrom1]

Kitten's Joy made the same move that Powerscourt made, however, neither of the jockeys that were affected panicked.

So, there is the big difference: jockeys' reaction as a basis of DQ.

I know that people continue to boycott Magna, but, here is an example why everyone should boycott AP. Whether its the fix 6 , millions in missing uncashed tickets, secret hidden tote machines, or retaliation against clockers who refuse to falsify workouts, AP is always at the forefront of some scam.

Thus, until CD cleans out its house, I am not spending a penny at AP

Don’t vote with feet, vote with your pockets.

[superfecta]

That was a just DQ.That move by powerscourt was a jock not paying attention and letting the horse bear in on the seven and four horse.Baily did the same move in the Secretariat,but was lucky he was well enough in front it didn't make a difference.
It was amazing how Kent stayed on the horse AND kept riding.I would have checked pretty quick.He probably wouldn't have won but it would have been closer.AND this is coming from someone who had the ticket but I knew it was not right to keep them in the order they came in.

[kenwoodallpromos]

How would Powercourt wearing blinkers and the jockey whipping so much on the right side affect it? The horse certainly could not have known there were others inside. He was reacting to the whipping. I think the jockey should have known a horse wearing blinkers may be more likely to move over.
I'm sure the rule about maintaining a straight course in the stretch is there because there are other horses moving forward at different speeds and horses are fading at different speed so it is very possible to move into another horse that suddenly appears.

[linrom1]

Q. Does Powerscourt clear Epalo without touching the horse?

A. Yes

Q. Would Powerscourt still clear Epalo if Starke doesn't veer to the left?

A. Yes

[NoDayJob]

Excerpts From the Rules of Racing:

PART V.

Stewards

39. (a) There shall be three Stewards to supervise each race meeting. One of such Stewards shall
be appointed by the State Racing Commission, one shall be appointed by the Jockey Club, and
one shall be appointed by the Association conducting such race meeting.

PART XV

Rules of Racing

153. (a) When clear, a horse may be taken to any part of the course provided that crossing
or weaving in front of contenders may constitute interference or intimidation for which the
offender may be disciplined.

(b) A horse crossing another so as actually to impede him is disqualified, unless the impeded
horse was partly in fault or the crossing was wholly caused by the fault of some other horse or
jockey.

(c) If a horse or jockey jostle another horse, the aggressor may be disqualified, unless the
impeded horse or his jockey was partly in fault or the jostle was wholly caused by the fault of some
other horse or jockey.

NDJ

[sq764]

If they ruled based on intimidation, then holy shit, we should all hang up our programs and move on to handicapping badmittion or hopscotch..

Isn't intimidation a tactic used everyday at every racetrack in the country??? In a stretch drive with 2 horses, the jock on the outside forcing the other horse to the rail, but not touching him?? If this was dq'd everytime, there may be 1-2 DQ's every card at every track..

Consistency is the key.. And the only constant is that there is always going to be inconsistency..

[KingChas]

My Condolences almost winners.I think the 7 was at fault myself ,if he wasn't RIGHT whipping as the winner also was, maybe not.The 7 horse should have been DQ'd.I got the shaft years ago at Arlington on a big bet when they DQ'd Lets Elope(turf) who won easily.I know the feeling .I no longer bet Arlington.Only if they run BC there.

[kenwoodallpromos]

The quoted rule shows a world of difference between discipline and DQ. Powerscourt jockey qualified for discipline, not the horse for DQ.

[Vegas Kid]

I'm a big proponent of leaving results as they stand, but in this instance, i think the call was a no brainer. You can discuss all you want about how the winner was much the best and would have won anyway and whatnut, but the fact remains that you can't recklessly ride. This winning jock was under right handed urging, never once looked up or even once made the slightest attempt to keep his horse straight. He was just whipping and flailing and angling in dangerously. You need to stay in a straight line or else you come down.

Also, the dq may have not been all about this race...it was about safety in general. The judges, by making the call, made the statement that "you can't be reckless".

If they permit recklessness and let a jock get away with weaving all over the track, they will promote, whether directly or indirectly, that type of riding. If a jock knows his horse is going to win, he can weave all over and intimidate rivals because he knows that he won't come down.

Safety comes first, it has to.

Also, i think if the jock made a better attempt to keep a straight line, things may have been different.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I a jockey is suspended, is it just in the local jurisdiction? I( assume it does not carry overseas.

[DJofSD]

Outsource the stewards.

[ghostyapper]

Reading through this thread (which was dug up from 2 years ago?) I don't agree with letting the betting stand for dq's. If a horse wins a race because he interfered with another, the wagering should not stand.

Now I think the steward system is a joke right now but why should the betting stand? This will add even more luck and chance to wagering

[Ron]

My god, this was like an April Fools thread. I was reading the thread and thinking what did I miss, what horse was Desormeaux on, etc?