WORST DQ I'VE EVER SEEN

[v j stauffer]

Check out the 2nd race today at Laurel. :8: Taken down and placed 2nd behind :5:who was on the inside.

I saw the coverage live on TVG so I don't have a link. I'm sure CJ will bust my balls for that.

If someone can find and post it you WILL NOT BELIEVE they took that horse down. Really bad.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

It was shitty, but who cares?


It put a 7/5 over a 2/1 in a 6 horse meaningless race.

[ReplayRandall]

Here ya go.....

https://youtu.be/wiuSO6tKbg4

[v j stauffer]

It was shitty, but who cares?


It put a 7/5 over a 2/1 in a 6 horse meaningless race.

It's a troll question. But I'll bite. The people who bet on and own :8: probably care.

[the little guy]

That's a preposterous takedown. Maybe fine the rider for making it a LITTLE tight, MAYBE, but that horse should not have come down.

[v j stauffer]

Here ya go.....

https://youtu.be/wiuSO6tKbg4

Randall thanks for posting.

This is a much better replay than what I saw live and was sent on a grainy I Phone.

I must retract what I initially said.

I don't think this call was incorrect. The rider on the outside did in fact put pressure on the inside horse just before the wire.

My bad. Sorry.

[098poi]

Randall thanks for posting.

This is a much better replay than what I saw live and was sent on a grainy I Phone.

I must retract what I initially said.

I don't think this call was incorrect. The rider on the outside did in fact put pressure on the inside horse just before the wire.

My bad. Sorry.


I have to agree with your first assessment Vic. I know my eye is not as trained as yours but it looked like kind of a bad DQ
to me. If the :8: were running mid pack and made a sweeping move to the front in the stretch and then banged the :5: I could see it. But as the :8: was clearly in front I think it could have stayed :8:, :5:.

[v j stauffer]

I have to agree with your first assessment Vic. I know my eye is not as trained as yours but it looked like kind of a bad DQ
to me. If the :8: were running mid pack and made a sweeping move to the front in the stretch and then banged the :5: I could see it. But as the :8: was clearly in front I think it could have stayed :8:, :5:.

Even if you're correct. Which you may be. Taking the :8: down was far from the WORST DQ I've ever seen. I overreacted without seeing the replay from the MUCH BETTER views that REPLAY RANDALL provided.

[098poi]

Even if you're correct. Which you may be. Taking the :8: down was far from the WORST DQ I've ever seen. I overreacted without seeing the replay from the MUCH BETTER views that REPLAY RANDALL provided.




I agree, I am just talking about this race. This is hardly the worst.

[v j stauffer]

I agree, I am just talking about this race. This is hardly the worst.

One of the things I saw with the better views was the tracks the horses left on the sloppy track. After the wire as they are galloping out. Look at the path's the horses took. I think it helps show the inside horse had a clear path, which he's entitled to and that was taken away by the outside horse who appears to initiate contact. I'd love to know if the rider on the outside horse thinks he would have won had he gone perfectly straight and not "race ridden" the inside horse?

[Robert Fischer]

Take him down.



The :5: continued gamely, bulling into the :8: when that rival drifted in, in deep stretch.

The :5: was also in contention, and it wasn't clear the the :8: had a certain win.


Tough beat. I respect everyone's opinion. Hope we both get the next one in our favor. :ThmbUp:

[jimmyb]

Looks like the 8 came in, impeding the 5 at 3:49 of the video.

[lamboguy]

that horse had no right to come down. but i saw a worse one with NICHOLES DREAM a decade ago at The Mountain with lots of show money on her.

[Tom]

Looks like the 8 came in, impeding the 5 at 3:49 of the video.

I agree.

[cj]

Check out the 2nd race today at Laurel. :8: Taken down and placed 2nd behind :5:who was on the inside.

I saw the coverage live on TVG so I don't have a link. I'm sure CJ will bust my balls for that.

If someone can find and post it you WILL NOT BELIEVE they took that horse down. Really bad.

Maryland racing posts all replays on YouTube.

[v j stauffer]

Maryland racing posts all replays on YouTube.

I saw that. But it wasn't up yet when I checked just after the race. BTW if anyone gets a chance to see owner Bob Bone's tweet about the incident it's humbling how much class he showed.

Evidently he was watching the track feed and what they were showing was the upper stretch not nearing the wire where the interference took place.

In his tweet he took the high road when he would have been totally justified in complaining for several reasons.

I've had the pleasure of knowing Bob for many years. We actually owned a few horses together.

You'll never find a guy with more class, devotion and dedication to racing.

[GMB@BP]

I saw that. But it wasn't up yet when I checked just after the race. BTW if anyone gets a chance to see owner Bob Bone's tweet about the incident it's humbling how much class he showed.

Evidently he was watching the track feed and what they were showing was the upper stretch not nearing the wire where the interference took place.

In his tweet he took the high road when he would have been totally justified in complaining for several reasons.

I've had the pleasure of knowing Bob for many years. We actually owned a few horses together.

You'll never find a guy with more class, devotion and dedication to racing.

There used to be nothing more deadly than a Bone horse claimed by Mullins.

[ZippyChippy423]

The 8 horse clearly came over and impeded the 5 horses path. BTW the judges made a unanimous decision on that nothing to debate .

[horses4courses]

I agree.

Occasionally we are of like mind ;)

I had no dog in that fight.
No issues here with that call.

[Afleet]

seen that happen many times w/no change

[Hambletonian]

Seriously Vic, the worse DQ ever?

You have been around since Hector was a pup and you never saw a worse DQ?

They made the right call, the horse on the lead was staggering around and he put the inside horse in tight late. And in the head on it looks like the jock on the lead was trying to tighten up on the rail horse.

Considering the closeness of the race, it was absolutely the right call.

[v j stauffer]

Seriously Vic, the worse DQ ever?

You have been around since Hector was a pup and you never saw a worse DQ?

They made the right call, the horse on the lead was staggering around and he put the inside horse in tight late. And in the head on it looks like the jock on the lead was trying to tighten up on the rail horse.

Considering the closeness of the race, it was absolutely the right call.

What can I say?

Wait! I know!

READ THE THREAD!!!:bang:

[Andy Asaro]

I woulda left him up. The less human intervention the better IMO.

And maybe not in this particular case but when you give Jocks a chance to do a little acting instead of riding hard to the finish a lot of them will do the acting.

[v j stauffer]

I woulda left him up. The less human intervention the better IMO.

And maybe not in this particular case but when you give Jocks a chance to do a little acting instead of riding hard to the finish a lot of them will do the acting.

Couple of things I'd like to share with all of you. First, when conducting an inquiry for the purposes of "placings" Stewards DO NOT look at the actions of the jockeys at all. Their actions and or intentions are completely irrelevant.

We watch the horses, their paths, action, momentum and chances of achieving the best possible finish position.

Fans tend to get entirely too wrapped up in what the offender (race riding) or fouled horse (acting) do and both are meaningless.

Another thing that tends to happen is people look to see if a horse committed a foul rather than was a horse fouled.

EVERY horse is entitled to a clear and unobstructed path. When a horse is put in very tight quarters I always gave the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse. It's as if they were an innocent bystander.

I always told riders that in 150 years of pari-mutual racing there has never been a horse DQ'ed that ran straight. Don't give me or my fellow stewards the opportunity to make a bad call. Again remember we tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse.

In this case it's very reasonable to surmise the inside horse could have won the race without being impeded. Ask yourself how you would feel if you owned or made a big bet on the inside horse? Would you feel it was fair to leave it alone given the race your horse ran or was trying to run?

[Andy Asaro]

Couple of things I'd like to share with all of you. First, when conducting an inquiry for the purposes of "placings" Stewards DO NOT look at the actions of the jockeys at all. Their actions and or intentions are completely irrelevant.

We watch the horses, their paths, action, momentum and chances of achieving the best possible finish position.

Fans tend to get entirely too wrapped up in what the offender (race riding) or fouled horse (acting) do and both are meaningless.

Another thing that tends to happen is people look to see if a horse committed a foul rather than was a horse fouled.

EVERY horse is entitled to a clear and unobstructed path. When a horse is put in very tight quarters I always gave the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse. It's as if they were an innocent bystander.

I always told riders that in 150 years of pari-mutual racing there has never been a horse DQ'ed that ran straight. Don't give me of my fellow stewards the opportunity to make a bad call. Again remember we tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse.

In this case it's very reasonable to surmise the inside horse could have won the race without being impeded. Ask yourself how you would feel if you owned or made a big bet on the inside horse? Would you feel it was fair to leave it alone given the race your horse ran or was trying to run?

Of all people you have to explain this to me.

[v j stauffer]

Of all people you have to explain this to me.

Yours was the most recent post. My words were for everyone. I'm not sure what you mean by your statement. I'm VERY sure I don't care.

[v j stauffer]

Of all people you have to explain this to me.

Why does it ALWAYS have to be about me? I was contributing to the thread. I said NOTHING to or about you. It's the holidays. Can't you just chill?

[bobphilo]

Check out the 2nd race today at Laurel. :8: Taken down and placed 2nd behind :5:who was on the inside.

I saw the coverage live on TVG so I don't have a link. I'm sure CJ will bust my balls for that.

If someone can find and post it you WILL NOT BELIEVE they took that horse down. Really bad.

Might be hard to tell from the pan shot where it looks like the 5 trying to push through a tight hole, but the head-on clearly shows the 8 coming in on the 5, that was getting to the 8, and actually making contact with the 5 shortly before the wire. Fair DQ.

[bobphilo]

Might be hard to tell from the pan shot where it looks like the 5 trying to push through a tight hole, but the head-on clearly shows the 8 coming in on the 5, that was getting to the 8, and actually making contact with the 5 shortly before the wire. Fair DQ.

Congrats to v.j. for having the stones to correct himself after further review from a better angle.

[ZippyChippy423]

Couple of things I'd like to share with all of you. First, when conducting an inquiry for the purposes of "placings" Stewards DO NOT look at the actions of the jockeys at all. Their actions and or intentions are completely irrelevant.

We watch the horses, their paths, action, momentum and chances of achieving the best possible finish position.

Fans tend to get entirely too wrapped up in what the offender (race riding) or fouled horse (acting) do and both are meaningless.

Another thing that tends to happen is people look to see if a horse committed a foul rather than was a horse fouled.

EVERY horse is entitled to a clear and unobstructed path. When a horse is put in very tight quarters I always gave the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse. It's as if they were an innocent bystander.

I always told riders that in 150 years of pari-mutual racing there has never been a horse DQ'ed that ran straight. Don't give me or my fellow stewards the opportunity to make a bad call. Again remember we tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the bothered horse.

In this case it's very reasonable to surmise the inside horse could have won the race without being impeded. Ask yourself how you would feel if you owned or made a big bet on the inside horse? Would you feel it was fair to leave it alone given the race your horse ran or was trying to run?

I have seen many DQ’s over the years that exclusively had to do with a jockeys action. Several to be specific had to do with JOCKEYS misuse of whips. Also there have been dq’s because of one jockey trying to hit/ kick etc another jockey while racing. One jockey threw his googles at another horse ...dq! None of these instances were initiated by the horse.

[Hambletonian]

I have seen many DQ’s over the years that exclusively had to do with a jockeys action. Several to be specific had to do with JOCKEYS misuse of whips. Also there have been dq’s because of one jockey trying to hit/ kick etc another jockey while racing. One jockey threw his googles at another horse ...dq! None of these instances were initiated by the horse.


Have to say I agree. The stewards in general seem to have more leeway for drifting horses if the jockey is not encouraging and/or causing it. Meaning, in my experience a horse bearing out under left handed whipping is way more likely to come down then one ridden by a jockey tugging hard on the left rein to control the drift.

But that is only based on my observations over 45 or so years. I do allow that Vic could be correct and that my experiences have been outliers.

[v j stauffer]

I have seen many DQ’s over the years that exclusively had to do with a jockeys action. Several to be specific had to do with JOCKEYS misuse of whips. Also there have been dq’s because of one jockey trying to hit/ kick etc another jockey while racing. One jockey threw his googles at another horse ...dq! None of these instances were initiated by the horse.

Striking another horse with the whip is the one instance where watching what the jockey does comes into play. They represent maybe 1/10th of one percent of inquiries.

[ultracapper]

In trying to be objective about this, I had to be honest with myself and admit that my opinion would be 100% influenced by which horse I had my money on. I guess I feel it could have gone either way.