I'll Give Anyone $500

[Gander36]

Today's Race 9 at Horseshoe Indiana (QH Race)

Original Order of Finish: 8 6 7

Challenge: Watch the replay pan and head-on, then provide me with a viable explanation why the 6 horse was disqualified from 2nd, and placed 3rd.

Because it cost me a $300+ Exacta.

Thanks.

(you will see the stewards made a huge mistake)

[cj]

Today's Race 9 at Horseshoe Indiana (QH Race)

Original Order of Finish: 8 6 7

Challenge: Watch the replay pan and head-on, then provide me with a viable explanation why the 6 horse was disqualified from 2nd, and placed 3rd.

Because it cost me a $300+ Exacta.

Thanks.

(you will see the stewards made a huge mistake)

The explanation is in the chart comments, albeit it a fuzzy one. My interpretation is that the 6 was DQed for fouling the 5, but then the 5 was DQed for fouling the 4 and 3.

Maybe like this:

8 6 7 5 4

6 DQed behind 5, so now 8 7 5 6 3 4

Then 5 is DQed behind 4, so 8 7 6 3 5 4

[westernmassbob]

The explanation is in the chart comments, albeit it a fuzzy one. My interpretation is that the 6 was DQed for fouling the 5, but then the 5 was DQed for fouling the 4 and 3.

Maybe like this:

8 6 7 5 4

6 DQed behind 5, so now 8 7 5 6 3 4

Then 5 is DQed behind 4, so 8 7 6 3 5 4


8675309

[wisconsin]

Today's Race 9 at Horseshoe Indiana (QH Race)

Original Order of Finish: 8 6 7

Challenge: Watch the replay pan and head-on, then provide me with a viable explanation why the 6 horse was disqualified from 2nd, and placed 3rd.

Because it cost me a $300+ Exacta.

Thanks.

(you will see the stewards made a huge mistake)



A real head scratcher. The :6: drifted in as equally as the :5:. Why does the :6: supercede the "foul" committed by the :5:. I do not understand that the :6: did not cause the :5: to move inward, and am befuddled as to why the :6: is not placed behind the :5:.

Strange

[Gander36]

A real head scratcher. The :6: drifted in as equally as the :5:. Why does the :6: supercede the "foul" committed by the :5:. I do not understand that the :6: did not cause the :5: to move inward, and am befuddled as to why the :6: is not placed behind the :5:.

Strange

Yeah. The placing is confusing. It costs people a pretty nice trifecta too. I felt the 5 drifted in and the 6 just followed along. The replay never shows the 6 withing a body width of the 5.

[wisconsin]

Yeah. The placing is confusing. It costs people a pretty nice trifecta too. I felt the 5 drifted in and the 6 just followed along. The replay never shows the 6 withing a body width of the 5.



I will argue that both the :5: and :6: drifted inward through the stretch, but they were "clear" when it began, and when the :4: gathered momentum, the :5: was in his way. Bad racing luck is all I saw there.

[lamboguy]

very sad, i wanted the $500. i have no good explanation for this, but i didn't have a good one for NICHOLES DREAM either 15 years ago.

[v j stauffer]

:1: :3: & :4: were clearly bothered and cost an opportunity at a better placing.

Now the job of the Stewards is to place blame.

IMO this was a fascinating piece of film with many nuances and ultimately a VERY subjective decision that could have gone many ways.

First I watched the race as a whole.

Then went back and watched only :5: as though :6: wasn't in the race.

Then went back again and watched only :6: and though :5: wasn't in the race.

First let's talk about the start. There was contact between :4: & :5: which was initiated by :5: coming inward.

During the running :5: drifted inward taking the path of :1: :3: & :4:

Now comes the really tough question. Was :5: intimidated and forced inward by
:6: who was also drifting inward? Did :6: cause :5: to shy away as he came closer? If you think the answer is YES blamed can be placed on :6:.

It's close but IMO the answer is NO. When a horse drifts inward other horses will tend to follow them down. Especially young green horses that are still learning.

John G Dooley said the horses were juveniles so that makes sense.

IMO the rider of :5: didn't make sufficient effort to maintain his straight path. Had he would the :6: continued inward and made contact? I don't think so. I say this because the rider of :6: did correct when he realized he had come inward a couple paths. After that correction :5: STILL continued his inward drift. Most of the damage had been done but I feel it made the case as to who was at fault.

DECISION: :5: DISQUALIFIED AND PLACED BEHIND :1: NO ACTION TAKEN AGAINST :6:

I would tell the rider of :6: at morning film review that he could have reacted and straightened his mount quicker and to work on that.

[wisconsin]

:1: :3: & :4: were clearly bothered and cost an opportunity at a better placing.

Now the job of the Stewards is to place blame.

IMO this was a fascinating piece of film with many nuances and ultimately a VERY subjective decision that could have gone many ways.

First I watched the race as a whole.

Then went back and watched only :5: as though :6: wasn't in the race.

Then went back again and watched only :6: and though :5: wasn't in the race.

First let's talk about the start. There was contact between :4: & :5: which was initiated by :5: coming inward.

During the running :5: drifted inward taking the path of :1: :3: & :4:

Now comes the really tough question. Was :5: intimidated and forced inward by
:6: who was also drifting inward? Did :6: cause :5: to shy away as he came closer? If you think the answer is YES blamed can be placed on :6:.

It's close but IMO the answer is NO. When a horse drifts inward other horses will tend to follow them down. Especially young green horses that are still learning.

John G Dooley said the horses were juveniles so that makes sense.

IMO the rider of :5: didn't make sufficient effort to maintain his straight path. Had he would the :6: continued inward and made contact? I don't think so. I say this because the rider of :6: did correct when he realized he had come inward a couple paths. After that correction :5: STILL continued his inward drift. Most of the damage had been done but I feel it made the case as to who was at fault.

DECISION: :5: DISQUALIFIED AND PLACED BEHIND :1: NO ACTION TAKEN AGAINST :6:

I would tell the rider of :6: at morning film review that he could have reacted and straightened his mount quicker and to work on that.


^ This is why you are a Steward and I am not. Thank you for the explanation.

[cj]

By the way, just donate the $500 to Old Friends. :)

[Gander36]

:1: :3: & :4: were clearly bothered and cost an opportunity at a better placing.

Now the job of the Stewards is to place blame.

IMO this was a fascinating piece of film with many nuances and ultimately a VERY subjective decision that could have gone many ways.

First I watched the race as a whole.

Then went back and watched only :5: as though :6: wasn't in the race.

Then went back again and watched only :6: and though :5: wasn't in the race.

First let's talk about the start. There was contact between :4: & :5: which was initiated by :5: coming inward.

During the running :5: drifted inward taking the path of :1: :3: & :4:

Now comes the really tough question. Was :5: intimidated and forced inward by
:6: who was also drifting inward? Did :6: cause :5: to shy away as he came closer? If you think the answer is YES blamed can be placed on :6:.

It's close but IMO the answer is NO. When a horse drifts inward other horses will tend to follow them down. Especially young green horses that are still learning.

John G Dooley said the horses were juveniles so that makes sense.

IMO the rider of :5: didn't make sufficient effort to maintain his straight path. Had he would the :6: continued inward and made contact? I don't think so. I say this because the rider of :6: did correct when he realized he had come inward a couple paths. After that correction :5: STILL continued his inward drift. Most of the damage had been done but I feel it made the case as to who was at fault.

DECISION: :5: DISQUALIFIED AND PLACED BEHIND :1: NO ACTION TAKEN AGAINST :6:

I would tell the rider of :6: at morning film review that he could have reacted and straightened his mount quicker and to work on that.

Well analyzed. Still confused on WHY, if the 6 interfered with the 5 (the only possible horse he could have interfered with), why he was only moved to 3rd and not below the 5.

The disqualification cost me the exacta, but by only moving below the 7, who was 15 yards away on the outside, trifecta tickets were affected too.

[jameegray1]

Well analyzed. Still confused on WHY, if the 6 interfered with the 5 (the only possible horse he could have interfered with), why he was only moved to 3rd and not below the 5.

The disqualification cost me the exacta, but by only moving below the 7, who was 15 yards away on the outside, trifecta tickets were affected too.

In what was deemed to be two separate incidents; :6: was first DQ'd behind :5: but then :5: was DQ'd behind :3:

Result at post was:
1st 8
2nd 6 7 (DH)
4th 5
5th 3

DQ's are dealt with in order of occurrence;
> Firstly 6 was DQ'd behind 5, leaving 8/7/5/6/3
> Then 5 was DQ'd behind 3, leaving the final result 8/7/6/3/5

[v j stauffer]

In what was deemed to be two separate incidents; :6: was first DQ'd behind :5: but then :5: was DQ'd behind :3:

Result at post was:
1st 8
2nd 6 7 (DH)
4th 5
5th 3

DQ's are dealt with in order of occurrence;
> Firstly 6 was DQ'd behind 5, leaving 8/7/5/6/3
> Then 5 was DQ'd behind 3, leaving the final result 8/7/6/3/5


IMO the order of finish should be 8-7-4-3-2-10-1-5-6

Even though the chronology of the alleged incidents was :6: then :5:

By rule the :6: can NEVER be allowed to be placed in front of a singular horse he fouled.

As I stated before. If it was me. I would not have changed the :6:'s placing. I didn't see him cost anyone an opportunity at a better placing.

VERY INTERESTING RACE.

If you think that one was tough. Try this one on for size from this summer at Energy Downs in Gillette Wy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjogHCOcWH0

Spoiler alert. The :4: was placed 2nd and the :5:placed 3rd in the single most ludicrous Stewards decision in the history of pari-mutuel racing..

[v j stauffer]

SORRY

8-7-3-4-2-10-1-5-6

[wisconsin]

IMO the order of finish should be 8-7-4-3-2-10-1-5-6

Even though the chronology of the alleged incidents was :6: then :5:

By rule the :6: can NEVER be allowed to be placed in front of a singular horse he fouled.

As I stated before. If it was me. I would not have changed the :6:'s placing. I didn't see him cost anyone an opportunity at a better placing.

VERY INTERESTING RACE.

If you think that one was tough. Try this one on for size from this summer at Energy Downs in Gillette Wy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjogHCOcWH0

Spoiler alert. The :4: was placed 2nd and the :5:placed 3rd in the single most ludicrous Stewards decision in the history of pari-mutuel racing..

Re: The race you posted

How was it not :8::6::7: there? I get it, the :4: and :5: were compromised, but what did the :6: or :7: do there?

[SharpCat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRRyB-S-zwM

[The_Turf_Monster]

QH is buyer beware. I suggest sticking to the win pool

[v j stauffer]

Re: The race you posted

How was it not :8::6::7: there? I get it, the :4: and :5: were compromised, but what did the :6: or :7: do there?

It was a 40 minute Inquiry and the decision completely botched and nonsensical. :4: was eased and not impacted AT ALL by several horses who finished in front of him.

Elevating him to 2nd is the worst Stewarding decision EVER!

Cannot begin to understand how they came to that conclusion.

[jameegray1]

If you think that one was tough. Try this one on for size from this summer at Energy Downs in Gillette Wy

Spoiler alert. The :4: was placed 2nd and the :5:placed 3rd in the single most ludicrous Stewards decision in the history of pari-mutuel racing..

Very confused by this Energy Downs race.

According to the race report the original order of finish was:
:8::1::6::3::2::7::5::4:

Only :1::6::3: and :2: were DQ'd

Yet the final result shows :8::4::5:

:confused::confused::confused:

[wisconsin]

It was a 40 minute Inquiry and the decision completely botched and nonsensical. :4: was eased and not impacted AT ALL by several horses who finished in front of him.

Elevating him to 2nd is the worst Stewarding decision EVER!

Cannot begin to understand how they came to that conclusion.



How could they possibly have jobs after such an "objective assumption" that the :4: was going to run second.

Not sure how they justify a dq on both the :6: and :7: there.

[CheckMark]

Vic is not just great at calling DQs he might be even better at having a helping hand in high school football games making the right calls too!

Hope you had fun at Spring Hill High on FNF!

Sorry link below

[CheckMark]

https://twitter.com/goofonroof/status/1570175225890852868

[v j stauffer]

Very confused by this Energy Downs race.

According to the race report the original order of finish was:
:8::1::6::3::2::7::5::4:

Only :1::6::3: and :2: were DQ'd

Yet the final result shows :8::4::5:

:confused::confused::confused:

Complete and total incompetence.

There is no conceivable way :4: could be placed 2nd and :5: placed 3rd.

The Energy Downs Stewards botched the decision and basic tenants of the rule book.

Wasn't the only tragic call of the meeting.

Unforgivable.

[v j stauffer]

Vic is not just great at calling DQs he might be even better at having a helping hand in high school football games making the right calls too!

Hope you had fun at Spring Hill High on FNF!

Sorry link below

I had a GREAT time Check.

Learned alot!

Had great partners who were VERY helpful.

Really looking forward to my next game at Danville High School this Thursday night.

If any of you are nearby. C'mon by the game. Love to see you there.

[v j stauffer]

Vic is not just great at calling DQs he might be even better at having a helping hand in high school football games making the right calls too!

Hope you had fun at Spring Hill High on FNF!

Sorry link below

UPDATE: I've now done 7 games. 2 each at DANVILLE*, CUTTER-MORNINGSIDE & HOT SPRINGS. As well as the 1st at Spring Hill.

The fields at the last two were brand new state of the art synthetic. Felt like walking on a cloud.

*DANVILLE was to hell and gone from Hot Springs! 90 minutes each way on a winding, dark mountain road. Not fun. Miracle, I didn't hit a big buck on the way home. He jumped out of the way at the last instant. Stopped for Red Bull on the way. Hope I don't get assigned there again!

This Thursday it's 8 man at CUTTER-MORNINGSIDE.

[wisconsin]

UPDATE: I've now done 7 games. 2 each at DANVILLE*, CUTTER-MORNINGSIDE & HOT SPRINGS. As well as the 1st at Spring Hill.

The fields at the last two were brand new state of the art synthetic. Felt like walking on a cloud.

*DANVILLE was to hell and gone from Hot Springs! 90 minutes each way on a winding, dark mountain road. Not fun. Miracle, I didn't hit a big buck on the way home. He jumped out of the way at the last instant. Stopped for Red Bull on the way. Hope I don't get assigned there again!

This Thursday it's 8 man at CUTTER-MORNINGSIDE.


Do you still ump any games or ref basketball?

[v j stauffer]

Do you still ump any games or ref basketball?

I sure do. Basketball is by far my favorite. I got into football because I don't like the down time. BB pre-season tournaments start in December.

Oh! and BTW so does OAKLAWN RACING CASINO RESORT on Friday Dec. 9.

Let's GO!

[wisconsin]

I sure do. Basketball is by far my favorite. I got into football because I don't like the down time. BB pre-season tournaments start in December.

Oh! and BTW so does OAKLAWN RACING CASINO RESORT on Friday Dec. 9.

Let's GO!



Planning on a February visit, 2nd time there. All the way from Wisconsin. Would like an opportunity to meet.

[v j stauffer]

Planning on a February visit, 2nd time there. All the way from Wisconsin. Would like an opportunity to meet.

Consider it done. My booth has been remodeled to 7 times larger than in the past. You can come up and spend a race with me.

[wisconsin]

Consider it done. My booth has been remodeled to 7 times larger than in the past. You can come up and spend a race with me.


Thank you! I will PM you as we draw closer to the visit.

[BarchCapper]

My booth has been remodeled to 7 times larger than in the past.

Wow! You get one of those air traffic control style deals like Bobby Neuman has at Prairie Meadows?