Churchill Group track stewards at it again.

[midnight]

Today in the 9th race at Arlington, #12, Ugottaseethisplace was accellerating past #13 Lucky They Call Me when it crossed over in front of that horse. The outcome of the race was already decided when this happened. The #13 had no chance of coming back at #12. The #12 didn't even touch #13, in my opinion, and #13 still finished second, so even if there was contact, the #13 wasn't out anything that wasn't already gone anyway. #12 was clearly better at that point.

The stewards couldn't wait to take #12 down. The reason? Michael Reavis was the trainer of #12.

Now before you call me for whining, I had a bet on #13, so I benefitted by the disqualifcation!

For some odd reason, this seems to happen at Churchill group tracks more than any others. Is that just me, or does it seem like Calder/Hollywoood/Arlington/Churchill seem to have more hanky panky by the officials than other tracks do?

[BillW]

Midnight,

(or anyone)
Do the tracks hire the stewards?

[karlskorner]

One is a State employee, the other 2 are track employees

[Figman]

In New York at both Finger Lakes and the NYRA tracks, one is a State Racing and Wagering Board appointment, one is a Jockey Club appointment and the third steward is a racing association (racetrack) appointment.

[so.cal.fan]

<sigh>
We don't really have stewards in So. Cal. just 3 people they pay $450 a day to sit and watch TV and read the paper.
You should be thankful you have stewards and stop whinning!

:D

[Lefty]

I think it was a bad DQ. I watched the "headon" several times and the #13 didn't check or brk stride when the #12 crossed in front of him. I bet the #3 so have no stake in this outcome.

[hurrikane]

$450 a day to watch tv and read the paper!

So cal, can you send me an application? :D

[Valuist]

I talked about this race in the selections forum. I thought Montalvo on the 13 should get an Academy Award for his acting job; the 12 appeared to be clear of the 13. I had it either way but it would've paid double (the tri) with the 12 in the top spot.

Arlington may be owned by CDI, but these are Illinois stewards who were around before the AP-CD merger. While I didn't agree with the decision, I wasn't totally surprised. The 12 definitely lugged in (although clear of the 13). What they need is an above track view to show if a horse is clear when he cuts in front of another horse.

[midnight]

The pan and rear shots both show that 12 was clear of 13 when he cut in front. Even if he did slightly brush the 13, he was well on his way to beating that horse, and 13 still finished second, so the "affecting the outcome of the race" --- which is supposed to be a key criteria in the decision --- wouldn't apply. I could possibly see it if the 13 finished 3rd, since an alleged brush MIGHT have cost him a position that way, but that wasn't the case. In any rate, it made me money I wouldn't have had otherwise, but I'd prefer in the long run for the stewards to call them correctly.

[Valuist]

It seems that almost all stewards are 70 years old or more. Maybe they should hire someone who isn't senile.

[midnight]

This just isn't my month for inquiries/objections.

The good news is that the stewards called one right at Churchill.

The bad news is that it cost me a bet.

In the 5th race, #8 Trial by Jury came in on #1 Reverse psychology twice in the stretch. There's no question that he interfered. It was blatant even from the pan shot. The second time, he drove #1 into the rail. Surprisingly, the stewards didn't call the inquiry. Jockey John McKee had to complain.

The stewards made the right call, which unforntunately cost me a bet at good odds. However, I have no quarrel with the disqualification.

[Shacopate]

I've watched this race several times on racereplays.com and it was marred from the start. Rene Douglas was unseated when his mount stumbled at the break. Hats off to the outriders for catching the loose horse before they reached the first turn. Very impressive.

The 12 was clearly better, but he got some poor race riding in the end and I think that that, coupled with the fall of a top rider caused "knee jerk reaction" to disqualify the horse.

Overall, I agree. Bad call.

[VetScratch]

When Mr. D. owned AP, the stewards, like everyone else, really worked at his sole discretion, and he bullied both the state racing officials and the legislature (and closed AP when they wouldn't knuckle under).

After the merger, Mr D. became the largest single Churchill shareholder, so probably not much has changed at AP.

I am NOT implying dishonesty by Mr. D. or the stewards. I merely question whether public trust is engendered when stewards are the track owner's appointees while the owner continues to race his horses at his own track.

Added thought... Wouldn't George Steinbrenner (who does/did own TAM as well as horses and Jeter) absolutely love it if he could hire the umpires for all home games! George reminds me of Mr. D.

Who are the AP stewards now?

[linrom1]

They called it right only after jockey's objection. Why was there no inquiry to begin with. I am now fuming at those stewards at CD because the infraction was easily observed., yet not called.

[Valuist]

Vestscratch-

You bring up a good point about Duchossois racing his own horses at AP. Major conflict of interest. His Apt to Be won an overnight handicap a week or so ago. Cella races horses at OP; Stronach does it all the time. But it doesn't make it right.

[gillenr]

I believe Mr. D was O for the 2002 AP meet!

[VetScratch]

Gillnr,

I believe Mr. D was O for the 2002 AP meet!

Whether he wins or loses is not the point. If stewards who work at his pleasure cannot run horses, why should the rules enable him to run? It's a matter of engendering public trust in the game.