Twirling Candy

[cj]

This was probably the most ridiculous non DQ I have seen in my entire life. I'm sure it had nothing to do with the Craig's (Jenny), huge Delmar supporters, owning the horse. If this happened at NYRA, there would be 20 threads by now.

I guess it is true, Cal racing is dead. Nobody cares.

[Dahoss9698]

I tried to watch the head on at calracing and for some reason it's the only race today that they don't have the head on for. I'm sure that's just a wacky coincidence. :rolleyes:

[InsideThePylons-MW]

From another thread concerning the topic of price affecting the stewards decisions which he has stated this opinion on many times........

Let me chime in one point. Whether you feel there should have been a DQ or not I can assure you the stewards DO NOT CARE if the horse in question was 3/5 or 100 to 1. In most cases they don't even know.

If Twirling Candy was 12-1 and Summer Movie was 1-5, there would have been a DQ.

[Dahoss9698]

From another thread concerning the topic of price affecting the stewards decisions which he has stated this opinion on many times........



If Twirling Candy was 12-1 and Summer Movie was 1-5, there would have been a DQ.

Sharp post (seriously)

[andymays]

Is evereyone saying that California Racing isn't on the up and up?

shocking. :eek: :lol:

[Fingal]

The horse needed to come down. I don't care who it was, who owns / trains it, how good the horse is or how much potential it has, that it was only his 4th start & he's still green, that he was the best, whatever. A foul is a foul.

I figure Sadler & Rosario think the non DQ as the right call. But........How big is the paycheck each will get from that race ?

[docicu3]

Sharp post (seriously)


The 6 TC would have been a bridge jumpers delight when placed 5th behind the 4 while P Val would have been given the win in a Graded stake at 36-1...

This has as much chance of happening as Sarah Palin winning the oval office with TFM as her VP.....GL on that one.

[NJ Stinks]

The horse needed to come down. I don't care who it was, who owns / trains it, how good the horse is or how much potential it has, that it was only his 4th start & he's still green, that he was the best, whatever. A foul is a foul.



No doubt about it. Either there is justice or there isn't. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[lamboguy]

From another thread concerning the topic of price affecting the stewards decisions which he has stated this opinion on many times........



If Twirling Candy was 12-1 and Summer Movie was 1-5, there would have been a DQ.
hey vic, you must have called 9 million different races all over the country in the last 20 years and you come up with this statement? is there something wrong with your eyeglass's? in case there is, i find the need to help you out. there is no way that that horse didn't come down unless the judges had an alterior motive for it not to come down.wheather they had a big show bet on the race or someone in one of their family's had something to do with that horse.


please don't don't come back here and tell me that the stewards and judges are not supposed to bet.

[owlet]

You guys are finally starting to see how rigged and ugly the sport truly is. And then (to add insult to injury) you have to have guys like Vic preach to you, robotically and like any good corporate boy, how the stews are completely neutral and never care who is involved in a decision.

Hey Vic, how many times did McCarron come down compared to some Panamanian no name? And was this because McCarron never rode dirty or made a mistake? How come Russell never comes down up north? Could this be because (as one horse owner told me) he 'owns' Golden Gate?

The sport is f-ing rigged; it's crooked and dirty and its days are numbered. Period. But what is perversely satisfying about this is that all the apologists and water carriers will soon be out of a job even as they continue to claim the game is on the level. blub blub blub. Goodbye.

[Stillriledup]

Of course Vic is going to stand by the stewards, he has to see these guys every day, he's an announcer and jocks agent, he's got to be on his best behavior.

As far as that race goes, it was a joke that horse stayed up.

[surfdog89]

A good read in the San Diego Union about the Del Mar Derby.... Here is the link........ a long article about Twirling Candy.


ttp://handicapperscorner.blogspot.com

I posted it on my blog...

[andymays]

Paulick Report » Blog Archive » TWIRLING CANDY: TO DQ OR NOT?

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/twirling-candy-to-dq-or-not/

[andymays]

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/thats-bs/

Excerpt:

"That’s B.S.," said Patrick Valenzuela, jockey of second place finisher Jairzihno. "They haven’t even talked to the jockeys and they’ve made the ruling. That horse took Victor’s horse out of the race."

[born2ride]

http://www.nctimes.com/sports/equestrian/racing/article_13b5fc13-8d6c-57f2-901e-240e07d73a2c.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Here's an excerpt from North County Times:

"There was obvious interference, no question," said Scott Chaney, one three stewards that made the decision. "And I suppose the dramatic nature of it made people think there would be some change, but in and of itself, it doesn't lead to an automatic disqualification.

"It happened five-eighths of a mile away from the wire, which makes a disqualification less likely. The horse was beaten 6 3/4 lengths for fifth (place). It's very speculative that (the incident on the backside) cost him 6 3/4 lengths. Lastly, there is some wiggle room in the rule. It's tough to disqualify a horse that is much the best ...

[bks]

This was a disgraceful non-call. Yet steward Scott Chaney did say one truthful thing about the incident:

“Had we disqualified the horse the cynics would have said we were putting up the 33-1 shot in order to help out Del Mar’s bottom line and help have a Pick Six carryover,” Chaney said

What he apparently fails to understand, however, is that it's the inconsistent nature of their decisions as a whole which gives rise to the suspicion of gaming the system in the first place.

[andymays]

This was a disgraceful non-call. Yet steward Scott Chaney did say one truthful thing about the incident:



What he apparently fails to understand, however, is that it's the inconsistent nature of their decisions as a whole which gives rise to the suspicion of gaming the system in the first place.

That's right. :ThmbUp:

Cheney is another Celebrity Racing Official in California. Rick Arthur is another. :ThmbDown:

[Tom]

Santa Claus
Easter Bunny
Stewards have integrity



Yeah. Right.

[Relwob Owner]

http://www.nctimes.com/sports/equestrian/racing/article_13b5fc13-8d6c-57f2-901e-240e07d73a2c.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Here's an excerpt from North County Times:

"There was obvious interference, no question," said Scott Chaney, one three stewards that made the decision. "And I suppose the dramatic nature of it made people think there would be some change, but in and of itself, it doesn't lead to an automatic disqualification.

"It happened five-eighths of a mile away from the wire, which makes a disqualification less likely. The horse was beaten 6 3/4 lengths for fifth (place). It's very speculative that (the incident on the backside) cost him 6 3/4 lengths. Lastly, there is some wiggle room in the rule. It's tough to disqualify a horse that is much the best ...



Wow....I agree with CJ in saying that this is one of the worst non DQ's I have ever seen....I find it almost laughable that one of the guys who kept the horse up also said the words "There was obvious interference, no question"....with this sort of stuff going on, is it any wonder new people dont come to our sport??????

[magwell]

No doubt about it. Either there is justice or there isn't. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: As much as I cant stand the call or non call of the "three blind mice" most of the time,in this case I have to agree with the call but that's just my opinion in this spot . I had no skin in the game and they could run this bunch against TC every week of the year and he would beat them like a drum. Now if he did that to the second place horse I might reconsider my position......:cool:

[Relwob Owner]

As much as I cant stand the call or non call of the "three blind mice" most of the time,in this case I have to agree with the call but that's just my opinion in this spot . I had no skin in the game and they could run this bunch against TC every week of the year and he would beat them like a drum. Now if he did that to the second place horse I might reconsider my position......:cool:


So, if on paper and talent wise, a horse is much the best, then you are advocating the idea that it is OK for that horse to interfere with the other ones? That doesnt seem to make much sense IMO


Question to all-what is the rule at Del Mar....is it whether a foul occurred or whether it affected a placing?

[PhantomOnTour]

Uhhhhh....California is dead to me..............right?

[Tom]

One of the biggest jokes in this game the very idea of the stewards.
You let three people decide the outcome of tens of thousands of dollars with NO checks or balances. EVERY decision should be evaluated by a neutral panel who does not know who the horses or jockeys are- black and white video. And the stewards need to be held accountable for their calls, with fines ans suspensions, just like the riders.

Don't tell me about honesty and integrity - that stuff is never assumed, only verified.

[Relwob Owner]

One of the biggest jokes in this game the very idea of the stewards.
You let three people decide the outcome of tens of thousands of dollars with NO checks or balances. EVERY decision should be evaluated by a neutral panel who does not know who the horses or jockeys are- black and white video. And the stewards need to be held accountable for their calls, with fines ans suspensions, just like the riders.

Don't tell me about honesty and integrity - that stuff is never assumed, only verified.



Right on target Tom

[Fingal]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/sep/05/del-mar-derby-controversy-another-look/


Steward C. Scott Chaney said the stewards attempted to talk to the two jockeys, but it was clear to them that Espinoza was in no hurry to talk to them.

“Given the fact that he was not exactly eager to talk to us, we went ahead and made a decision,” Chaney said. “We made the decision before we talked to him. We’re not just going to wait an undue amount of time. Our opinion is that if an inquiry is going on and we’ve asked to talk to both jockeys, they’re going to take time. We didn’t know how long he was going to stand there and talk to the trainer. We’re not going to wait a crazy amount of time if it doesn’t seem that important to them.

“It was pretty obvious what happened in this case and we did talk to both jockeys afterward. And frankly their comments would have had no influence in terms of the decision.”


I thought the principle of all the cameras, all the angles, all the input was to take the time to get it right, but evidently only when it fits someone's schedule.

[cj]

A horse is actually by another injured but it wasn't a DQ? Are you kidding me? Apparently they feel it was more important for Espinoza to tell them what every person could see than it was to talk to the trainer about an injured stakes horses...pompous asses is how that sounds.

This is as bad as it gets. The fact they didn't even speak to the jockeys tells me something is rotten. If I were the runner up I would appeal this for years, making them spend money (money they don't have) to defend this ridiculous decision.

[cj]

It is also pretty funny the steward called it a G1 when it is a G2.

[toetoe]

Only slightly, now --- that's pretty good for me.



Unless you put Vic's horse 1st, 2nd, 3rd, wherever the men-playing-God determine he shoulda coulda woulda finished, you're just rewarding PVal's horse, and that horse couldn't even warm Twirling Candy up. Fine the jockey, by all means. Give the winner's purse to Victor's horse, fine and dandy; but what good is done by penalizing the favorite's backers and rewarding those dumb enough to think PVal's mount had any shot ?



Any chance Twirling Candy might be able to warm up Goldikova ? I think I'm dreaming, but who knows ?

[Greyfox]

So a couple of months back:

V.J. Stauffer boldly proclaimed in another thread:

"Whether you feel there should have been a DQ or not I can assure you the stewards DO NOT CARE if the horse in question was 3/5 or 100 to 1. In most cases they don't even know."

Then Steward Scott Chaney is quoted as saying:

"Had we disqualified the horse the cynics would have said we were putting up the 33-1 shot in order to help out Del Mar's bottom line and help have a Pick 6 carryover."

V.J. - That latter comment certainly brings your defence of So Cal stewards a couple of months ago into disrepute. Obviously they are aware of the odds. With friends like that who needs enemies?
(By the way, they help Del Mar's bottom line by putting up a favorite via the breakage.)

[Shelby]

Santa Claus
Easter Bunny
Stewards have integrity



Yeah. Right.

You've managed to crush all of my hopes in one fell swoop.


:lol:

[Stillriledup]

This was a disgraceful non-call. Yet steward Scott Chaney did say one truthful thing about the incident:



What he apparently fails to understand, however, is that it's the inconsistent nature of their decisions as a whole which gives rise to the suspicion of gaming the system in the first place.

They had SO many carryovers this meet that i think they discussed this. This was the first thing i thought of, they kept the horse up so they can dispense ANY rumors that they routinely DQ horses to create carryovers.

If DMR was struggling for carryovers this season, they take this horse down. They have had SO many C/Os, and players need a break from this past week, that this was a great chance for them to say "see, we dont care about carryovers"

Bunch BS, they care, they just did this to shut everyone up about the issue.

[Stillriledup]

One of the biggest jokes in this game the very idea of the stewards.
You let three people decide the outcome of tens of thousands of dollars with NO checks or balances. EVERY decision should be evaluated by a neutral panel who does not know who the horses or jockeys are- black and white video. And the stewards need to be held accountable for their calls, with fines ans suspensions, just like the riders.

Don't tell me about honesty and integrity - that stuff is never assumed, only verified.

Racing needs a 'war room' like the NHL has. Controversial stuff goes to the booth in Toronto, not someone on site who might have a bias towards the home team.

[Dan Montilion]

On top of the tote board should sit a NBA style possession arrow...
< NO CHANGE
> CHANGE

[toetoe]

Controversial stuff goes to the booth in Toronto


I foresee the following headline:

JOCKEY DISQUALIFIED CONVICTED OF HATE CRIME

[freehouse2002]

Was at DMR yesterday for said race and I along with others thought he was coming down. Lots of boo birds came out when the announcement was made.


freehouse2002

[sonnyp]

Was at DMR yesterday for said race and I along with others thought he was coming down. Lots of boo birds came out when the announcement was made.


freehouse2002


back in the 70's a mutuel on an exacta was posted that really smelled at yonkers raceway.. the fans started the place on fire and stormed the paddock in search of the drivers.

naturally, i don't condone behavior like that, but at the very least, they should have headed to the exits after that and emptied that joint.

[Spalding No!]

If I were the runner up I would appeal this for years, making them spend money (money they don't have) to defend this ridiculous decision.
From the other side of things, if I were the connections of The Wicked North ('94 Big Cap) and Futural ('01 Hollywood Gold Cup), I would appeal the disqualifications of my "much the best" winners from those $1 million Grade 1 races.

[Stillriledup]

Does anyone remember Bob and John? He won a race in So Cal by a distance and was taken down for some 'incident' in the lane. The jock on the 2nd horse overreacted and stood up costing himself a placing. So naturally, the judges did the right thing and took down a much the best winner.

[rgustafson]

Read Hovdey's blog entry today in the DRF to see the out the stewards took according to the California Horse racing Board Book of Rules.

[cj]

Hovdey is nothing but a yes man.

[appistappis]

maybe they will make a disney movie about twirling candy and summer moves will piss on the stewards??????????

[BluegrassProf]

Haskin/BH from this PM:

There is no doubt Twirling Candy was many lengths the best in the Del Mar Derby (gr. IIT) and taking him down for his infraction would have been difficult. But there also is no doubt that what he did to Summer Movie normally would result in an instant disqualification.

The fact that Summer Movie apparently came out of the race battered and sore adds even more fuel to the fire. To the stewards’ credit, they did present an explanation on why they let the result stand, which resulted in a chorus of boos as the winner was led into the winner’s circle. But then they went and negated it by saying that they made their decision before talking to Summer Movie’s jockey, Victor Espinoza. Why? Because he didn’t come to the phone fast enough.

That’s like the police saying the victim of a crime didn’t come to the station quickly enough, so they let the suspect go. That comment was a major faux pas and only exacerbated the situation. Let’s also not forget what a disqualification would have resulted in, considering the amount of show money bet on Twirling Candy and the last-place finish by Summer Movie.

[PaceAdvantage]

These are supposed to be professional stewards, no?

So now, rules aren't rules anymore...rules are rules depending on the setup...I get it now...

[Stillriledup]

These are supposed to be professional stewards, no?

So now, rules aren't rules anymore...rules are rules depending on the setup...I get it now...


That cost me thousands. I had 100 dollars to show on the horse who was 4th and 50 to show on the 2nd and 3rd place runners. I think i would have been able to wait 5 more minutes for a few grand.

[ceejay]

Just wondering, what is more random: disqualification in a horse race or disqualification in short track speed skating?

Just for the record, (And given the current rules the ruling under discussion is truly a horrible non-call) I think a strong case could be made for always leaving the order of finish as they crossed the finish line and make adjustments for disqualifications in the purse money after the fact. Suspensions, fines, etc. At least there would be some consistency.…

[InsideThePylons-MW]

...rules are rules depending on the setup...

And price of horses involved.

If Candy was 12-1 and Summer was 1-5, it would have been an instant disqualification.

[Stillriledup]

Just wondering, what is more random: disqualification in a horse race or disqualification in short track speed skating?

Just for the record, (And given the current rules the ruling under discussion is truly a horrible non-call) I think a strong case could be made for always leaving the order of finish as they crossed the finish line and make adjustments for disqualifications in the purse money after the fact. Suspensions, fines, etc. At least there would be some consistency.…

This is the great thing about dog racing.

[lamboguy]

i found out a little about the judges making that call at del mar. the easiest way to put this is simple: if you can't trust the messenger, how can you trust the message?

this game is in very sad shape when the judges are in the tank

[horses4courses]

I'll lay donuts to dollars that a bunch of you would still be complaining had the stewards DQed Twirling Candy.........

[RXB]

I thought the idea of allowing the stewards a little discretion was intended to avoid DQ'ing a horse that might have committed a minor foul against a horse that was clearly going nowhere. I didn't realize that this "discretion" would now be used to justify leaving up a horse that committed a major, dangerous foul against a foe that was in contention for at least a placing at that point. But now I've seen it twice within a month at the two biggest meets.

[lamboguy]

victor espinoza clearly had to pull up his horse. it looked like victor was going to go buy but he got stopped. that clearly compromised summer movies chances.

bottom line is that there is something more than that that meets the eyes in this on.

[cj]

I'm pretty sure causing another horse to be injured costs him at least one placing.

[Canarsie]

I'll lay donuts to dollars that a bunch of you would still be complaining had the stewards DQed Twirling Candy.........

I miss the good old days when there was a foul claim or inquiry and you could hedge your bet or make a stand at a monitor. Did that many a time.

[Stillriledup]

I'll lay donuts to dollars that a bunch of you would still be complaining had the stewards DQed Twirling Candy.........

There would be no complainers, how can you argue, your horse slammed into another horse and destroyed his chances.