SA stewards make correct call in Big 'Cap

[thespaah]

Twirling Candy came out first hitting the 11 causing that horse to lose balance. Twirling Candy had nothing left.

[ranchwest]

It looked like a pinball machine. So much for betting or even watching Santa Anita. This is the worst stewards' decision I've seen in a long time.

[toussaud]

I will never say another bad thing about the SA stewards again (okay at least until del mar)

[Stillriledup]

It would have been a travesty if they moved anything. That's horse racing, a little bumper cars, nobody really at fault, its a contact sport sometimes.

Good stuff from the judges over there.

[RXB]

I thought that Game On Dude and Twirling Candy were approximately equal contributors to the initial contact, so I would've let the result stand, too. But it was a tough call.

Another weak 4YO+ Gr 1 field. Congratulations, horse racing industry, you've almost completely destroyed the older horse divisions. Be proud.

[toussaud]

they came home in sub 2:00. there goes your weak race theory.

[Stillriledup]

What?

:bang:

[tzipi]

I personally was really surprised Game on Dude didn't come down. Tons of horses have come down for way less. JMO.

[Wickel]

Twirling Candy came out and bumped Setzuko, but once he gathered himself he was clobbered by Game On Dude. Bad call by stewards. Setzuko should have been moved up and Game On Dude placed second. Unfortunately, I bet on the favorite.

[andtheyreoff]

Twirling Candy came out first hitting the 11 causing that horse to lose balance. Twirling Candy had nothing left.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A5t5_O8hdA

[tzipi]

Another weak 4YO+ Gr 1 field. Congratulations, horse racing industry, you've almost completely destroyed the older horse divisions. Be proud.

A 1:59.4 finish is weak?

[Jay Trotter]

It looked like a pinball machine. So much for betting or even watching Santa Anita. This is the worst stewards' decision I've seen in a long time.

That was the right decision! TC caused the problem more than anyone else in my opinion!

[Golf man]

It was a very long review, but i could have supported Setsuko as being the culprit because at the top of the stretch it looked like Setsuko was trying to straighten out but slightly veered left into Twirling Candy and only then did the ping pong routine get going back and forth. I saw Game on Dude as reactive to the push (second hand) from TC; credit the jockey with keeping the horse on course and getting by when the place horse weakened.

Bill

[toussaud]

horse racing karma at it's finest.


Remember the Del Mar debacle when he came out and bumped a horse and they didn't see a need to take him down? Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot.

[ranchwest]

That was the right decision! TC caused the problem more than anyone else in my opinion!
So, running a straight course is against SA rules?

[Market Mover]

Twirling Candy came out and bumped Setzuko, but once he gathered himself he was clobbered by Game On Dude. Bad call by stewards. Setzuko should have been moved up and Game On Dude placed second. Unfortunately, I bet on the favorite.


Agreed. Bad call by SA stewards. The SECOND bump by Game On Dude should have brought him down.
Setzuko is the deserving winner. Mandella got robbed on this one. And Baffert and Chantal got a freebie here.

Twirling Candy did start it. But that does not give a bumped rival the right to interfere with another rival after the initial contact...

This ranks up there with those other million dollar G1 races that soCal puts on and leaves the results in doubts....like The Wicked North's G1 debacle..

[classhandicapper]

I think the stewards made the correct decision.

I thought Setzuco and Twirling Candy brushed ever so lightly coming out of the turn and that caused TC to eventually react and come in a little. Then Game on Dude and TC hit hard and that set off the chain reaction.

I think leaving them up was the correct decision because the initial contact was so incidental I can't see taking anyone down for that. The major contact was more about TC being a little leg weary after getting brushed and coming in.

[Jay Trotter]

So, running a straight course is against SA rules?

I just don't think Setsuko or Game On Dude directly caused the pinballing! They came off the turn and it got a little tight and TC lost the hole touching Setsuko first and then all hell broke loose! While unfortunate, I don't believe their was an infraction to take the top two down! I'm not an expert so I don't wish to offend. Just my take on it.

[RXB]

they came home in sub 2:00. there goes your weak race theory.

Dead cheap claimers are running 1:08-1:09 for 6f.

The first three finishers, between them, had one graded stakes win (a Gr 3, no less) from 18 previous graded tries until today.

[thespaah]

The Stewards were spot on. Twirling Candy initiated all contact. it was his move inward that caused the chain reaction we witnessed.

[Stillriledup]

Agreed. Bad call by SA stewards. The SECOND bump by Game On Dude should have brought him down.
Setzuko is the deserving winner. Mandella got robbed on this one. And Baffert and Chantal got a freebie here.

Twirling Candy did start it. But that does not give a bumped rival the right to interfere with another rival after the initial contact...

This ranks up there with those other million dollar G1 races that soCal puts on and leaves the results in doubts....like The Wicked North's G1 debacle..

BZZZZZT, incorrect.

:eek:

[Stillriledup]

I think the stewards made the correct decision.

I thought Setzuco and Twirling Candy brushed ever so lightly coming out of the turn and that caused TC to eventually react and come in a little. Then Game on Dude and TC hit hard and that set off the chain reaction.

I think leaving them up was the correct decision because the initial contact was so incidental I can't see taking anyone down for that. The major contact was more about TC being a little leg weary after getting brushed and coming in.

DING DING DING, CORRECT ANSWER!

:ThmbUp:

[toussaud]

TC acted that way, not because he was bumped that hard, he was very tired, tired horses get are like tired babies, they get finicky when they want to lay down.

[point given]

I'd like to hear Rosarios take on what happened and if he was out of horse as Baffert stated, then Mandella and Sadler.It ppeared to me that GoD came out and Setsuko was blameless and should have been put up, but you can't take down GoD

[Stillriledup]

I'd like to hear Rosarios take on what happened and if he was out of horse as Baffert stated, then Mandella and Sadler.It ppeared to me that GoD came out and Setsuko was blameless and should have been put up, but you can't take down GoD

Of course he was out of horse, you don't need Rosario's take, the video is proof positive. Human's can stretch the truth, but the video tells it like it is.

[redshift1]

I thought it was the correct call TC was out of gas and Game was better than S, re-rallying for the win.

[Tom]

I am sure glad I am boycotting SA...that race was really bad. and nt because of the bumping.

[RXB]

A 1:59.4 finish is weak?

In addition to the obvious class line weaknesses that I noted earlier, I've done some quick final time assessments and the only way that I can justify the BSF landing in triple digits is by splitting the two dirt route races off from the sprints. If I don't, my numbers for the two Gr 1 dirt races come back 86 (Oaks) and 96 (Little 'Cap). I could make a case for adding about 3-5 points to those BSF's, based on projections and beaten lengths assessments, but not more. That would make it about 99-101 for a $750,000 Gr 1 older male race. :ThmbDown:

[RXB]

that race was really bad. and nt because of the bumping.

That's the truth.

[point given]

Per DRF

"
Jockey Victor Espinoza was left furious by the stewards' decision not to disqualify Game On Dude in Saturday's $750,000 Santa Anita Handicap after a bumping incident in early stretch involving Espinoza's mount, Setsuko.

After a lengthy review, stewards Scott Chaney, Kim Sawyer and Tom Ward voted 2-1 to not change the order of finish in which Game On Dude finished a nose in front of Setsuko. Twirling Candy, the 1-2 favorite, faded to finish fifth after also being involved in the bumping incident.

The stewards ruled that Twirling Candy initiated the contact that led to bumping between the horses. The stewards ruled that Twirling Candy drifted to the inside, struck Game On Dude, and caused the winner to tip the outside, resulting in a chain reaction of bumping between Game on Dude, Twirling Candy and Setsuko, who raced farthest wide.

Espinoza told track publicity, "It's the wrong decision. I don't know why it took so long to make the wrong decision. I think the stewards are blind. They need to have some education so people know what's going on at the races. Obviously, those three stewards, they don't know what they're looking at. How many times do they have to drop me to disqualify the horse? That's insane. I don't mind running a legitimate second, but when you knock the air out of my horse and you get beat by a head, it's just insane."

Sutherland, who became the first woman rider to win the Big Cap, said that Game On Dude did not cause the trouble and that Twirling Candy struck her mount first, even though he was racing slightly behind Game On Dude.

"All I know is that in the race it felt like I got bumped from behind," she told track publicity. "My horse went off balance and I hadn't drifted in or anything

[GregReinhart]

Espinoza lost any room to talk about steward's decisions after the Santa Anita Derby last year. I hope every call for the rest of time goes against him.

[point given]

Addendum ;


stewards voted 2 to 1

Chaney and Ward voted to make no change, while Sawyer argued for a disqualification, Ward said.

[Greyfox]

I just don't think Setsuko or Game On Dude directly caused the pinballing! .

??Directly??
#6 Setsuko initiated the pinballing.
Whether or not, Twirling Candy would have beat Game On Dude, we'll never know.

[Greyfox]

Espinoza lost any room to talk about steward's decisions after the Santa Anita Derby last year. I hope every call for the rest of time goes against him.

You are nominated for the stupidest post of the year with that one. :ThmbDown:

[GregReinhart]

Oh well. When you want to take out personal vendettas in a million dollar race with horses worth multiple times more than that, then you don't deserve wins like that one.

[ronsmac]

Great no call by the stewards. It would have been a terrible DQ.

[nijinski]

I don't recall Baffert using Chantel in a stakes like this , but maybe I missed a few..
Congrats to both of them , but I also would have been happy to see Setsuko in the winner's circle as well.

[toussaud]

According to the post race interview, Jill talked bob into using her.

[Fastracehorse]

What worried me however, was that Chantal was left hand whipping when she made contact w/ the middle horse, and because of the whipping I thought they would probably take her down.

Importantly, if you just watch the middle horse, you can see that this horse initiated the contact, and in this way, it was the right call.

The great thing about California racing is:if there is an inquiry on your horse, you have a good chance of surviving it. I like it, Chantal's horse ran big and the super paid $48k.

fffastt

[appistappis]

twirling candy in the middle definitely caused the problems....the stew's got one right for a change.

[Greyfox]

:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: Independent of the call, Chantal Sutherland rode a brilliant race. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:
Here's hoping she gets more live mounts.

[plainolebill]

I thought it was the right call too. As far as Setsuko winning - he got even with Game on Dude and the dude outgamed him after running close to the pace all the way.

[Greyfox]

Chantal was brilliant. Good ride, in spite of the bumper cars stuff.

[cj]

they came home in sub 2:00. there goes your weak race theory.

You have got to be kidding.

[nijinski]

Chantal was brilliant. Good ride, in spite of the bumper cars stuff.
Thank You for correcting my spelling and yes I agree she was well up to the task.

[nijinski]

According to the post race interview, Jill talked bob into using her.
Good decision made by Jill !!

[Badactor]

my reaction to the stewards decision (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki7e0faZM7k)

[Stillriledup]

Kim Sawyer wanted a DQ?

Seems like she wasnt able to seperate the emotion from the scenario.

When a horse gets bumped and knocked off stride, if that horse pinballs into other horses, its not his fault, how can Sawyer think differently?

[Edward DeVere]

Simon Bray declared that Game On Dude clearly caused the problems and should have been taken down in 20 seconds.

Therefore, anybody with an IQ over twelve knows that the stewards made the right decision.

[Stillriledup]

Simon Bray declared that Game On Dude clearly caused the problems and should have been taken down in 20 seconds.

Therefore, anybody with an IQ over twelve knows that the stewards made the right decision.

lol

exactly.

Simon is a great example of why America is the best country anywhere...a person with no talent can make himself a very nice living, America is the best place to pull this off.

[Fastracehorse]

horse racing karma at it's finest.


Remember the Del Mar debacle when he came out and bumped a horse and they didn't see a need to take him down? Sucks when the shoe is on the other foot.

.......as players sometimes :)

fffastt

[ranchwest]

Simon Bray declared that Game On Dude clearly caused the problems and should have been taken down in 20 seconds.

Therefore, anybody with an IQ over twelve knows that the stewards made the right decision.
Hey, a broken clock is right twice a day. It happens.

[MickJ26]

Thank you. Chantal went to the left hand and her horse made a right turn. Her hourse should've come down.

[RXB]

In addition to the obvious class line weaknesses that I noted earlier, I've done some quick final time assessments and the only way that I can justify the BSF landing in triple digits is by splitting the two dirt route races off from the sprints. If I don't, my numbers for the two Gr 1 dirt races come back 86 (Oaks) and 96 (Little 'Cap). I could make a case for adding about 3-5 points to those BSF's, based on projections and beaten lengths assessments, but not more. That would make it about 99-101 for a $750,000 Gr 1 older male race. :ThmbDown:

Preliminary figures from the Beyer boys are in this morning: 88 for Oaks, 99 for Handicap.

[senortout]

So, running a straight course is against SA rules?

so, with 2 1/2 to 3 lanes inside her, the jockey on GOD determines that she must be whipping left handed, rather than riding that rail to victory...I don't think so...take another look see ladies and gentlemen!

senortout

[pandy]

In my opinion, the stewards made the correct call. Yes, Game Dude did come out under left handed urging, but the initial contact was clearly made by Twirling Candy who lugged in and bumped Game Dude. After the bump, Game Dude came out but the initial contact is important because Twirling Candy started the chain reaction.

The only way you could dq anyone in this race would be to take both Twirling Candy and First Dude down because they both failed to run a straight course. People who think that they should have taken Game Dude down are wrong.

[classhandicapper]

In my opinion, the stewards made the correct call. Yes, Game Dude did come out under left handed urging, but the initial contact was clearly made by Twirling Candy who lugged in and bumped Game Dude. After the bump, Game Dude came out but the initial contact is important because Twirling Candy started the chain reaction.

The only way you could dq anyone in this race would be to take both Twirling Candy and First Dude down because they both failed to run a straight course. People who think that they should have taken Game Dude down are wrong.

I agree.

Even if you argue that First on Dude came out a little under left handed whipping (which is probably the case), TW also came in a little after the brush with the outside horse. If one is coming in and one is going out how do you pick which one is at fault?

You either take down both or do nothing.

Either way, I'm not even how you could determine whether the order would have been different without any bumping at all. The right horse probably won.

[PhantomOnTour]

Chantal went to the lefty whip at the exact same time that Rosario was getting TC to switch leads. Game On drifted out a bit when he got hit and TC drifted in a bit when he switched leads...contact, fishtail, contact, chain reaction.
Very tough call, but if I were a steward my vote would be 'No Change'.

[toussaud]

the steward on HRTV just said "the people who think there should have been a double DQ I don't disagree with them"


Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot

[Greyfox]

#6 Setsuko came in slightly causing Twirling Candy to jostle with # 11 Game On Dude. #11 Game on Dude then smacked on Twirling Candy.
Taking either #6 or # 11 or both down meant a 65-1 Quindici Man was going to finish first or second. That wasn't likely going to happen by a Judges decision.

[johnhannibalsmith]

the steward on HRTV just said "the people who think there should have been a double DQ I don't disagree with them"


Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot

The first two finishers?

[cj]

The first two finishers?

No, Game on Dude and Twirling Candy.

[johnhannibalsmith]

No, Game on Dude and Twirling Candy.

Well, I'd enjoy hearing that explanation. I'm assuming that he wants to DQ Twirling Candy first for the initial contact, then Game On Dude from first to fifth for subsequent contact with Twirling Candy, making the entire result look like a 330 yard-esque steward's rendering??? :confused: :confused:

[toussaud]

I sat this, having cahed a win ticket on GOD. After the emotions had died down, and I looked at it today, I just laughed, how the hell did chantel stay up I have no idea. she bulldozed the freaking horse.

There is no doubt in my mind that TC wasn't going to win that race even if he didn't get bumped. However there is NO doubt that the bumping didn't cost him a placing. maybe not for win, but I think he would have at least been 3rd or 4th had he not been bumped like that.

[pandy]

Chantal said it right, her horse went off balance after he was bumped by Twirling Candy. You can't take a horse down (Game Dude) for lugging out a split second after he is run in to. Correct decision by the stewards.

[Relwob Owner]

Chantal said it right, her horse went off balance after he was bumped by Twirling Candy. You can't take a horse down (Game Dude) for lugging out a split second after he is run in to. Correct decision by the stewards.


When this this bump take place? It must have been before coming off of the turn and into the stretch because I have watched the replay several times and didnt see it.....as far as "Chantal saying it right", I cant ever take a word that a jock says in support of their position seriously.

[OntheRail]

No the two Stewards called it right. TC drifted out and brushed Setsuko and then Rosario does a jig in the saddle and TC veers in and knocks the rear-end out of Game On Dude causing him to stumble back into TC who then bounces off Setsuko once again. I think Rosario was frustrated and his jig in the saddle caused a tiring TC to wobble about... more then anything he caused the horses trouble. Like others have said good call and a helluva ride by Chantal. :ThmbUp:

[Relwob Owner]

No the two Stewards called it right. TC drifted out and brushed Setsuko and then Rosario does a jig in the saddle and TC veers in and knocks the rear-end out of Game On Dude causing him to stumble back into TC who then bounces off Setsuko once again. I think Rosario was frustrated and his jig in the saddle caused a tiring TC to wobble about... more then anything he caused the horses trouble. Like others have said good call and a helluva ride by Chantal. :ThmbUp:



Agree to disaree with you, as I just didnt see it.....genuine question here....in such close quarters entering the stretch, was it smart for her to whip left handed so aggressively?

[pandy]

When this this bump take place? It must have been before coming off of the turn and into the stretch because I have watched the replay several times and didnt see it.....as far as "Chantal saying it right", I cant ever take a word that a jock says in support of their position seriously.

You have to watch the head on, which shows that Twirling Candy, apparently tiring, lugs in and bumps Game Dude, who then lugs out but that was most likely caused by the initial contact.

I was glad to see Game Dude get his 2nd win, he always tries his heart out.

[toussaud]

You have to watch the head on, which shows that Twirling Candy, apparently tiring, lugs in and bumps Game Dude, who then lugs out but that was most likely caused by the initial contact.

I was glad to see Game Dude get his 2nd win, he always tries his heart out.
that was game on dude's 4th win (maiden, lone star derby, 2x alw, big cap)

[Relwob Owner]

You have to watch the head on, which shows that Twirling Candy, apparently tiring, lugs in and bumps Game Dude, who then lugs out but that was most likely caused by the initial contact.

I was glad to see Game Dude get his 2nd win, he always tries his heart out.


I watched it several times and didnt see the Twirling Candy initial contact at all........ even if he did hit Game on Dude, Game on Dude still came back out out and caused TC to hit the 6...... I think that supports the notion of a Double DQ....I think any way you slice it, the stewards didnt make the right call.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...I think that supports the notion of a Double DQ.....

Okay, let's take a break from dissecting the race itself and let's go with this theory based upon the sequence of events as described in this post.

Now, let's everyone see how many unique "official" top five finishes we can come up with using the DBLDQ strategy.

We'll let Vic determine the winner of the contest.

[Stillriledup]

Okay, let's take a break from dissecting the race itself and let's go with this theory based upon the sequence of events as described in this post.

Now, let's everyone see how many unique "official" top five finishes we can come up with using the DBLDQ strategy.

We'll let Vic determine the winner of the contest.

lol exactly.

I mean, if we're just going to be double DQ-ing we may as well not even run the race and just pick the winners out of the some contraption they use to select lottery or bingo numbers.

Or, we can just let vic decide. :D

[Relwob Owner]

Okay, let's take a break from dissecting the race itself and let's go with this theory based upon the sequence of events as described in this post.

Now, let's everyone see how many unique "official" top five finishes we can come up with using the DBLDQ strategy.

We'll let Vic determine the winner of the contest.


I am up for it, since it would be a nice diversion for me as I cant seem to hit anything at Gulfstream today.....would save me some dough....:)


I have my opinion on the race but it was such a clusterf***, that I am interested in reading the takes of others and seeing what they think....interested to hear what Vic and some of the other experienced people think of it.

[OntheRail]

Agree to disaree with you, as I just didnt see it.....genuine question here....in such close quarters entering the stretch, was it smart for her to whip left handed so aggressively?
What was she suppose to do... switch hands and fear being DQ for hitting TC on the nose. I believe She rode with a left hand whip the whole race. Either way Rosario and TC caused the incident when they bumped into Setsuko while entering the lane. Rosario jostled around the the saddle and TC knocked into Game On Dude's rear quart ping pong ensued after that. It's all right there in the replay... if you look at it with an unbiased eye.

So aggressively.... You mean like staying on and winning.

[Relwob Owner]

What was she suppose to do... switch hands and fear being DQ for hitting TC on the nose. I believe She rode with a left hand whip the whole race. Either way Rosario and TC caused the incident when they bumped into Setsuko while entering the lane. Rosario jostled around the the saddle and TC knocked into Game On Dude's rear quart ping pong ensued after that. It's all right there in the replay... if you look at it with an unbiased eye.

So aggressively.... You mean like staying on and winning.


Still totally disagree....as I saw it(at abt 3:24 of the YouTube replay)Game on actually went a smidege wide coming into the stretch and TC adjusted and then bumped the 6 a bit, they stayed straight and then Game on hammered TC again....it is just what I see but hey the stewards were 2 to 1 so there is obviously room for interpretation and disagreement.

While those things are up for interpretation, your post is just wrong in two ways:

1. You said she went left handed the whole way-watch the replay-after the bumping, she went right handed the rest of the way, wisely realizing that the left handed whipping made her horse move out.

2. Your mention of watching the replay with an unbiased eye. I had no betting or rooting interest at all...frankly, I am glad Twirling Candy got the worst of it after he wasnt DQ's in that race last year.



As far as what she was supposed to do for fear of hitting TC on the nose, any alternative other than one making her horse come out would have worked, I would think.

[classhandicapper]

Preliminary figures from the Beyer boys are in this morning: 88 for Oaks, 99 for Handicap.

IMO this is one of those figures that understates the quality of the race.

That field was clearly not the quality you'd expect in high level Grade 1 race like the SA Handicap. So on that count, the figure reflects the obvious weakness. However, a 99 is the PAR for a higher level ALW race. It's actually below PAR for a classified ALW race. If you look at the quality of some of the horses in the race, they were clearly superior to Classified ALW horses or were lightly raced enough to step forward relative to good 3YO form. In addition, some pretty good horses got totally buried badly. That tells you something about overall depth of quality of the race.

I still have some serious questions about all speed figures for the CA circuit.

A lot of the high quality horses in CA right now were formerly racing on synthetic tracks that tended to have slower paces and slower final times than equivalent dirt races (with some extremes). Those depressed speed figures were then used as a basis for the dirt race projections when the horses switched surfaces. Add in the fact that some of them may prefer dirt and you have to wonder if they may still be depressed by a few points or more at the top.

As more top eastern based horses ship in to and out of CA we'll learn a lot more, but several of the handful of easterners that have shipped to CA so far have run quite poorly. That suggests that the quality in CA is not as bad as the races are "supposedly" slow.

[RXB]

The entire collective race record of the assembled field yesterday contained one previous Gr 1 win: Twirling Candy, by a nose, in a 3YO-only sprint. And, only one second: First Dude in the Preakness. And please recall that the 3YO crop last year was a rather weak one so even those modest accomplishments should be kept in context.

We can also look at the figs. The highest lifetime number was Twirling Candy's 108-- earned in that sprint, so not entirely relevant to a 10f race. The next highest was First Dude's 103 in the Pa Derby. None of the others, several of whom had raced many times as older horses, had ever exceeded 101.

So, I'm not sure what argument could be made, either on analysis of previous races or the results and figures from yesterday's race, that this was anything other than a Gr 2 field masquerading as a major Gr 1.

[RXB]

PS, I was perhaps undergoing a moment of generosity when I referred to it as a Gr 2 field. "Weak Gr 2 field" is probably more accurate. Just four Gr 2 wins among the lot from 24 Gr 2 starts-- and in two cases, it's because they were soft, slow Gr 2's where someone had to win them. The other two Gr 2 wins both belonged to Twirling Candy, and they were restricted to 3YO only and 4YO only company.

[OntheRail]

Still totally disagree....as I saw it(at abt 3:24 of the YouTube replay)Game on actually went a smidege wide coming into the stretch and TC adjusted and then bumped the 6 a bit, they stayed straight and then Game on hammered TC again....it is just what I see but hey the stewards were 2 to 1 so there is obviously room for interpretation and disagreement.

While those things are up for interpretation, your post is just wrong in two ways:

1. You said she went left handed the whole way-watch the replay-after the bumping, she went right handed the rest of the way, wisely realizing that the left handed whipping made her horse move out.

2. Your mention of watching the replay with an unbiased eye. I had no betting or rooting interest at all...frankly, I am glad Twirling Candy got the worst of it after he wasnt DQ's in that race last year.



As far as what she was supposed to do for fear of hitting TC on the nose, any alternative other than one making her horse come out would have worked, I would think.
BoF9wpnnG8o

Optical illusion if you if you look at 1.55 in the race or 3.25-26 in the replay video you'll see that TC bumps into Setsuko then after that drifts into GoD. If you pay attention the the furrow marks on the track you'll see the GoD holds his line and that it's TC who was moving in sideways after contact with Setsuko.

I said I believe she had and up till the stretch she did. She held the whip in her left hand and was in front of TC else he would not of shoved GoD's hindquarters out that way. She was in the lane getting ready to move when IT happened. After that she went to right till she was clear and then again switched back to left hand urging to respond to Setsuko's run up. So 95% of the race the whip was in her left hand. ;)

Either way if I blink each time I watched the replay and missed the smidge that GoD can out... that is nothing to TC cross-country trip after the turn that even Mr. Magoo could see. Either way... all's I'm saying is that TC cause his own trouble so how it that wrong twice over?

[v j stauffer]

Okay, let's take a break from dissecting the race itself and let's go with this theory based upon the sequence of events as described in this post.

Now, let's everyone see how many unique "official" top five finishes we can come up with using the DBLDQ strategy.

We'll let Vic determine the winner of the contest.

What am I deciding?

[Relwob Owner]

BoF9wpnnG8o

Optical illusion if you if you look at 1.55 in the race or 3.25-26 in the replay video you'll see that TC bumps into Setsuko then after that drifts into GoD. If you pay attention the the furrow marks on the track you'll see the GoD holds his line and that it's TC who was moving in sideways after contact with Setsuko.

I said I believe she had and up till the stretch she did. She held the whip in her left hand and was in front of TC else he would not of shoved GoD's hindquarters out that way. She was in the lane getting ready to move when IT happened. After that she went to right till she was clear and then again switched back to left hand urging to respond to Setsuko's run up. So 95% of the race the whip was in her left hand. ;)

Either way if I blink each time I watched the replay and missed the smidge that GoD can out... that is nothing to TC cross-country trip after the turn that even Mr. Magoo could see. Either way... all's I'm saying is that TC cause his own trouble so how it that wrong twice over?


I still disagree with you and I I cant really help what I see and interpret....coming off of the turn, I see Twirling Candy with very little room because of Game on going a bit wide on the turn, brushing the 6 as a result and Game on coming out....not sure what you are talking about with the optical illusion reference and have no clue what you were trying to say in the bolded part with the Mr. Magoo reference.....

In any case, your opinion is the one that was backed up by the stewards and mine wasnt and that is that....

[Stillriledup]

What am I deciding?

The winner.

Here's how it works. Since most people here seem to want the judges to pay off random horses (and not the actual physical winner) JHS was suggesting that we just let YOU decide who the winner should be.

That means, you get to look at your program and select from all the entrants and just come up with your favorite numbers for the official order of finish.

Sounds fun, huh? :D

[v j stauffer]

The winner.

Here's how it works. Since most people here seem to want the judges to pay off random horses (and not the actual physical winner) JHS was suggesting that we just let YOU decide who the winner should be.

That means, you get to look at your program and select from all the entrants and just come up with your favorite numbers for the official order of finish.

Sounds fun, huh? :D

Fun and easy both. That's the way I handicap already.

I have the winning numbers at the ready. When do you want Vicky's official order of finish?

[Stillriledup]

VickAAAY!

Love when Ken R does that!

:D

[Fastracehorse]

When this this bump take place? It must have been before coming off of the turn and into the stretch because I have watched the replay several times and didnt see it.....as far as "Chantal saying it right", I cant ever take a word that a jock says in support of their position seriously.

......if we were watching the SA simulcast. They must have replayed the incident 40 times b4 making a decision.

Try this: Watch the horse in the middle only. You will see how the pinball effect was started.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I still disagree with you and I I cant really help what I see and interpret....coming off of the turn, I see Twirling Candy with very little room because of Game on going a bit wide on the turn, brushing the 6 as a result and Game on coming out....not sure what you are talking about with the optical illusion reference and have no clue what you were trying to say in the bolded part with the Mr. Magoo reference.....

In any case, your opinion is the one that was backed up by the stewards and mine wasnt and that is that....

.....that the stewards have.

fffastt

[Relwob Owner]

.....that the stewards have.

fffastt



Is it different than the YouTube one? I have watched that one several times and arrived at my conclusion, which I have stated several times. Like I have said, the stewards made their decision and that is that but it doesnt change my opinion that they were wrong......if my opinion is wrong, it isnt the first time and surely wont be the last.

[Stillriledup]

Is it different than the YouTube one? I have watched that one several times and arrived at my conclusion, which I have stated several times. Like I have said, the stewards made their decision and that is that but it doesnt change my opinion that they were wrong......if my opinion is wrong, it isnt the first time and surely wont be the last.

I'm not sure what you're missing. TC was the first to initiate contact, he clipped the rear end of the winner. Why are you not seeing this?

[johnhannibalsmith]

The winner.

Here's how it works. Since most people here seem to want the judges to pay off random horses (and not the actual physical winner) JHS was suggesting that we just let YOU decide who the winner should be.

That means, you get to look at your program and select from all the entrants and just come up with your favorite numbers for the official order of finish.

Sounds fun, huh? :D

I enjoy misrepresenting myself, but for some reason get miffed when others roll with it...

Vic, the reference to you was related to the assertion that a double DQ of both Twirling Candy and Game On Dude was warranted. Without disagreeing with the premise, I was making a point (poorly I guess) that taking the incident(s) in sequence and then disqualifying those two horses at the point of incident would lead to some differing opinions on what the resulting top five order of finish would result in.

Maybe I'm off the mark in that thought - but disqualifying the horse that initiated the contact with the winner, but ended up fifth, then disqualifying the winner for subsequent contact and presumably placing him fifth and moving the fifth place finisher to fourth - seemed like the long route to an order of finish that would be even more controversial.

You, as a recently accredited member of the club, were to select the poster whom correctly identified the "official" top five after a double DQ.

A lot of typing to clarify something that has proven to be uninteresting.

[Relwob Owner]

I'm not sure what you're missing. TC was the first to initiate contact, he clipped the rear end of the winner. Why are you not seeing this?


I apologize if it is frustrating that I dont see things the way you do SRU and that you arent sure what I am missing....now, you know how I feel when I read 95 percent of your posts.

[nijinski]

The aftermath of this race left Setsuko 's left foreleg with swelling
following a cut he got during the race.
Sounds so far like he'll be ok , but it's a shame with the fine effort
he put in yesterday. According to the Thoroughbred Times , Mandella
was not too pleased with Baffert's actions after the race. I guess Bob
tookl it upon himself to speak with the Jocks and Stewards before the
decision was made.

[OntheRail]

I still disagree with you and I I cant really help what I see and interpret....coming off of the turn, I see Twirling Candy with very little room because of Game on going a bit wide on the turn, brushing the 6 as a result and Game on coming out....not sure what you are talking about with the optical illusion reference and have no clue what you were trying to say in the bolded part with the Mr. Magoo reference.....

In any case, your opinion is the one that was backed up by the stewards and mine wasnt and that is that....
Yes GoD was in the three/four path coming into the lane... but that is the path he ran the whole race. FD and AE were inside of him when he moved ahead on the turn. So I don't call the going wide.. I call that staying the course. As for the Magoo comment that was just a bit of levity. ;) t8GTHXTEvIc

As far as the optical illusion I'm saying thing don't appear as they seem... if you look at the ground and the lines the tractor made... GoD did not move out. TC can in. It's a combination of camera movement and prospective. But the ground features are static and lead me to the believe TC came in.

That's all nothing against you I just see it one way and you see it another. A perfect example of why eyewitness testimony is not a reliable tool in the Court of Law. :D

[Relwob Owner]

Yes GoD was in the three/four path coming into the lane... but that is the path he ran the whole race. FD and AE were inside of him when he moved ahead on the turn. So I don't call the going wide.. I call that staying the course. As for the Magoo comment that was just a bit of levity. ;) t8GTHXTEvIc


Got it-nothing wrong with some levity as far as I am concerned......maybe I will wake up tomorrow and watch it again and think differently and if so, will admit it.....agreeing to dsiagree isnt the worst thing in the world and all that matters is that 66 percent of the stewards took your side.

[olddaddy]

What am I deciding?

Wasnt your pick Setsuko? That was a nice pick, did you feel a little bit jobbed by the decision?

[v j stauffer]

Wasnt your pick Setsuko? That was a nice pick, did you feel a little bit jobbed by the decision?

Yes I picked Setsuko. Jobbed? Not at all. Bummed out? Totally. Remember guys this decision is not like a bang bang play at the plate where the runner is safe or out. If you differ with the final outcome you are not WRONG you're simply in the minority. The stewards are paid to use their knowledge to make an informed and well thought out opinion. They did that and majority ruled and the race stayed as is. The process worked EXACTLY as as it was meant to. The stewards all did their jobs. IMO this was a VERY VERY DIFFICULT and close call. Some thougt it was a no brainer to leave it alone. Some thought is was obviously a clear DQ. Even those camps who don't think it was tough are running about 50/50 in the polls. The rest of us are closer to the middle and STILL 50/50.

At the end of the day. It was a great race. With intense passion and drama. That has the racing world abuzz.

Pretty sure that's a good thing.

[Stillriledup]

I apologize if it is frustrating that I dont see things the way you do SRU and that you arent sure what I am missing....now, you know how I feel when I read 95 percent of your posts.

Its not really all that frustrating, i'm just curious to know what you're seeing that i'm not seeing.

[Relwob Owner]

Its not really all that frustrating, i'm just curious to know what you're seeing that i'm not seeing.



I was just giving you a hard time SRU....I am actually wondering what I am not seeing that others are as well.....Vic is probably right and it is a 50/50, very close call.

[Stillriledup]

I was just giving you a hard time SRU....I am actually wondering what I am not seeing that others are as well.....Vic is probably right and it is a 50/50, very close call.

But then if its 50/50, shouldnt it stay up?

Shouldnt actually winning the race count for something?

Its not like we don't know who actually won and we're looking at the bumping to determine the winner. We HAVE the winner and in order to reverse the winner, there has to be clear cut, irrefutable, obvious, egregoious, massive interference where there is NO DOUBT that one horse destroyed another.

We don't do nit pick in horse racing. Real judges actually 'let them play' and only DQ the really obvious ones. Real judges know that horse racing is a contact sport and that horses aren't held to a standard of racing in an exact straight line. They don't play god with other people's money, they pay the winners unless there is a situation where they just can't pay the winners.

This was obviously a situation that called for a no call.

Joel yanked his horses head to the left to get him to switch leads and that was the very moment contact happened. If you want to make the case that Chantal came out a hair i'll give you that, but Rosario also came in when he was yanking on a tiring horse to change leads.

[pandy]

You're right, the infraction must be indisputable otherwise a change should not be made. In this case, since the winner, Game Dude, only altered course after he was banged into by the tiring favorite, they made the right call. Some people seem to think that the place horse would have won if not for this bumping, but Game Dude had just as much trouble and he stuck his nose in front when it counted.

[Stillriledup]

You're right, the infraction must be indisputable otherwise a change should not be made. In this case, since the winner, Game Dude, only altered course after he was banged into by the tiring favorite, they made the right call. Some people seem to think that the place horse would have won if not for this bumping, but Game Dude had just as much trouble and he stuck his nose in front when it counted.

Amen.

[Relwob Owner]

But then if its 50/50, shouldnt it stay up?

Shouldnt actually winning the race count for something?

Its not like we don't know who actually won and we're looking at the bumping to determine the winner. We HAVE the winner and in order to reverse the winner, there has to be clear cut, irrefutable, obvious, egregoious, massive interference where there is NO DOUBT that one horse destroyed another.

We don't do nit pick in horse racing. Real judges actually 'let them play' and only DQ the really obvious ones. Real judges know that horse racing is a contact sport and that horses aren't held to a standard of racing in an exact straight line. They don't play god with other people's money, they pay the winners unless there is a situation where they just can't pay the winners.

This was obviously a situation that called for a no call.

Joel yanked his horses head to the left to get him to switch leads and that was the very moment contact happened. If you want to make the case that Chantal came out a hair i'll give you that, but Rosario also came in when he was yanking on a tiring horse to change leads.



That is how you saw it....I saw it differently. I think that Game On came put pretty good right as TC was coming in a bit.....the more I watch it, the more I think that them hammering each other screwed the 6 and a double DQ would have been worth considering.....I may be in the minority and that could be a stretch but that is how I see it.

I think your opinion is severely compromised by your "let em play" philosophy of DQ's in general. That, in my opinion, keeps you from judging any specific race objectively because you dont really think there should be many rules to begin with.....

[Stillriledup]

That is how you saw it....I saw it differently. I think that Game On came put pretty good right as TC was coming in a bit.....the more I watch it, the more I think that them hammering each other screwed the 6 and a double DQ would have been worth considering.....I may be in the minority and that could be a stretch but that is how I see it.

I think your opinion is severely compromised by your "let em play" philosophy of DQ's in general. That, in my opinion, keeps you from judging any specific race objectively because you dont really think there should be many rules to begin with.....

But if GOD came out and TC came in, its a wash and thus, no change.

[Relwob Owner]

But if GOD came out and TC came in, its a wash and thus, no change.

Right, but what if the actions of those two of them kept the 6 from winning? That would necessitate a change, no?


Have a good night SRU....I was out-voted 2-1 by the stewards and it wont be the last time that happens

[olddaddy]

Yes I picked Setsuko. Jobbed? Not at all. Bummed out? Totally. Remember guys this decision is not like a bang bang play at the plate where the runner is safe or out. If you differ with the final outcome you are not WRONG you're simply in the minority. The stewards are paid to use their knowledge to make an informed and well thought out opinion. They did that and majority ruled and the race stayed as is. The process worked EXACTLY as as it was meant to. The stewards all did their jobs. IMO this was a VERY VERY DIFFICULT and close call. Some thougt it was a no brainer to leave it alone. Some thought is was obviously a clear DQ. Even those camps who don't think it was tough are running about 50/50 in the polls. The rest of us are closer to the middle and STILL 50/50.

At the end of the day. It was a great race. With intense passion and drama. That has the racing world abuzz.

Pretty sure that's a good thing.

I thought it was a coin flip in my eyes but I am no steward. It was a great race and could have been good for racing without the perception that Baffert was an influencing factor in the final decision.

I did feel for you as the decision was made and your selection would have put me in your camp but when I am on losing streak, I go opposite of what I like and go to what I dont like. Baffert is usually my slump buster, I am glad I picked the right one of his this time.

[Stillriledup]

Right, but what if the actions of those two of them kept the 6 from winning? That would necessitate a change, no?


Have a good night SRU....I was out-voted 2-1 by the stewards and it wont be the last time that happens

No, because the judges thought that TC started the mess.

Lets look at a different example. Lets say in a 10 horse field, the 10 horse makes a left turn right out of the gate and crashes the entire field. Should the 9, 8, 7, 6, and 5 horses all be disqualified for bumping into the 4?


I believe the rules state that if horse A bumps horse B and then horse B bumps horse C, they don't blame horse B.

I think that's a fair rule.

[pandy]

You're exactly right.

Even if the two horses caused the 6 interference, which they did, there is no way of telling if Game Dude would have altered course if he had not been bumped first by the favorite. Consequently, taking him down because the 6 was impeded would not be fair. The only sensible decision was the one they made, in this case. Game Dude was running in his lane until he got bumped, then he lost his action and swerved in, but that can happen when you're a big animal running at high speed. Actually it can happen to a human when running in a race, he was bumped and lost his balance. It would have been unfair to dq him for something he didn't start.

[Relwob Owner]

No, because the judges thought that TC started the mess.

Lets look at a different example. Lets say in a 10 horse field, the 10 horse makes a left turn right out of the gate and crashes the entire field. Should the 9, 8, 7, 6, and 5 horses all be disqualified for bumping into the 4?


I believe the rules state that if horse A bumps horse B and then horse B bumps horse C, they don't blame horse B.

I think that's a fair rule.


Right, but that is based on how you saw the replay-I saw it differently. I saw TC maybe coming in a bit and Game On definitely coming out and think that if that were the case, they both were equally responsible for the 6 getting hosed......you keep trying to make me see something I didnt and then come up with scenarios based on that.....in addition, you are referencing what the judges decided, which is something I ultimately disagree with.....I dont even really think TC came in at all, but maybe slightly and if that were the case, that is what I use to support my double DQ thought.



You can keep arguing with me about it but it wont change my way of seeing it....I respect the opinion of you and others who may disagree with me and I think the fact that it took so long to decide shows just how much of a difficult decision it was.....

[v j stauffer]

But then if its 50/50, shouldnt it stay up?

Shouldnt actually winning the race count for something?

Its not like we don't know who actually won and we're looking at the bumping to determine the winner. We HAVE the winner and in order to reverse the winner, there has to be clear cut, irrefutable, obvious, egregoious, massive interference where there is NO DOUBT that one horse destroyed another.

We don't do nit pick in horse racing. Real judges actually 'let them play' and only DQ the really obvious ones. Real judges know that horse racing is a contact sport and that horses aren't held to a standard of racing in an exact straight line. They don't play god with other people's money, they pay the winners unless there is a situation where they just can't pay the winners.

This was obviously a situation that called for a no call.

Joel yanked his horses head to the left to get him to switch leads and that was the very moment contact happened. If you want to make the case that Chantal came out a hair i'll give you that, but Rosario also came in when he was yanking on a tiring horse to change leads.

Riles. I'm usually with you on most cases but on the 50/50 aspect I don't think you're looking at this the right way. An incident clearly occurred. It was egregious and massive in it's content. A decision had to be made. The nation is not saying the incident had 50/50 contributors. They are saying that their opinion of WHO was at fault is 50/50. That very fact shows that the call was a tough one but nonetheless a decision HAD to be made. When something is super tough to decide does not mean automatically lean to as is. As is IS a decision and that's fine. It's not an option when circumstances make the call very very difficult. It would be like ten umpires standing at 2nd base. Catcher throws the ball to try to catch the base stealer. 5 say safe. 5 say out. an 11th umpire has to break the tie. He HAS to make a decision. They can't just send the runner back to 1st and act like it never happened. When you say well since it's 50/50 leave it alone. That's the stewards equivalent of sending the runner back to first.

[The_Knight_Sky]

The nation is not saying the incident had 50/50 contributors.
They are saying that their opinion of WHO was at fault is 50/50.



Sharp post. ;) If there was a brush from the hind end by Twirling Candy I don't see how something incidental like that can be weighed more heavily
than two blatant bumps by Game On Dude.

Trevor Denman: "Game on Dude shifted out !".

B3kMUiZH_tc

[olddaddy]

Trevor Denman: "Game on Dude shifted out !".




Vic , How did you call it when it happened? Sorry, I didnt listen to your call.

[v j stauffer]

Vic , How did you call it when it happened? Sorry, I didnt listen to your call.

I said " Game on Dude came out". Pretty much exactly what Trevor said. Remember we are calling play by play. Reporting what we see. He did come out. Of that there is no argument so I think the calls were sound. They were not editorials they were observations. The question of course soon became did he come out on his own or was it as a result of being tipped out by Twirling Candy. It's not for either of us to asses blame during the racecalls and we didn't. Announcers who do that soon become ex-announcers.

[olddaddy]

I said " Game on Dude came out". Pretty much exactly what Trevor said. Remember we are calling play by play. Reporting what we see. He did come out. Of that there is no argument so I think the calls were sound. They were not editorials they were observations. The question of course soon became did he come out on his own or was it as a result of being tipped out by Twirling Candy. It's not for either of us to asses blame during the racecalls and we didn't. Announcers who do that soon become ex-announcers.

I am not accusing you or Trevor, just wondering if you saw what Trevor saw while calling the race.

[v j stauffer]

I am not accusing you or Trevor, just wondering if you saw what Trevor saw while calling the race.

I didn't think you were accusing anything. I think we both saw it the same way and called it the same way.

[OntheRail]

I didn't think you were accusing anything. I think we both saw it the same way and called it the same way.
But now that you have seen the replay... do you think TC caused it all?

[v j stauffer]

But now that you have seen the replay... do you think TC caused it all?

No.

[Fastracehorse]

Sharp post. ;) If there was a brush from the hind end by Twirling Candy I don't see how something incidental like that can be weighed more heavily
than two blatant bumps by Game On Dude.

Trevor Denman: "Game on Dude shifted out !".

B3kMUiZH_tc

.......if GOD was bumped he probably wasn't at fault for his hindend being thrown off balance, and any consequent action of his thereafter. It was almost the final 1/16 th of a 1 1/4 race race, dueling on the front end for GOD. Setsuko passed him after the incident and GOD came back. Cool.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

Is it different than the YouTube one? I have watched that one several times and arrived at my conclusion, which I have stated several times. Like I have said, the stewards made their decision and that is that but it doesnt change my opinion that they were wrong......if my opinion is wrong, it isnt the first time and surely wont be the last.

The YouTube one shows the incident at an angle. The stewards decision was made from a direct head on view.

The horse could have very easily come down because it could have been argued that GOD was at fault due to Chantal's use of the whip at the same time of the bumping; it was complicated. But somehow I believe they made the right call. I was saying that if you focus on the favorite, he made the initial contact w/ Setsuko, which then caused all the action.

fffastt

[Mechanic]

Left hand whip on a left hand turn :ThmbDown:
At least PVal waits until deep stretch to pull the drift :ThmbUp:
:( Setsuko was my single key to a cashing P4 :lol:

this is the way I saw it as stated by Jay Hovey
http://www.drf.com/blogs/full-metal-handicap

[Stillriledup]

Riles. I'm usually with you on most cases but on the 50/50 aspect I don't think you're looking at this the right way. An incident clearly occurred. It was egregious and massive in it's content. A decision had to be made. The nation is not saying the incident had 50/50 contributors. They are saying that their opinion of WHO was at fault is 50/50. That very fact shows that the call was a tough one but nonetheless a decision HAD to be made. When something is super tough to decide does not mean automatically lean to as is. As is IS a decision and that's fine. It's not an option when circumstances make the call very very difficult. It would be like ten umpires standing at 2nd base. Catcher throws the ball to try to catch the base stealer. 5 say safe. 5 say out. an 11th umpire has to break the tie. He HAS to make a decision. They can't just send the runner back to 1st and act like it never happened. When you say well since it's 50/50 leave it alone. That's the stewards equivalent of sending the runner back to first.

Here's the thing about your baseball analogy. In your analogy, you don't know if the baserunner made it or not. Some think he made it, some think he did not. In this race, we know for sure that GOD made it. A better analogy might be a call in the NFL that goes under review. In the NFL, they stick with the original call unless there is conclusive evidence they're wrong. In other words, they give the 'edge' to the original call, much like i want to give the edge to the horse who actually won the race.

In your 50/50 example in the NFL, the call would just stand because 50/50 means they don't know for sure, so they leave the original result. (or, the result that was called on the field)

You say the circumstances make the call very difficult. I'm of the belief that DQs shouldnt be difficult, they should be obvious. I would only take down the obvious stuff, i believe a 'difficult' call should just stick with the winner. If you don't have conclusive proof i believe you gotta leave the result alone.

[elysiantraveller]

Here's the thing about your baseball analogy. In your analogy, you don't know if the baserunner made it or not. Some think he made it, some think he did not. In this race, we know for sure that GOD made it. A better analogy might be a call in the NFL that goes under review. In the NFL, they stick with the original call unless there is conclusive evidence they're wrong. In other words, they give the 'edge' to the original call, much like i want to give the edge to the horse who actually won the race.

In your 50/50 example in the NFL, the call would just stand because 50/50 means they don't know for sure, so they leave the original result. (or, the result that was called on the field)

You say the circumstances make the call very difficult. I'm of the belief that DQs shouldnt be difficult, they should be obvious. I would only take down the obvious stuff, i believe a 'difficult' call should just stick with the winner. If you don't have conclusive proof i believe you gotta leave the result alone.

Well said...

The fact that so many people are still arriving at different conclusions is proof itself that there is no clear cut decision and thus the original result should stand. Nevermind the fact that Setsuko passed GOD in the stretch only to be overtaken by the horse whose run was obviously the most impaired.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

interest at all.

I watched it 4-5 times (from the only view on here).

In my opinion, no DQ on the winner.

[Relwob Owner]

The YouTube one shows the incident at an angle. The stewards decision was made from a direct head on view.

The horse could have very easily come down because it could have been argued that GOD was at fault due to Chantal's use of the whip at the same time of the bumping; it was complicated. But somehow I believe they made the right call. I was saying that if you focus on the favorite, he made the initial contact w/ Setsuko, which then caused all the action.

fffastt

I dont know what Youtube one you are referring to but my opinion is based on the one in post 80 of this thread which does show a head on in about the 3:20 range.

[Relwob Owner]

Left hand whip on a left hand turn :ThmbDown:
At least PVal waits until deep stretch to pull the drift :ThmbUp:
:( Setsuko was my single key to a cashing P4 :lol:

this is the way I saw it as stated by Jay Hovey
http://www.drf.com/blogs/full-metal-handicap


Could not agree more.....this was the reason I found it so surprising when people praised her for her ride.

[OntheRail]

No.
I guess I could say I'm shocked... but I'm not. Once an opinion is held rarely is it reversed.

[gm10]

Good call by the stewards imo. If you sum up all the bumping that went on in the stretch, I think it's fair to say that god ran on a pretty straight line and was probably just reacting and did not initiate anything.

Good ride by Chantal C as well. Not easy to get the horse back on track, stay on a straight course and win the race in a tight finish.

I'm also 99% sure that Twirling Candy was running out of gas.

[A. Pineda]

I'm a big fan of Sutherland, and credit her with a strong stretch run to win.

Now, back to the scene of the crime. Chantal turned into the stretch in lane 2, drifted out into lane 3, pushing TC into S, who wouldn't budge an inch. When TC was veering back in, GOD responded to the left-handed whip by bumping TC. That's what I saw, officer, and I'm not changing my story.

It's too bad that Victor didn't let up with that right-handed whip, or he probably would have won the race.

[Relwob Owner]

I'm a big fan of Sutherland, and credit her with a strong stretch run to win.

Now, back to the scene of the crime. Chantal turned into the stretch in lane 2, drifted out into lane 3, pushing TC into S, who wouldn't budge an inch. When TC was veering back in, GOD responded to the left-handed whip by bumping TC. That's what I saw, officer, and I'm not changing my story.


It's too bad that Victor didn't let up with that right-handed whip, or he probably would have won the race.



Thai is exactly how I saw it as well.

[Stillriledup]

I'm a big fan of Sutherland, and credit her with a strong stretch run to win.

Now, back to the scene of the crime. Chantal turned into the stretch in lane 2, drifted out into lane 3, pushing TC into S, who wouldn't budge an inch. When TC was veering back in, GOD responded to the left-handed whip by bumping TC. That's what I saw, officer, and I'm not changing my story.

It's too bad that Victor didn't let up with that right-handed whip, or he probably would have won the race.

But here's where the optical illusion comes into play. Chantal never drifted from path 2 to path 3, that was the natural progression of a horse coming off a turn. It APPEARED like she drifted out, but she didnt drift any more than what is naturally expected to happen when a 1,000 pound animal is running at 35 MPH coming off a tight turn.

[davefulche]

This race was marred by the incident and has soured me on a sport that I enjoy and support. I know there are bad calls like this every year, but an infraction is an infraction. IF that race for an 8k claimer or even an optional allowance that horse is taken down 100 times out of 100. Chantal goes to the left handed stick and causes Dude to shift out into Twirling Candy. Which causes a chain reaction into Setsuko. Not only did Game on Dude make contact once but numerous times. While I definitely think TC got the worst of it, TC appeared to be that day no better than 4th at best. Setsuko lost by a slim margin and I think TC definitely lost a placing yet neither resulted in the DQ. To me that is giving riders free reign in big races to get away with alot. I'm not saying Chantal did anything intentionally, but there are alot of hungry riders that could do something very similar to win a close race. Also very frustrating for the everyday bettor who sees so many DQs where horses barely brush or they don't even make contact, but force another horse to check sharply and are not deemed clear. It seems like some people want to say that she was just floating TC out around the turn which happens everyday...which it does, but it is one thing to float when it's head to head around the turn and another when its three across the track. I'm sure Setsuko gets taken down if he makes the same infraction from the outside.

BTW Vic I loved your call on gate crashers and I did not have Setsuko or Game on Dude.

PS. Does anyone else think if this wasn't Chantal and maybe a male rider that things could have got heated between the jocks?? I don't know Joel personally but I wasn't a big fan of the left handed strikes coming around the turn.

[The_Knight_Sky]

To me that is giving riders free reign in big races to get away with alot. I'm not saying Chantal did anything intentionally, but there are a lot of hungry riders that could do something very similar to win a close race.



Excellent post. I agree with you all the way. http://i51.tinypic.com/25isvev.gif
It should be interesting to see how much leniency the SoCal riders will now have
whenever there is an objection/inquiry in the near future.

[A. Pineda]

But here's where the optical illusion comes into play. Chantal never drifted from path 2 to path 3, that was the natural progression of a horse coming off a turn. It APPEARED like she drifted out, but she didnt drift any more than what is naturally expected to happen when a 1,000 pound animal is running at 35 MPH coming off a tight turn.

Not sure if that "natural progression" is a natural law, but Chantal's mount bothered two runners which, for whatever reason, failed to follow that expectation.

[Fastracehorse]

Could not agree more.....this was the reason I found it so surprising when people praised her for her ride.

..........and knew she still had horse. The left hand whipping wasn't so bad; it was the left hand whipping and the fact the horse came out at the same time. But, and a big but, GOD's hind end was knocked at the same time she was whipping. So what looked bad, really wasn't - I'm impressed w/ the decision.

Another advantage of the steward's replay is that they slowed it down so you could see TC initiated the contact.

fffastt

[Relwob Owner]

..........and knew she still had horse. The left hand whipping wasn't so bad; it was the left hand whipping and the fact the horse came out at the same time. But, and a big but, GOD's hind end was knocked at the same time she was whipping. So what looked bad, really wasn't - I'm impressed w/ the decision.

Another advantage of the steward's replay is that they slowed it down so you could see TC initiated the contact.

fffastt



That is the second time you have mentioned a stewards replay having something not contained in the Youtube Post 80 relay(the first time you said it was the head on, this time the slow mo) and the second time that what you mentioned is indeed in the replay in post 80......as I said, the slow mo is indeed there and I dont see TC initiating contact. I see Game on coming out and the left handed whipping that you said "looked bad, really wasnt" didnt help things.....

[OntheRail]

I'm a big fan of Sutherland, and credit her with a strong stretch run to win.

Now, back to the scene of the crime. Chantal turned into the stretch in lane 2, drifted out into lane 3, pushing TC into S, who wouldn't budge an inch. When TC was veering back in, GOD responded to the left-handed whip by bumping TC. That's what I saw, officer, and I'm not changing my story.

It's too bad that Victor didn't let up with that right-handed whip, or he probably would have won the race.
How could GoD come from the 2 lane into the 3 lane while having FD and AE to the inside of him. And was 3/4+ of a length in front of TC exiting the corner. TC brushed Setsuko and then hit GoD knocking him ass end out from under him making him lose his balance and leaned into TC after that... thus pushing TC back into Setsuko. Chantel went to the whip after TC and brushed into Setsuko and had already started to come back in toward GoD.
TC caused that whole mess... plain and simple.

And that's how I saw it and shows on all the reply... just don't see how people seem to miss the facts as shown. :faint:

[Kevroc]

And that's how I saw it and shows on all the reply... just don't see how people seem to miss the facts as shown. :faint:

I'm from the camp that it was the right call but, I can see why it is a tough call. The side angle looks like GoD cornered well, the head-on shows him coming out.. However, TC comes out even more so, imo.. fanning Setsuko even wider.

The initial inside lunge TC takes, whacks GoD on the hindquarters and he loses his action. In turn, he whacks TC twice. The first whack is totally in reaction to the initial bump and the second one is in regaining his action.

The whole question imo, is if he should be taken down for causing interference in the stretch with that second thump... I submit that the horse would've maintained a straight course without suffering the fishtail inducing initial bump on the rear by TC.

Setsuko was compromised and even sustained an injury from this. It is unfortunate but, the anger directed at Sutherland and Co. is unwarranted imo, because she was trying her hardest to stay straight and win the race. The left handed urging on the turn may look bad but, she had a good hold of him with her right arm. If she goes righty with an erratic fatigued TC to her outside, she risks striking that runner.

My .02

[FenceBored]

Longer (10 minutes) inquiry video, includes rear shot of incident at 8 minute mark.

BXBxGpcYl7Q

[Relwob Owner]

Longer (10 minutes) inquiry video, includes rear shot of incident at 8 minute mark.

BXBxGpcYl7Q




Now THAT(the rear angel coming around the turn) was an angle I had not seen and after seeing it, feel like I totally stand corrected and can totally see why those who had seen it were disagreeing with me.....like I said earlier in the thread, won't be the last time I am wrong.....nice call to all who saw it as a non DQ.

[rwwupl]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/03082011-some-big-caps-just-wont-go-away/

Pete Pedersen gives an informed opinion...

Excerpt:


"It wasn't an easy call," Pedersen said. "But I would have voted for disqualification. I don't think there was any question that the winner interfered with the horse (Twirling Candy) between him and (Setsuko). That started the chain reaction. And there was enough interference to merit a disqualification

[David-LV]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/03082011-some-big-caps-just-wont-go-away/

Pete Pedersen gives an informed opinion...

Excerpt:
Maybe that is why Pedersen retired, I guess his eyes are going also.

_______
David-LV

[Stillriledup]

I gotta be honest with all of you guys. I'm of the camp that i don't want to see any DQs unless there's a REAL legit reason. I would leave the ticky tack stuff alone. So even if you think Chantal came out a hair and started this mess (which i dont), i would have still voted to leave it alone. I would have given a jock some leeway to not have to run in an exact straight line.

The one thing we know in racing is that horses don't always travel in an exact straight line. For a horse to move an inch or two to either side in the run down the lane is going to happen more times than its not going to happen. These horses are tired and straining, the jocks are tired and straining and they're giving all the have. Sometimes 'stuff' is going to happen. That's part of racing.

I love tracks that leave results alone. Some tracks just DQ to DQ (like Turf Paradise for example) but i would pay you if you won.

I know, its a novel concept to actually pay off the winners, but i would pay you if you won.

You guys know the fair catch rule in the NFL? You have to give the player catching the ball some 'space' to actually catch it. In racing, i would judge races where a horse should have some space on each side of him to move an inch or two if he needs to move. You can't pin a horse and run directly along side that runner and just hope he shifts an inch. I'm not exactly sure why Rosario was along side Chantal without giving her a few inches to move and maneuver. This happens in a lot of races where one jock will crowd another jock. If one jock is directly alongside another jock and the inside jock's horse moves out an inch or two, i'd blame the outside horse for being so close. When you turn into the lane, there's really no reason to be a millimeter away from another horse, if you're that close, you're not giving the other horse room for his 'fair catch'.

If Rosario was 5 inches away from Chantal, and she came out 4 inches (hypothetically) there would have still been an inch between them where no bumping would occur. But, when you are right next to a horse crowding him, that can't happen.

If Rosario didnt want to get bumped, he should have been farther away from Chantal when he turned for home....that way, if Chantal came out an inch or two, he wouldnt have been hit.

[classhandicapper]

PS, I was perhaps undergoing a moment of generosity when I referred to it as a Gr 2 field. "Weak Gr 2 field" is probably more accurate. Just four Gr 2 wins among the lot from 24 Gr 2 starts-- and in two cases, it's because they were soft, slow Gr 2's where someone had to win them. The other two Gr 2 wins both belonged to Twirling Candy, and they were restricted to 3YO only and 4YO only company.

I agree with your assessment that the race was not the high level Grade 1 race you'd expect for the SA Handicap, but "personally" I wouldn't go overboard on the downside either unless you have a high degree of confidence in CA speed figures (which I don't).

The winner and 2nd horse were both competitive in Grade 1 races as 3YOs against some every nice horses and were still lightly raced enough to think they may be just hitting their best stride now. Most of the horses that were competitive in the weaker Grade 2 and Grade 3 CA races earlier in the year got totally buried. That suggests either higher quality at the top or at least significant depth of quality. Twirling Candy had a rough trip but he was well beaten and First dude was left in the dust.

Time will tell about the quality of these horses as some leave CA and more horses like First Dude ship in.

A 99 suggests this was a below average Classified Alw race. Personally, I don't believe it. I think the CA figures have misrepresented the relative ability at the top of the CA circuit for several years because of the shift to synthetic tracks and the problem may still exist.

Horses keep coming out of CA and doing well in the east but few eastern horses seem to be able to replicate their best form going in the other direction (on synthetic or dirt). That does not make sense. Some of the horses going from east to west should have liked synthetic tracks just as some of the CA horses preferred dirt. Now the first evidence of east to west on dirt looks the same among the handful I have seen so far.

[RXB]

CH, I understand your point, but I have enough confidence in my own figuremaking to believe that the number is quite fair. (I settled on 100; the official number is 99.) The track seemed consistent and I'm satisfied that my numbers for the sprints and routes are reasonably accurate. Now, there was some bumping so probably they could've ran a point or two higher if they hadn't been bouncing each other around, but that still leaves it entirely uninspiring. And it fits with my overall class evaluation of that field.

The narrowly defeated place horse (Setsuko) and the second favourite (First Dude) are both still N1X-eligible. That pretty much sums it up. With the way First Dude is going right now maybe he should take a turn at that condition. He had a few semi-respectable placings against a modest group of 3YOs, and now he can't get close against a field of Fla-breds or the worst Santa Anita Handicap field that I've ever seen. He wasn't that good to begin with and he hasn't shown any signs of improvement with maturity. If the best that be said for the first three finishers is that they left FD in the dust, that's damning them with awfully faint praise.

Look at the San Antonio. About MCL20k pace-- that's no exaggeration-- and won by a horse who was just out of his N1X condition after nine tries in MSW and N1X. And that was one of those four G2 wins to the entire group's credit.

The last two 3YO crops have been uninspiring so I don't expect much of anything from the older horses this year unless there's a talented, lightly raced horse lurking somewhere-- and I haven't seen one yet. Twirling Candy has some talent but I don't believe he's anything special at all, and based on his form and breeding I think that he's really a miler. Somebody has to win these races; that's my assessment of Game On Dude's win and that will probably be my assessment of the entire division this year, unless some horse comes out of nowhere.

[Fastracehorse]

Now THAT(the rear angel coming around the turn) was an angle I had not seen and after seeing it, feel like I totally stand corrected and can totally see why those who had seen it were disagreeing with me.....like I said earlier in the thread, won't be the last time I am wrong.....nice call to all who saw it as a non DQ.

John White does the M/L for S Anita and he thinks the stews made the right call.

You just needed evidence :)

fffastt

[Relwob Owner]

John White does the M/L for S Anita and he thinks the stews made the right call.

You just needed evidence :)

fffastt



Yep, it took a while but I finally saw what you were talking about and you were right in my opinion :ThmbUp:

[Fager Fan]

Could not agree more.....this was the reason I found it so surprising when people praised her for her ride.

She's being praised because she's a woman, the first to win the race, the underdog. If that were Gomez, there wouldn't be a bunch of praise for the ride. It's a fan thing, a congratulatory thing, not a real critique of her ride, I'd say.

[Market Mover]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/03082011-some-big-caps-just-wont-go-away/

Pete Pedersen gives an informed opinion...

Excerpt:


"I was there Saturday," Pedersen said. "Saw the race, watched the replays a number of times."

And? Tom Ward, one of the stewards for the 2011 Santa Anita Handicap, was one of Pedersen's partners in the stewards' stand for dozens of race meets over the years. The 2-1 decision for Game On Dude's number staying up was Ward and Scott Chaney for, Kim Sawyer against. But I knew that Pedersen wouldn't pull any punches.

"It wasn't an easy call," Pedersen said. "But I would have voted for disqualification. I don't think there was any question that the winner interfered with the horse (Twirling Candy) between him and (Setsuko). That started the chain reaction. And there was enough interference to merit a disqualification."

Much was made of Chantal Sutherland, the rider of Game On Dude, getting to talk to the stewards twice on the phone as they took 12 minutes before taking a vote. But it turns out that Victor Espinoza, who rode Setsuko, also picked up the phone twice, according to the Daily Racing Form. The objection by Richard Mandella, the trainer of Setsuko, was that Bob Baffert, Game On Dude's trainer, got on the phone with the stewards. Ward told the Racing Form that Baffert spoke briefly, for only a matter of seconds, and Ward said he wouldn't have taken the call had he known in the beginning that it was Baffert and not one of the jockeys.

The day after the race, Mandella said: "I said (after the race) that I had no comment, and I don't want to drag the game down by saying anything now about the (stewards') decision. I think they should talk to the jockeys, but I think it was chickenxxxx that Baffert was trying to talk to the other jockeys and to the stewards. I was trying to be a gentleman, and unless the trainer is claiming foul, I just don't think it's right that he is trying to talk to the jocks and the stewards."

A few questions arise:

Does anyone beside Richard Mandella think that phone call from Baffert to the stewards' room is suspect action at best?

If it's not a trainer's claim of foul, does any trainer have the right to phone the stewards during an inquiry/objection?

And, more importantly, can a trainer lodge a claim of foul (or "talk" to the stewards, i.e. provide commentary, race/trip opinions) if that trainer finished first in the posted order of finish?

[Market Mover]

#6 Setsuko came in slightly causing Twirling Candy to jostle with # 11 Game On Dude. #11 Game on Dude then smacked on Twirling Candy.
Taking either #6 or # 11 or both down meant a 65-1 Quindici Man was going to finish first or second. That wasn't likely going to happen by a Judges decision.


Check Penn National last year, on a race won initially by a 3 year old named Battleground. He veered in leaving the gate, and was DQ'ed, as well as another DQ during the running of the race. And yes, there was yet a THIRD DQ.

Three DQ's in one race. Go figure. It happened on 07/22/2010. Race 1 at Penn National.

Surely soCal would never allow that to happen to a G1 Big Cap, their Signature Race...

Triple DQ's DO occur. They just have to have the right setting: obscure track location with questionable integrity....

[samyn on the green]

steward interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUAV_E3JjiI

[classhandicapper]

CH, I understand your point, but I have enough confidence in my own figuremaking to believe that the number is quite fair. (I settled on 100; the official number is 99.) The track seemed consistent and I'm satisfied that my numbers for the sprints and routes are reasonably accurate.

I don't disagree with much of what you are saying. In fact it's a pleasure discussing the race with you because we think so much alike. I rate the 3YOs from last year a little better than you, but that's it.

To me the entire premise of the 99 (or 100) being accurate is that the CA circuit is accurate relative to the rest of the country. Personally, I am not 100% convinced of that "yet" because of the complexities of switching from synthetic (where figures were depressed at the top) back to dirt, even though it could be. We'll find out eventually, but I understand if you more confidence than me.

However, even if the circuit and 99 is correct, I still think the figure is not reflecting the ability of those horses properly.

Races often come up fast or slow due to pace, race development, competitiveness of the contest etc..

IMHO, there's almost no way those horses are worse than the average Classified Alw race which is what a 99 is suggesting. That field was way too deep with moderate talent and way too many of them got totally buried for it to be that bad.

[Tom]

The average classified allowance winner is not rated about $20,000, so it all come out in the wash.

[cj]

To me the entire premise of the 99 (or 100) being accurate is that the CA circuit is accurate relative to the rest of the country. Personally, I am not 100% convinced of that "yet" because of the complexities of switching from synthetic (where figures were depressed at the top) back to dirt, even though it could be. We'll find out eventually, but I understand if you more confidence than me.



Looking at Miss Match today, maybe the horses are being overrated in California!

[Stillriledup]

Looking at Miss Match today, maybe the horses are being overrated in California!

Miss Match got a trainer change recently, maybe she's a 'new' horse.?