Mountaineer Stewards Make Good Call

[Bruiser1]

Just finished watching the 5th @ Mountaineer where the 8 horse, Ameliaislandmissle, had the gate open properly but appeared to get tangled up with an assistant starter. The horse ended up breaking 10 lengths behind the rest of the field. The Stewards ended up declaring the horse a "non-starter".

It's nice to see the Stewards make a good call protecting the bettors.

Good job!

[Stillriledup]

If i bet on the winner, i wouldnt have felt 'protected' when my win price got slashed after the fact.

[Fastracehorse]

If i bet on the winner, i wouldnt have felt 'protected' when my win price got slashed after the fact.

...you have 8 more months of racing drama

fffastt

[Sekrah]

Just finished watching the 5th @ Mountaineer where the 8 horse, Ameliaislandmissle, had the gate open properly but appeared to get tangled up with an assistant starter. The horse ended up breaking 10 lengths behind the rest of the field. The Stewards ended up declaring the horse a "non-starter".

It's nice to see the Stewards make a good call protecting the bettors.

Good job!


Heh. Last year there was a longshot (25-1 maybe?) at Gulfstream where this happened to, cost him a couple lengths at the start and ended up finishing a very close 2nd. Got non-startered.

What do you think the holders of that exacta were thinking?

[Bruiser1]

Heh. Last year there was a longshot (25-1 maybe?) at Gulfstream where this happened to, cost him a couple lengths at the start and ended up finishing a very close 2nd. Got non-startered.

What do you think the holders of that exacta were thinking?

Um...Heck of a horse to bet next time?

You make a good point. Then again, those who bet that horse to win would be happy.

I'm reminded of a race just a few weeks ago, I think at Aqueduct, where a horse broke through the gate a split second before the start and made a left turn impeding the start of the horse next to him. In that instance, the Stewards changed nothing, which appeared to be a lousy call.

The consistency I'm looking for among Stewards is to protect the bettor. If a horse doesn't get a fair start due to circumstances beyond his or her control, like what happened @ Mountaineer, I favor making the horse a non-starter and giving the bettor their money back.

[Stillriledup]

Um...Heck of a horse to bet next time?

You make a good point. Then again, those who bet that horse to win would be happy.

I'm reminded of a race just a few weeks ago, I think at Aqueduct, where a horse broke through the gate a split second before the start and made a left turn impeding the start of the horse next to him. In that instance, the Stewards changed nothing, which appeared to be a lousy call.

The consistency I'm looking for among Stewards is to protect the bettor. If a horse doesn't get a fair start due to circumstances beyond his or her control, like what happened @ Mountaineer, I favor making the horse a non-starter and giving the bettor their money back.

But THEY are not giving the bettor his money back, they are taking money from the winners and giving it to these bettors who didnt win. Its not like they are paying for their mistake out of their own pocket, they're fleecing the winner to pay for their gate error. So, they may be 'protecting' the bettor who had horrible luck, but in doing so, they're using the winning bettors to pay for their gate incompetence. It might protect one segment of bettors, but it does so at the expense of another segment of bettors.

[Bruiser1]

But THEY are not giving the bettor his money back, they are taking money from the winners and giving it to these bettors who didnt win. Its not like they are paying for their mistake out of their own pocket, they're fleecing the winner to pay for their gate error. So, they may be 'protecting' the bettor who had horrible luck, but in doing so, they're using the winning bettors to pay for their gate incompetence. It might protect one segment of bettors, but it does so at the expense of another segment of bettors.

They are not "taking" money from the winner, anymore than you could claim a late scratch is taking money from the eventual winner. What it is doing is altering an anticipated win mutual.

If you bet a horse, you expect a fair shake. When an asistant starter is tied up with the horse when the gate opens, the horse has had it's chances compromised by factors beyond it's control.

Are you saying the Stewards made an incorrect call in this instance?

[Stillriledup]

They are not "taking" money from the winner, anymore than you could claim a late scratch is taking money from the eventual winner. What it is doing is altering an anticipated win mutual.

If you bet a horse, you expect a fair shake. When an asistant starter is tied up with the horse when the gate opens, the horse has had it's chances compromised by factors beyond it's control.

Are you saying the Stewards made an incorrect call in this instance?

I'm not a big fan of refunding bets. If you dont get a good start, its just bad luck. Personally, i would only refund if the gate doesnt actually open. If some starter guy holds the horse too long, well, its just bad luck, you lose and get em next time.

[Sekrah]

I'm not a big fan of refunding bets. If you dont get a good start, its just bad luck. Personally, i would only refund if the gate doesnt actually open. If some starter guy holds the horse too long, well, its just bad luck, you lose and get em next time.


Your kidding right?

I'll just wait for a 1-9 bridgejumper and bribe my buddy (who works at the starting gate) to hang onto him while I'm placing massive show bets on every other horse in the race.

Not refunding the bettors money in this case is ludicrous.

[Stillriledup]

Your kidding right?

I'll just wait for a 1-9 bridgejumper and bribe my buddy (who works at the starting gate) to hang onto him while I'm placing massive show bets on every other horse in the race.

Not refunding the bettors money in this case is ludicrous.

Why would you bet show? If you know a 1-9 is going to be off the board, you can make much more money betting on trifectas.

[Dahoss9698]

I'm not a big fan of refunding bets. If you dont get a good start, its just bad luck. Personally, i would only refund if the gate doesnt actually open. If some starter guy holds the horse too long, well, its just bad luck, you lose and get em next time.

Weren't you calling for a refund for those that bet Life At Ten in the Breeders Cup? Sort of contradicts your post here.

I guess when what you are saying isn't really as important as just saying something this kind of contradiction happens.