5th At CT 10/27 DQ

[MightBeSosa]

Happened to be watching the feed and see this pitiful excuse for a dq.

Horse outside the winner comes in early and makes it tight for him and the "fouled" horse trying to duel on the rail, who checks. No way for the winner to make room even if he wanted to.

Jock bitches and the stews DQ the winner and put up the checked horse.

Stews are truly inept everywhere.

[ArlJim78]

I couldn't believe that. I had that 3 horse pretty hard, and I'm steamed right about now.

that and the fact that all of the totes are shut down at the moment. frustrating game.

[Stillriledup]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98473

[MightBeSosa]

It's rare that the head on looks BETTER (to stay up) than the side shot, but in this case thats exactly what it was. I knew they must have been smoking the good stuff when the reran the video about 7 times.

Makes it look like they were really adjudicating in earnest. :D

[johnhannibalsmith]

Lame. Get in there or get out of there. He was in no man's land and the hole was moving faster than the horse. What is the DQ'ed rider expected to do there? Lay into the outside horse and initiate contact that might result in a DQ to avoid the inside horse causing his own trouble by persevering into a spot he was never at?

[SharpCat]

The 4 horse is in the clear here. The 3 horse came in because Carmouche gave him about 10 backhanders.

[MightBeSosa]

Anyone that thinks the 3 should have come down, is either blind or seeking a job as a steward.

[duncan04]

the stewards are too busy playing the slots that they dont care about the racing there!! :rolleyes:

[johnhannibalsmith]

The 4 horse is in the clear here. The 3 horse came in because Carmouche gave him about 10 backhanders.

I don't know if there was an explanation given, but I really can see the only plausible justification being if the first incident (when rider on 3 straightens back up after coming down a bit) before the runner-up actually checks was deemed to possibly cost him a chance to get into better position to avoid what happened 200 yards later. I'm not even sure I can buy that per se, but if the entire DQ is on the merit of the actual "incident" that caused the rider to check, I just can't see how they can hold the original winner accountable for the runner-up's problem there enough to change the running order.

[SharpCat]

Happened to be watching the feed and see this pitiful excuse for a dq.

Horse outside the winner comes in early and makes it tight for him and the "fouled" horse trying to duel on the rail, who checks. No way for the winner to make room even if he wanted to.

Jock bitches and the stews DQ the winner and put up the checked horse.

Stews are truly inept everywhere.


Speeking of blind. How exactly can Carmouche fire off 10 backhanders if the 4 horse is making tight for him and the horse on the rail? The 4 horse played no part in this incident. Still a tough call if you had the 3.

[SharpCat]

I don't know if there was an explanation given, but I really can see the only plausible justification being if the first incident (when rider on 3 straightens back up after coming down a bit) before the runner-up actually checks was deemed to possibly cost him a chance to get into better position to avoid what happened 200 yards later. I'm not even sure I can buy that per se, but if the entire DQ is on the merit of the actual "incident" that caused the rider to check, I just can't see how they can hold the original winner accountable for the runner-up's problem there enough to change the running order.


They never give and explanation. I think the 2 horse just got a little intimidated when the 3 came over. I agree with you the 2 was in no man's land. No reason why all tracks can't show the replay while giving an explanation of the stewards descision.

[precocity]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98473
thats all they had to do :D