Originally Posted by sammy the sage (Post 2327987)

Been done before....not only Baffert either...

https://blog.horsetourneys.com/2016/...n-stakes-race/

Originally Posted by Track Phantom (Post 2328164)

Can anyone confirm, or say with a straight face that:

1. Baffert entered Restoring Hope because he thought that colt could win the Belmont
2. Baffert did EVERYTHING in his power to give Restoring Hope the best chance to win the Belmont
3. Baffert did not instruct rider Geroux to do anything, be it overtly or subtly, that would compromise the chances of Restoring Hope to the benefit of Justify?

My opinion is very simple.... Baffert told Geroux to get out of the gate with Restoring Hope and sit on the flank of Justify, thereby forcing anyone else that wanted to pressure Justify to travel at least three wide. I also think Baffert told Geroux to not press Justify or go to the lead in front of Justify. This is the reason why Geroux floated very wide was to take the early sting out of Restoring Hope and not get in the way of Justify early.

All of this leads to one serious theme....too many good horses are in the hands of too few trainers (and owners). When horses are entered in a race without serious intent to win but to change the race dynamics (i.e. rabbit) or create early chaos (i.e. blocker), we have a major problem and it becomes a slippery slope. This problem doesn't exist if all 10 horses in the Belmont were trained by 10 different trainers.

I don't recall the name of the horse but didn't a Chad Brown runner on the turf, a rabbit of sorts, shift way out from the rail in a G1 to allow the favorite to roll up the inside? Two different betting interests but clearly a "team" approach. If connections are willing to "cheat" (for lack of a better term) in full view of the public, what are they willing to do out of view from the public?

Welcome to 21st century horse racing.

Originally Posted by TiffaniO (Post 2328258)

The only way to solve the problems above is to:

Allow only one entry per owner or trainer per race. This would keep teamwork out of a race and force owners to move horses to other trainers. The guys with all the stakes horses wouldn’t be able to keep their owners happy if this was the case. Thus horses would be dispersed more evenly.

Originally Posted by FenceBored (Post 2328272)

It would not keep teamwork out of a race, especially one as important as the Belmont. You would still see jockeys combining to box the favorite in (see Big Brown) or force a speed duel to take him out of his game plan (see Smarty Jones) without their horses sharing owner or trainer.

Originally Posted by TiffaniO (Post 2328281)

Well what you list is normal race riding. What FloGo did (basically doing everything but jump off the horse to not make the lead) was not that. They would be trying to beat the horse at least instead of teaming up for a certain horse to win.

Originally Posted by FenceBored (Post 2328283)

Neither Rock Hard Ten nor Purge finished on the board after their speed duel "troubling the early rhythms" of Smarty Jones (to use Jay Hovdey's phrase). They nuked their own chances solely to make sure that the favorite didn't win.

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 2327795)

Repole sounds like sour grapes to me.
But I do agree with him - Javier pretty much sucks.
I will not wage a dime on that dipstick ever again.

btw, when the stewards closely examine the film for this race, maybe they could take a closer look how their local boys ride day in day out.:rolleyes:

Maybe NY just doesn't like it when outsiders play THEIR game better than they do. :D

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey (Post 2327842)

At the 1:50 minute mark in the drone overhead video replay, it sounds like a jockey is calling out something like “Is he” but it is difficult to understand...was wondering if anybody could recognize the voice or what was said and why...?

https://www.nbcsports.com/video/2018...s-triple-crown

Originally Posted by Denny (Post 2327933)

If there were a college class on race fixing - a Race Fixing 101.

Viewing this Belmont Stakes would be a course requirement.

How many different ways Baffert can do it and get away with it?

This would be an essay question on the Final to RF101.

Originally Posted by GMB@BP (Post 2328027)

So do I have this straight:

Some people are upset that an uncoupled entry from the same barn had a horse ridden aggressively to make sure that another horse from an uncoupled entry could not work in tandem with their stablemate to try and make sure that the best horse didn’t get a fair shake in the race?

Ok, only In horse racing. This sport man.

Originally Posted by Track Phantom (Post 2328164)

My opinion is very simple.... Baffert told Geroux to get out of the gate with Restoring Hope and sit on the flank of Justify, thereby forcing anyone else that wanted to pressure Justify to travel at least three wide. I also think Baffert told Geroux to not press Justify or go to the lead in front of Justify. This is the reason why Geroux floated very wide was to take the early sting out of Restoring Hope and not get in the way of Justify early.