Kentucky Downs misses minor detail
 

Should be declared a no-contest. Too many horses never got a fair start.

Not a good luck needless to say, neither has been their graphics.

I think that starters' days are numbered

cost me the super....bastards

Yes
 

like 1 is a good number for the starter and I had 200,000 on the winner... not

The other 10 horses DID race and completed the race. The one horse overcame traffic to get up. Oh yeah, it never happened. At least that's what I assume. We know all wagers were refunded but I believe there was no purse distribution, and THAT is wrong.

The one horse overcame some traffic to get up and win, but won't collect that $54k portion of the purse. As bettors we get screwed plenty. In this case, the horsemen were screwed. Horses don't have unlimited bullets to fire. Brad Cox and Bridgmohan have reason to be upset.

The reason it basically has to go as a no contest (and I HATE no contests; for instance, I would never do them for spills) is that it isn't just the two horses behind the gate- because two horses were behind the gate, there's no way for sure that the other 10 jockeys were ready. They have the right to be a bit complacent when the gate hasn't been fully loaded.

Watch the replay, and see how many horses were held by the assistant starters, that were not ready. More than just the two horses that didn’t get into the gate were affected.

If one or two horses were unfairly advantaged and the rest compromised, I can see it. But that wasn't the case. We didn't see a horse or two get out and steal an easy lead and wire. Wasn't the case at all. Based on the fractional times, there didn't seem to be any effect of an unprepared start. They went :46 1:11 1/5 and 1:35 4/5. Besides, we see horses getting pinballed at the break all the time and rarely a DQ (2014 BC Classic come to mind?). A field of 10 ran, competed and finished.

Every week or so, we see a spill, and spills usually have much more collateral damage than what we saw today. It never should've been declared no contest. And not only that, wagers on 6 and 12 were the only ones that should've been refunded, IMO.

Just stick em in the next race

They have already been handicapped......

To me it looks like three horses broke reasonably well. So I guess that means seven were unprepared, and two were behind the gate.

Kentucky Downs says it was a mechanical issue, not the starter's error.

No effect of an unprepared start? Are you kidding? Watch the head on. Not one horse had a prepared start!

I don't buy that. These machines were perfected in 1940. The technology isn't complicated and they test the gates periodically. This has got to be human error.

They think we're all a bunch of idiots.