| Stillriledup |
11-26-2014 02:59 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I thought we had a thread for this! You can find threads from 20 years ago but not the DQ thread? Come on, man.
EDIT: Merged
|
Sorry. Forgot about this. Out of sight, out of mind. My bad. |
| thespaah |
11-26-2014 09:33 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by outofthebox
This is the track i race at. I cringe every time i'm involved with an inquiry. There are a lot of squeeze jobs going on into the turn because of horses switching leads and dropping down naturally. It seems if a jockey is half in going into the turn and feels the outside pressure, he is going to grab and take hold. This is what seemed to happen here.
|
Is this due to inexperienced or "less skilled" riders? Or is it an issue of the jockeys "playing the game" of trying to get the attention of the Stewards with the idea of having the Stews give them a position? |
| thespaah |
11-26-2014 09:36 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillriledup
Sorry. Forgot about this. Out of sight, out of mind. My bad.
|
Off to the Principal's office with you!!!!!!!
:lol: |
| Stillriledup |
11-28-2014 02:04 PM |
Frivilous foul claim by E Vaz Race 4 Parx today. This is embarrassing, jocks should be fined for this type of stuff.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillriledup
Frivilous foul claim by Frankie Pennington Race 4 Parx today. This is embarrassing, jocks should be fined for this type of stuff.
|
Ummm...they are. |
| Stillriledup |
11-28-2014 02:08 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
Ummm...they are.
|
I was wrong about Pennington, it was Vaz who had the frivilous claim. |
| Stillriledup |
12-02-2014 05:28 PM |
Bizarre DQ at Zia in Race 8 today (Dec 2), the horse who caused the interference was placed first and a horse who did nothing was placed out of the money?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillriledup
Bizarre DQ at Zia in Race 8 today (Dec 2), the horse who caused the interference was placed first and a horse who did nothing was placed out of the money?
|
Something tells me there is more to it than this. I'll watch later. |
| Stillriledup |
12-02-2014 05:34 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
Something tells me there is more to it than this. I'll watch later.
|
They seemed to dq the wrong horse, i didnt see where the winner did anything wrong, he never bumped anyone so its all greek to me. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillriledup
They seemed to dq the wrong horse, i didnt see where the winner did anything wrong, he never bumped anyone so its all greek to me.
|
I would guess the reasoning was the 5 forced the 4 in at the start, which in turn caused the 1-2-3 to be stopped pretty hard. I'm not sure I agree, but I can see why it was called. |
| Stillriledup |
12-02-2014 05:47 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I would guess the reasoning was the 5 forced the 4 in at the start, which in turn caused the 1-2-3 to be stopped pretty hard. I'm not sure I agree, but I can see why it was called.
|
I didnt see where the 5 did anything wrong and even if you can make a case the 5 was at fault, the 4 was also at least partly at fault and needed to come down too. Not sure how anyone can look at that and say the 4 was blameless for his jock completely overreacting to something that didnt happen, i have a problem with that DQ. If you take down the 5, you gotta take the 4 with him. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillriledup
I didnt see where the 5 did anything wrong and even if you can make a case the 5 was at fault, the 4 was also at least partly at fault and needed to come down too. Not sure how anyone can look at that and say the 4 was blameless for his jock completely overreacting to something that didnt happen, i have a problem with that DQ. If you take down the 5, you gotta take the 4 with him.
|
I tend to agree, I thought the 4 was at least as much to blame. I hate to say it, but I think the 1-5 odds had an impact. |
| Stillriledup |
12-02-2014 05:52 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I tend to agree, I thought the 4 was at least as much to blame. I hate to say it, but I think the 1-5 odds had an impact.
|
I was thinking that the track wouldnt want to have to pay out a minus show pool and the DQ of the 4 would be made, i saw the inquiry and just thought it was on the 4 and was shocked that it was on the 5.
Rough DQ if you had the winner, that's a hard way to not get paid. |
| Gapfire |
12-02-2014 06:17 PM |
Just looked at the replay, and thought the 4 caused most of the problems, The 5 was coming over as well, but the 4 moved in, and caused the foul before the 5 came over.
Bad DQ, and the 1/5 shot gets rewarded for being the main culprit. :ThmbDown:
|
| appistappis |
12-02-2014 08:45 PM |
the objection was 1 on 5.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
|
|
