Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hoofless_Wonder
Yes. Yes I am.
The only argument I know of to "original finish equals tote payoffs" is the potential for larceny by rough race riding. I don't buy that, though I freely admit I'm not a jockey. It's way too dangerous to ride any more aggressively than the riders due today, IMHO, with clipping heels and breakdowns leading to horrific accidents within fractions of a second. Just the other night a female jockey in Australia was killed when her horse shied and threw her 200 meters from the finish - unfortunately, she was leading at the time and was trampled.
I believe the potential for the stewards to make the wrong call is MUCH higher than the potential for larceny. "Original finish equals tote payoffs" would be consistent. If there is a questionable result, then the stewards and/or jockeys could enforce rules for safe riding after the fact.
And speaking of Australia, at least when they have a protest (objection), the stewards interview the jockeys in public, unlike their American counterparts.
And yes, I know humans aren't riding the dogs. But of course humans are giving Fido a pep pill now and then, or a big bowl of water before the race...
|
This is a great point you've touched on. I think that judges essentially "pass the baton" to the horseplayer and put the burden on the players to "police" the riders to make sure they are riding in safe fashion instead of leaving the betting alone, and policing the sport out of the public eye.
