The DQ (or non-DQ) complaint thread

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by bello

They didnt even put up an inquiry...Jock objected and they looked at it for 2 minutes. 7 was 4 wide entering lane. Had the 5 tried to squeeze throughhe would have gone down. They just appear to want to go home. That was also the stary of the p4 and p3....I was right in the middle of rolling the card.

Not patronizing you. I totally get it. Brutal Brutal Brutal.

It makes a normal person grind their teeth. Makes a peace lover smash a fist into the ground.

Brutal.

Again, if I were in charge, the stewards would have a $50,000 loss of paycheck. You want this job? You are now personally liable for egregious decisions that are black and white wrong.

[EasyGoer89]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

Not patronizing you. I totally get it. Brutal Brutal Brutal.

It makes a normal person grind their teeth. Makes a peace lover smash a fist into the ground.

Brutal.

Again, if I were in charge, the stewards would have a $50,000 loss of paycheck. You want this job? You are now personally liable for egregious decisions that are black and white wrong.

This is why it's better off to just pay the winners and keep the jock infractions separate, judges aren't responsible enough to understand that they are not being consistent with assigning 'severity' and knowing that if you take down something that's a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10 as far as severity (for example) you can't leave up an '8' the next racing day. It appears to me that each racing day is judged completely independent of the previous day, we all have had plenty of situations where we got disqualified on a ticky tack call (like the one a week or two at gulf in the first race that is talked about here a few posts above this) and then the next day something worse than what happened the day before gets left up.

This is why I always advocate only taking down the most severe infractions, judges should be viewing races under the idea that they're going to try their hardest to leave the results alone, too many of them take the opposite approach and specifically look for ways to take horses down.

Dq's are an extra 'vig' for elite players, no, it doesn't even out.

[SuperPickle]

Originally Posted by EasyGoer89

This is why it's better off to just pay the winners and keep the jock infractions separate, judges aren't responsible enough to understand that they are not being consistent with assigning 'severity' and knowing that if you take down something that's a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10 as far as severity (for example) you can't leave up an '8' the next racing day. It appears to me that each racing day is judged completely independent of the previous day, we all have had plenty of situations where we got disqualified on a ticky tack call (like the one a week or two at gulf in the first race that is talked about here a few posts above this) and then the next day something worse than what happened the day before gets left up.

This is why I always advocate only taking down the most severe infractions, judges should be viewing races under the idea that they're going to try their hardest to leave the results alone, too many of them take the opposite approach and specifically look for ways to take horses down.

Dq's are an extra 'vig' for elite players, no, it doesn't even out.

Funny there was a guy who used to post the exact same thing to the word on here last year. Went by the initials SRU.

You two should meet up. You have a lot in common.

[picojim]

WOW very bad DQ Santa Anita 9th race today,
if the 12 had actually won I would have taken him down

[EMD4ME]

I ABSOLUTELY DETEST THE CALIFORNIA STEWARDS. I don't ever want to tinker with CALI again.

STUPID can't describe them. Had the pick 4 with the 9. Got punished for winning by STUPID people in charge.

[SandyW]

Another phony DQ at Santa Anita, both the 9 and the 12 were equally at fault in a bumping incident under very sloppy conditions in the last race. I wonder which one of of the friends of the stewards benefited from the over $300,000 gift.
You have to be out of your mind to be betting the races at Santa Anita.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by SandyW

Another phony DQ at Santa Anita, both the 9 and the 12 were equally at fault in a bumping incident under very sloppy conditions in the last race. I wonder which one of of the friends of the stewards benefited from the over $300,000 gift.
You have to be out of your mind to be betting the races at Santa Anita.

I keep being told to start betting CALI and to avoid the NYRA circuit. I tried to take some notes lately and look at it but I've been DQ'd there TWICE on horses who had a 10% chance of coming down and really a 1% chance of coming down if the stewards actually know what a horse race is.

Then I watch Can't Desormeaux stand up twice near the wire (in WIN PHOTOS).

No thanks. Give me my Portland, Sam Houston and Emerald soon.

I agree.

[Track Phantom]

I will admit when I watched the replay of the stretch run, I thought they would take down the 9. He did drift in slightly into the path of the 12 and it likely was the reason for the consistent knocking.

However, looking at it from a less myopic view, I thought there was equal bumping throughout the stretch and the initial infraction by the 9 was very slight. One would think the sloppy track should allow for a little leeway.

Not the worst DQ I've ever seen but these are the kinds of incidents I would not change.

[EasyGoer89]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

I keep being told to start betting CALI and to avoid the NYRA circuit. I tried to take some notes lately and look at it but I've been DQ'd there TWICE on horses who had a 10% chance of coming down and really a 1% chance of coming down if the stewards actually know what a horse race is.

Then I watch Can't Desormeaux stand up twice near the wire (in WIN PHOTOS).

No thanks. Give me my Portland, Sam Houston and Emerald soon.

I agree.

DQs like this scream loud and clear that the horseplayer/customer is just a necessary evil, these are not 'horseplayer friendly' DQs I'm not sure what the need is to make changes in races unless you have 'no choice' seems like this was a classic example of a situation where they had a choice.

Inherently judges must feel if they aren't 'judging' they aren't doing their jobs, issuing a dq makes it FEEL like they're 'doing their job' more than blinking it and making no change. I guess my point is that anyone can make 'no change' but it takes a 'true expert' to make that dq, stewards feel smarter and more powerful when They are playing god with other people's money and livelihoods, little Napoleon dictators sitting up in gods country pointing the finger at the peasants and minions makes them feel strong, flexing muscles and playing policeman.

You're not a 'real policeman' unless you're writing tickets and or locking up bad guys. Right?

[rrpic6]

Great conversation between Todd Shrupp and Kurt Hoover before the final decision was made. They compared Stewards DQ's to officials of football games giving leeway to big name coaches and teams albeit subconsciously. Wish they just would have said Baffert and Bayern.

RR

[EMD4ME]

Still disgusted. Best horse won, taken down. No impact on outcome of race.

Runner up was herding back desperately in last 1/8 in an attempt to show more bumping.

They rewarded an actor.

Looked terrible on pan live but to an intelligent eye, the head on showed it wasn't bad and there was mutual bumping (more desperation from the 12 as the rider knew he wasn't on the better horse).

They simply rewarded a loser with a win.

This is the example of how stupid a steward is. They are like taxi drivers. They are supposed to be the best at 1 thing but ironically there is no one worse than a steward to decide an outcome of an inquiry.

Taxi drivers drive slow, sit in the left lane on a highway while 452 cars blow by them in the "righter" of lanes and as you go by them all you see on their face is: Doopty doooo and a blank deer like look.

[EasyGoer89]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

Still disgusted. Best horse won, taken down. No impact on outcome of race.

Runner up was herding back desperately in last 1/8 in an attempt to show more bumping.

They rewarded an actor.

Looked terrible on pan live but to an intelligent eye, the head on showed it wasn't bad and there was mutual bumping (more desperation from the 12 as the rider knew he wasn't on the better horse).

They simply rewarded a loser with a win.

This is the example of how stupid a steward is. They are like taxi drivers. They are supposed to be the best at 1 thing but ironically there is no one worse than a steward to decide an outcome of an inquiry.

Taxi drivers drive slow, sit in the left lane on a highway while 452 cars blow by them in the "righter" of lanes and as you go by them all you see on their face is: Doopty doooo and a blank deer like look.

Great post, 100 pct agree.

Calif used to dq on placings affected and now I guess they're playing foul is a foul. it's amazing that the 'hand of God' has to keep reaching in and affecting results in borderline at best cases.

As a great man once said 'just pay the winners'

[EasyGoer89]

I'm confused at Belmont dq in 6th didn't cost the 3 a board spot any thoughts on this?

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by EasyGoer89

I'm confused at Belmont dq in 6th didn't cost the 3 a board spot any thoughts on this?

I'm confused too - are we talking about Aqueduct? 6th today? The 3 came in 5th and was moved up to 4th with the DQ. What's the board spot here? Another horse should have been DQ'ed too? Could you flesh it out a little more, please.

[EasyGoer89]

Originally Posted by VeryOldMan

I'm confused too - are we talking about Aqueduct? 6th today? The 3 came in 5th and was moved up to 4th with the DQ. What's the board spot here? Another horse should have been DQ'ed too? Could you flesh it out a little more, please.

Sorry I meant aqu, the 6th race the 3rd place finisher was placed 5th according to the announcer, not sure why only placed behind the 3, didn't cost that horse a spot, I guess nyra is disqualifying on fouls are fouls?