Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 09-07-2020, 03:24 PM   #1
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Kentucky Downs misses minor detail

dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 03:31 PM   #2
Frost king
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 310
Should be declared a no-contest. Too many horses never got a fair start.
Frost king is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 03:31 PM   #3
metro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 440
Not a good luck needless to say, neither has been their graphics.
metro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 03:34 PM   #4
Afleet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Missouri
Posts: 2,190
I think that starters' days are numbered
Afleet is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 03:36 PM   #5
metro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 440
cost me the super....bastards
metro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 03:36 PM   #6
stuball
Registered User
 
stuball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,819
Yes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Afleet View Post
I think that starters' days are numbered
like 1 is a good number for the starter and I had 200,000 on the winner... not
stuball is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 04:46 PM   #7
Valuist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 16,487
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.

Last edited by Valuist; 09-07-2020 at 04:47 PM.
Valuist is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 07:35 PM   #8
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valuist View Post
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.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 07:53 PM   #9
Frost king
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 310
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.
Frost king is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2020, 08:23 PM   #10
Valuist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 16,487
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.

Last edited by Valuist; 09-07-2020 at 08:26 PM.
Valuist is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-08-2020, 01:21 AM   #11
JustRalph
Just another Facist
 
JustRalph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Now in Houston
Posts: 52,611
Just stick em in the next race

They have already been handicapped......
__________________
WE ARE THE DUMBEST COUNTRY ON THE PLANET!
JustRalph is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-08-2020, 10:46 AM   #12
therussmeister
Out-of-town Jasper
 
therussmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frost king View Post
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.
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.
__________________
“If you want to outwit the devil, it is extremely important that you don't give him advanced notice."

~Alan Watts

Last edited by therussmeister; 09-08-2020 at 10:48 AM.
therussmeister is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-08-2020, 11:36 AM   #13
v j stauffer
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valuist View Post
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.
No effect of an unprepared start? Are you kidding? Watch the head on. Not one horse had a prepared start!
__________________
"Just because she's a hitter and a thief doesn't mean she's not a good woman in all the other places" Mayrose Prizzi
v j stauffer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-08-2020, 12:01 PM   #14
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by therussmeister View Post
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.
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.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-08-2020, 12:50 PM   #15
metro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by therussmeister View Post

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

They think we're all a bunch of idiots.
metro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.