Race 1, Beulah Park, 2/25/13

[MAGICHORSEMAN]

I agree with you that is was a violent crash and severe bumping that led to the 6 horse being disqualified.

I don't know why more cannot see it. The 1 horse was knocked crazy because of the 6 horse. This horse might have won the race had not #1 had to take up and the jockey knocked out of the irons. There ought to be rules against this - sure enough there are- so the 6 was disqualified.


Mountainman was just trying to help explain how a racetrack is operated. There is no way the stewards are trying to fix a race. He is telling nothing but the truth. It is easy to understand. Why can't everyone understand the truth? He has alot of experience and knowledge in the industry.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by greengorilla

Should have smelled you sooner MARK. Can't believe they still have you on the air at the mountain. U and Nancy sure knock em dead with your picks LOL. If you read any of my comments donut man you would see I didn't call out any stewards personally by name. And who cares what a loser handicapper like you has to say. How many stakes winners have your sold or booked mounts for? zero last I checked, how many horses have u owned and payed a bill on. and your a liar no stewards make 6 figures and you no that. You really are a goof. In stead of posting your opinion you need worry about picking a winner once a month..

^ What a jackass

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Some_One

So what do you tell the connections of the horse that lost all chance because of the infraction, 'sorry but since your horse was 50-1, we don't give a damn about you, the 2-5 shot matters more'?

Hopefully judges arent judging based on odds, as far as 'losing all chance' that's what happens sometimes when you draw post 1 and you're a slowpoke and can't keep up, you might get shuffled back, post 1 isnt a great post in a sprint, that's why at the Derby Draw, post 1 is the last or 2nd to last post selected. Its a bad spot to be, especially if you're not fast enough to get the lead and not slow enough to be 8 lengths behind.

[Stillriledup]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...ht=beulah+park

These judges have been known to let bumping slide for what its worth.

[rastajenk]

The Beulah stewards gave Dean Sarvis a week off a couple weeks ago for doing almost the exact same thing (starting from the outside, getting to the rail down the backstretch with a superior runner and drawing off to an easy win) , so there is some consistency in this kind of decision. It's clearly different than some incidental contact elsewhere in the race that may occasionally be allowed to stand.

[precocity]

[QUOTE=jcI watched the replay (the head on) and still see no reason for a take down. Actually, I don't even think it is debatable. If that is a take down, you would have DQs in 95% of all races ever run.[/QUOTE]
A month ago had 40 to win and 20 to place on the 5 at sunland park really forgot what race. the 5 was a 9-2 and the 8 was a 6-1 so the 8 goes gate to wire a furlong to go my 5 comes flying on that azz! as the 5 gets stride for stride with him with 10 feet to go the 8 veered off and takes my 5 about eight feet to the right? jockey objection and nothing happens? 8 wins the race. happens all the dam time! actually cut my finger crunching a bud light beer can after that race.

[HUSKER55]

greengorilla,


which track are you the handicapper for? where do you post your picks?

I would be interested in reading about them, your methods and etc.

[toddbowker]

As others have mentioned, the track doesn't bear the impact of the negative pool, unless the money is bet on-track. The stewards would have no way of knowing where the bridgejumpers made the bets while they are in the middle of watching a race, and they probably wouldn't have saved the track any money even if they did. Everyone can take off the tinfoil hats about the bridgejumper being the cause of the DQ.

As for the Ed Vomacka bashing, it's totally uncalled for. I have known Ed for a long time, and from my history of dealing with him, he is a good Racing Secretary (and a great guy to boot).

I worked as an official with Vince Clark, and also worked meets with Joe Deluca and Daryl Parker as Stewards. All decent guys who have been officials around Ohio for a long time. You might disagree with the decision, but the Stewards aren't evil, or incompetent.

From the media reports, the Stewards have been warning the jockeys about this type of thing, and it sounds like they have been ignoring it. The fact that one of the jockeys lost his irons speaks volumes as to why they made the decision to DQ the horse. We wouldn't be having this conversation if the jockey came off the horse as a result.

[iwearpurple]

Originally Posted by toddbowker

The fact that one of the jockeys lost his irons speaks volumes as to why they made the decision to DQ the horse. We wouldn't be having this conversation if the jockey came off the horse as a result.

Let me see if I have this straight. Because a horse takes a bad step (caused by the horse himself) and the jockey lost his irons, some horse needs to be disqualified.

I don't get it.

[iceknight]

I, for one, did not let the bridgejumping or negative pool theory, influence me in any way. Simply watching the head on video multiple times seems to tell me that6 or 5 did not cause the 1 to stumble. It looks more like the 1 did something to his own legs and stumbled.

I did not bet this race, have nt bet Beaulah in a long time and I usually do not bet big favorites, and never bet them to show even if I did. In spite of all those factors, I just feel that in this case, it was not a fair and square result. The 6 deserved to be declared winner based on the evidence as I see it. This looks like a fake foul ruling in soccer or the recent boxing match where the celebrity (did not) hit the other guy to a knockout win

[Scanman]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

. Bettors want to be paid. If a horse wins by 12, you pay the winners off. As far as rules of racing goes, punish the jock behind the scenes, but leave the pari mutuel stuff alone. Its not unprecedented that a jock be left up and then fined/suspended for a mistake he 'allegedly' made.

Bettors dont' want stewards playing god with their money and that's exactly what happened in this situation.

I watched the replay, including the head-on, and the looked at the chart. The chart writer adequately described the event. The simply took a bad step. The and/or the had nothing to do with it.

Stillriledup has been "spot on" with all of his posts. The was clearly the best horse in the race and should have never been DQ'ed. The connections were unjustly punished. This was a case of the stewards overreaching. Don't know if the connections have any recourse through the racing commission, but they should look into it. Clearly, the stewards blew this one.

Lastly, if, and that's a big if, the rider committed some type of infringement; it should have been dealt with as a separate matter. The connections and those who wagered on the got hosed. These kinds of decisions continue to have the sport looked at in a negative way.

[precocity]

Originally Posted by iceknight

I, for one, did not let the bridgejumping or negative pool theory, influence me in any way. Simply watching the head on video multiple times seems to tell me that6 or 5 did not cause the 1 to stumble. It looks more like the 1 did something to his own legs and stumbled.

I did not bet this race, have nt bet Beaulah in a long time and I usually do not bet big favorites, and never bet them to show even if I did. In spite of all those factors, I just feel that in this case, it was not a fair and square result. The 6 deserved to be declared winner based on the evidence as I see it. This looks like a fake foul ruling in soccer or the recent boxing match where the celebrity (did not) hit the other guy to a knockout win

pissed alot of people off if the blood horse did a story on it. the blew there azz away and gets D-QUED.

[moneyandland]

The #6 wasn't forcing the 5 over in any way he was just taking the path vacated by the 5, so if anyone should have been DQ'd it would have to be the 5, IMO it appears like the 1 spooked for some reason as there didnt appear to be contact and there was still plenty of room by the rail, the whole incident appears right along where the shadow is cast from the rail which may have aided in spooking the 1.

[greengorilla]

Hate all you want magic, mountain,Todd,veryoldman. I didn't lose a dime in the race. All of you work behind the scenes at mtr and Beulah. I understand your passion to want to defend your coworkers. Everyone is entitled to there own opinion. But remember as a payed employee your words are binding even here. Let me ask you about Paucars ride last January where he pulled up the 2 horse Sterling Emblem 1 full furlong before the finish line. Then tells the stewards he missed judged the finish line, veteran rider misjudge the finish line? who's been riding there for years? See there still letting him ride there and you think these stewards are fair? Maybe to there coworkers but not to the gamblers and owners that support the sport. Those that know me personally know I keep pretty quiet, And I've done a great job for all my clients. Oh by the way those of you that work at mtr, that are posting in defense of the stewards. Please, I hope your working that vigorously to get the horsemen there pension money and lobbying to get the place fixed up its gross. It looks like the house on Texas chainsaw last I was there.

[rastajenk]

It was Pusac, not Paucar.