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 01-08-2018, 02:14 PM   #16
oughtoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,032
They came out and said the claiming horses at Los Al didn't count. I guess Los Al isn't in Ca. anymore.
oughtoh is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 02:41 PM   #17
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by onefast99 View Post
I'm sure the forum lawyers will debate this one, what I see here it is pretty clear if you write a race and a horse doesn't fit the condition then you have to disqualify that horse from running, which is done all over the country many times a year. In the event the horse got into the race and won and it was missed by the racing secretary or the stewards, that horse should be disqualified and any and all horses moved up placement wise.
I agree. I think CA has to eat this one. They need to disqualify the winner and place him last and move up the second-place horse. Then they need to give an amount equal to the purse to the DQd for taking the entry and now robbing them of the purse. It can come out of the racing secretary's pocket if they like.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 02:47 PM   #18
oughtoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,032
It is the trainers duty to know if a horse can be entered or not depending on the race. He knew he had more than 20 horses. He should get nothing and everyone else should be moved up. The lossers like always are the bettors.
oughtoh is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 02:51 PM   #19
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by oughtoh View Post
They came out and said the claiming horses at Los Al didn't count. I guess Los Al isn't in Ca. anymore.
It is "almost" in Ca.
jay68802 is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 03:08 PM   #20
onefast99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fager Fan View Post
I agree. I think CA has to eat this one. They need to disqualify the winner and place him last and move up the second-place horse. Then they need to give an amount equal to the purse to the DQd for taking the entry and now robbing them of the purse. It can come out of the racing secretary's pocket if they like.
The horse that won should be disqualified and the purse monies re-distributed. I don't see any difference if a horse tested positive for an illegal substance or this. Both carry the same weight. is he fighting the claim as well?
__________________
Remember the NJ horseman got you here now do the right thing with the purses!
onefast99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 03:13 PM   #21
oughtoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,032
It would be interesting if the horse that came in first got claimed and then got disqualified because he shouldn't have been in the race. Then would the claim still be good?
oughtoh is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 03:18 PM   #22
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
Conditions are like like the distance of a race. They are guidelines and not meant to be exact. The solution will be the next time the conditions will read "ABOUT 20 horses in their care".
THIS~!
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 03:25 PM   #23
onefast99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by oughtoh View Post
It would be interesting if the horse that came in first got claimed and then got disqualified because he shouldn't have been in the race. Then would the claim still be good?
This isn't your normal scenario where a horse is dq'd for interfering with another horse as that claim would still be good, and the positive out of that for the new barn is if the horse was in for a certain condition the new barn now gets to race for that condition as the horse didn't lose the condition.
This scenario is: was the horse actually allowed to race since it didn't meet the condition? If the stewards rule any other way but to take this horse down, the other owners and trainers in the race have a legitimate case against the track. Maybe someone who knows California racing rules can chime in.
__________________
Remember the NJ horseman got you here now do the right thing with the purses!
onefast99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 03:30 PM   #24
onefast99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
Conditions are like like the distance of a race. They are guidelines and not meant to be exact. The solution will be the next time the conditions will read "ABOUT 20 horses in their care".
A condition is exactly that, it separates the fields into more competitive racing. Distance is sometimes not exact in longer distance racing where there have been modifications to the track as in a shoot or placement of the starting gate.
__________________
Remember the NJ horseman got you here now do the right thing with the purses!

Last edited by onefast99; 01-08-2018 at 03:34 PM.
onefast99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 04:15 PM   #25
arw629
First Time Gelding
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 642
The track should pay the connections of the other horses the difference of what they should have gotten had the winner not run. They shouldn’t punish the winner bc it was the track’s error.
arw629 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 04:50 PM   #26
iamt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 310
This wasn't a case of an unknown ineligible horse accidently slipping through the cracks, this was actually mentioned pre-race

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...-retain-owners

Santa Anita wrote a race aiming for a condition in spirit, not in fact.
iamt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 05:00 PM   #27
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamt View Post
This wasn't a case of an unknown ineligible horse accidently slipping through the cracks, this was actually mentioned pre-race

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...-retain-owners

Santa Anita wrote a race aiming for a condition in spirit, not in fact.
Another case of not giving bettors all the information. I shouldn't have to read Bloodhorse to know the conditions of a race aren't really the conditions.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 05:19 PM   #28
iamt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 310
If they really want to implement what they are trying, the condition should be for trainers who have had fewer than x thoroughbred starters in races with a purse greater than $y in the past 6 or 12 months. That would allow the LA barns to enter in most cases while also stopping any larger out of operations shipping in.

Much like with their new MSWs, they would have been better served borrowing from NYRA and running a $150,000/$200,000 maiden claim with their auction restriction to stop well bred homebreds from entering.
iamt is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 05:33 PM   #29
VigorsTheGrey
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 4,553
It's an interesting question (regarding eligibility for the race), because the racing secretary can write any conditions he wants," said steward Scott Chaney. "Ultimately we decide eligibility, but we give a lot of deference to the guy who wrote the condition, in terms of what his intent was."

So, if the stewards have information that a horse entered does not fit the condition of the race—which in this case, is stated as "restricted to trainers with 20 or less horses in their care in California"—are they obligated to scratch the horse?

"Yes, if we know 100% (that the horse does not fit the condition)," said steward Grant Baker.

Bloodhorse article cited above
VigorsTheGrey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-08-2018, 10:09 PM   #30
HuggingTheRail
BC Canada
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by onefast99 View Post
Maybe someone who knows California racing rules can chime in.
Heads or Tails, they use a quarter...
HuggingTheRail 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 09:30 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.