Irad Ortiz knocks a rider off a horse

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by 1mileto7Fcutback

It was good to see Dilan credit Paulick for the Medina Spirit bad news.

Apparently he does read him. Weird.

It was a tweet that someone retweeted on my Twitter feed. No, I actually don't read Paulick unless someone points me to an article. But you keep on being you.

[1mileto7Fcutback]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

After you initially spurred my interest with your comment about it, I DID re-read the article, having read it when it was first included in the Paulick Digest, compared it to the post, and came away thinking it was NOT all that similar. Then I ran the plagiarism checker, and it was confirming what I was thinking. Yeesh.

You are quite the piece of work! I tend not to find myself on dilanesp's side argument in many things (including other things in this thread) - but on this one I agree with him.

So we agree to disagree. All good.

[PaceAdvantage]

Dahoss loves to drag people down into the minutia of his world. If he is able to latch onto one little thing, you'll never hear the end of it.

Then he drags entire threads down with it...which is why he always gets banned after 10 minutes.

It's too bad...there is a brain in there somewhere that could be used for good.

[1mileto7Fcutback]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Dahoss loves to drag people down into the minutia of his world. If he is able to latch onto one little thing, you'll never hear the end of it.

Then he drags entire threads down with it...which is why he always gets banned after 10 minutes.

It's too bad...there is a brain in there somewhere that could be used for good.

Yeah that's why I get banned...LOL

You know he's lying. It was amusing to me to see him pretend he isn't. I can't help what other people post and it's not as though I was talking to myself.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by 1mileto7Fcutback

Yeah that's why I get banned...LOL

Correct.

Case in point: as if porn stars should be a part of this thread.

But you just had to....cause it makes you feel good

[1mileto7Fcutback]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Correct.

Case in point: as if porn stars should be a part of this thread.

But you just had to....cause it makes you feel good

If you'd look, you'd notice he attempted to get personal with me multiple times before I retaliated.

Weird how both moderators missed that, but both have made it a point to chastise me.

But I hold a grudge....

[Robert Fischer]

i want to hear about a trainer whose horses are suddenly 'running through brick walls'..., not trying to get Dilanesp to admit he read a press release... IDGAF if he did or remembers/admits it...

'Ruben Alvarado' is really 'Peter Miller', at least on some of his stock.
'Gustavo Rodriguez' must be a student of the game to go out on his own and fortunate that his horses are improving.


But, whoever this new guy is, he knows his horses and injects life w/ vitriolic candor

[1mileto7Fcutback]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

i want to hear about a trainer whose horses are suddenly 'running through brick walls'..., not trying to get Dilanesp to admit he read a press release... IDGAF if he did or remembers/admits it...

'Ruben Alvarado' is really 'Peter Miller', at least on some of his stock.
'Gustavo Rodriguez' must be a student of the game to go out on his own and fortunate that his horses are improving.


But, whoever this new guy is, he knows his horses and injects life w/ vitriolic candor

Gustavo is Rudy's brother.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by 1mileto7Fcutback

Gustavo is Rudy's brother.

was surprised to see Kumar wire that field, Saturday.

to add insult to injury, Rudy claimed Regal Quality (albeit did no running as chalk for Atras/Bobby Bone)

[westernmassbob]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Highly unlikely it was personal. He got 30 days. If it was intentional, I think he'd be looking at least 6 months. Perhaps a year.

Fully agree. How anyone could buy into that it was intentional so early on in the race is mysterious. For whatever reason he floated right to the rail as any other jockey would have but never looked over his shoulder to see if another horse could be there. Yes he was in front of that horse when he crossed into it’s path but why he never looked over before crossing is odd. Another thing I find odd is his buddy little Andy has not brandished an opinion on the matter.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by westernmassbob

Fully agree. How anyone could buy into that it was intentional so early on in the race is mysterious. For whatever reason he floated right to the rail as any other jockey would have but never looked over his shoulder to see if another horse could be there. Yes he was in front of that horse when he crossed into it’s path but why he never looked over before crossing is odd. Another thing I find odd is his buddy little Andy has not brandished an opinion on the matter.

yea I don't think it was intentional.

I also don't know enough say anything like that. Is it possible that when Irad goes forward and off the rail, that he believes he 'owns' the rail as well? I suppose. Looked more like a 'blindspot' thing. Not sure if we've said the fallen jock's name many times, but I'd have to look back through to remember who he was. Not as if it was some 'beef' over previous duels...


anyway, you may find this interesting - pretty good recap (including Serling's) of the stakes and does address Irad etc;

one of the parts about 25:40 or so

YouTube

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by westernmassbob

Another thing I find odd is his buddy little Andy has not brandished an opinion on the matter.

Who knew Irad and I were buddies. I mis learn something new from each of your posts.

I'm quoted in the Thoroughbred Daily News article about his suspension.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...d-for-30-days/

As usual, you're firing on all cylinders.

[cj]

Originally Posted by westernmassbob

Fully agree. How anyone could buy into that it was intentional so early on in the race is mysterious. For whatever reason he floated right to the rail as any other jockey would have but never looked over his shoulder to see if another horse could be there. Yes he was in front of that horse when he crossed into it’s path but why he never looked over before crossing is odd. Another thing I find odd is his buddy little Andy has not brandished an opinion on the matter.

Couldn't agree more. Andy is well known to never discuss jockeys, their rides, or anything of substance at all really.

Come on, man...

[v j stauffer]

IMO the 30 day suspension was correct. Had the horse or jockey been badly injured I expect it would have been harsher. As for the Remesn. Jockeys at elite levels ride right on the edge attempting to gain even the slightest advantage. These races are often decided by inches. What I saw from Irad was exactly what we've seen from great riders over the years. Cordero, Pincay, Valenzuela, Baeza, Bailey, Gomez, Arcaro have all made that exact move. Did he initiate contact? Yes. But did it warrant changing a Graded Stake? No. Frankly he probably didn't have to brush Zandon when he did. IMO the incident took place so close to the finish line Zandon didn't have enough time to battle back regardless of the brush. Was it close? Yes. Is someone WRONG if they think there should have been a DQ? No, I can't say they are. As we all know film review by the Stewards is subjective. Two can interpret the same incident differently and make a compelling case for their side. In this case had I been in the booth I would have voted for NO CHANGE. Being a Steward is a thankless, impossible, frustrating job. No matter what, each decision made is going to anger some and please the others. Nature of the beast. I think for the most part the Stewards currently working at the major venues are doing a good job "trying" to provide a level playing field for everyone involved. Are they perfect? Of course not. But as a whole I think the nations racing officials are doing good work. One other thing. The MAGIC word. The real "C" word. Consistency! The bane of the existence of all Stewards. It shouldn't be consistency. It should be agree. If you AGREE with 5 or 6 consecutive decisions I make. You'll applaud my CONSISTENCY. However, if on that 7th call, you're sure I got it wrong. You'll say I've lost all my consistency. Have I? Or on that one do you simply disagree?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

But did it warrant changing a Graded Stake?

Vic, there's no rule or principle where stewards are supposed to act differently because it's a graded stake. If a move is a foul in a $10,000 claimer, it's a foul in a big stakes race.

I really hope that stewards aren't considering this as a factor in their decisions (and to be clear, I have never seen any evidence that they do- California has seen several famous DQ's in big races, including several Santa Anita Handicaps and the first BC Classic, and of course Maximum Security was properly taken down in the Kentucky Derby). Horses interfered with in graded stakes races, and their connections, are entitled to equal protection as horses interfered with in cheap races.