Nyra Stewards

[Tom]

I think the NYRA stewards are sending a clear message to the jckeys......

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by burnsy

I saw it. But this is a General problem throughout racing and enforcing the rules . In just about every jurisdiction. Somehow the start is not equally weighted with the stretch or turns. The jockeys know this too. A lot of uncalled shenanigans at the start. I mean, if you can pull it off in the BC Classic…… that’s a message that almost anything goes. It’s not just about disciplining and punishment of an individual. The penalties are also meted out to send a message and make an example. Rules are meant to be bent in high level competition. If there’s no deterrent……. Well…,,, what do people expect?

Juding the start is a slippery slope. Not unlike holding in the NFL you could technically throw a flag on almost every play.

Do smart riders shave and take an edge at the start? Sure, they do. But we Stewards are pretty smart too and can watch for a continued pattern of pushing the envelope.

It's all about the opportunity to recover from a possible foul. Does losing a couple lengths at the start mean as much as the sixteenth pole?

Mathematically yes. Practically, not so much.

People who don't think suspensions are a deterrent are wrong. Getting a three day suspension is a VERY big deal. It's the gift that keeps on giving. Not only no money for three days. Most horses you lose to other riders are gone for more than just one race. Especially if the horse wins. Very unlikely they'll take the new pilot off for the next few starts.

Stewarding as it relates to race reviews is EXTREMELY SUBJECTIVE. It's not a perfect system but IMO it's the best available.

I know I'm in the minority here. But by and large I think the North American Steward do a pretty darn good, consistent job.

Just like an umpire with a bang bang play at first. No matter what you call. Half the people watching are going to be pissed. Comes with the territory.

I appreciate anyone who puts themselves in the firing line and tries to promote an unbiased, level playing field.

[dilanesp]

Stewards do a decent job. And I generally oppose DQ's at the start unless we are absolutely certain it eliminated a horse from contention. (Remember, lots of horses recover from trouble at the start.)

But we should get rid of the designated race rule- maybe we'd need a voter initiative or something in California because the racing commission is in thrall to the owners and jockeys who love the rule. No other sport says "the poor owner will be hurt because someone is suspended". Baseball just suspended the heck out of Fernando Tatis Jr. They didn't tell the Padres "we'll let you use them in big games anyway".

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Stewards do a decent job. And I generally oppose DQ's at the start unless we are absolutely certain it eliminated a horse from contention. (Remember, lots of horses recover from trouble at the start.)

But we should get rid of the designated race rule- maybe we'd need a voter initiative or something in California because the racing commission is in thrall to the owners and jockeys who love the rule. No other sport says "the poor owner will be hurt because someone is suspended". Baseball just suspended the heck out of Fernando Tatis Jr. They didn't tell the Padres "we'll let you use them in big games anyway".

Many well intentioned rules can be manipulated for personal gain. That happens often with this rule.

However, your analogy of the Padres doesn't resonate for me.

Some dedicated owners might go decades between chances at winning an important Stake.

Can see good arguments on both sides. I'd be inclined to NOT rescind the rule.

[westernmassbob]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Juding the start is a slippery slope. Not unlike holding in the NFL you could technically throw a flag on almost every play.

“Do smart riders shave and take an edge at the start? Sure, they do. But we Stewards are pretty smart too and can watch for a continued pattern of pushing the envelope.”

What exactly do you mean by that ? Like you believe jockeys are intentionally coming out of the gate and interfering with other horses so they are in a better spot? I hardly believe that’s going on because that’s extremely dangerous for both parties involved. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze....or in this case the squeeze isn’t worth the juice.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

However, your analogy of the Padres doesn't resonate for me.

Some dedicated owners might go decades between chances at winning an important Stake.

That actually describes the Padres quite well.

[Al Gobbi]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Many well intentioned rules can be manipulated for personal gain. That happens often with this rule.

However, your analogy of the Padres doesn't resonate for me.

Some dedicated owners might go decades between chances at winning an important Stake.

Can see good arguments on both sides. I'd be inclined to NOT rescind the rule.

The BHA allows jockeys to ride in Group 1 races if they are serving a suspension of four days or less, provided they don't appeal it.

perhaps a similar rule could be implemented here - possibly including allowing them to ride in any stake (graded or ungraded) with an purse amount of a certain high value?

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by westernmassbob

What exactly do you mean by that ? Like you believe jockeys are intentionally coming out of the gate and interfering with other horses so they are in a better spot? I hardly believe that’s going on because that’s extremely dangerous for both parties involved. The juice isn’t worth the squeeze....or in this case the squeeze isn’t worth the juice.

Every great race rider ever dances on a fine line between dangerous and a foul and tactical edges.

Arcaro, Cordero, Pincay, Gomez and many more.

Believe it.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

The BHA allows jockeys to ride in Group 1 races if they are serving a suspension of four days or less, provided they don't appeal it.

perhaps a similar rule could be implemented here - possibly including allowing them to ride in any stake (graded or ungraded) with an purse amount of a certain high value?

Here in North America a jock can ride in one "designated" race during his suspension.

If he rides in more than one he must serve another reciprocal day.

When I say reciprocal, I mean if he rides two Stakes on a Saturday he can't serve the additional day on a sleepy Wednesday.

[Suff]

Originally Posted by burnsy

I saw it. But this is a General problem throughout racing and enforcing the rules . In just about every jurisdiction. Somehow the start is not equally weighted with the stretch or turns. The jockeys know this too. A lot of uncalled shenanigans at the start. I mean, if you can pull it off in the BC Classic…… that’s a message that almost anything goes. It’s not just about disciplining and punishment of an individual. The penalties are also meted out to send a message and make an example. Rules are meant to be bent in high level competition. If there’s no deterrent……. Well…,,, what do people expect?

"We don't adjudicate gate fouls".

It breaks my heart to hear. A hard pill. It probably goes down easier with a peppermint. I tell u the enemy is not peta or horse racing wrongs. The enemy is horse lovers want to be pet owners. In order to be on TV you have to agree.

[westernmassbob]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Every great race rider ever dances on a fine line between dangerous and a foul and tactical edges.

Arcaro, Cordero, Pincay, Gomez and many more.

Believe it.

I 100% agree with this during the race however at the gate break not so much. We have seen many times when a horse breaks it can take a right or left hand turn causing massive collisions. There is no way I believe this to be intentional on a jockeys behalf to gain a tactical edge. IMO the gate break is the most dangerous park of a horse race. Horses clip heels, fall down and run erratic more so at the break then any other time during a race. We will just have to agree to disagree that a jockey at that moment would intentionally create a foul to get a “ tactical “edge.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by westernmassbob

I 100% agree with this during the race however at the gate break not so much. We have seen many times when a horse breaks it can take a right or left hand turn causing massive collisions. There is no way I believe this to be intentional on a jockeys behalf to gain a tactical edge. IMO the gate break is the most dangerous park of a horse race. Horses clip heels, fall down and run erratic more so at the break then any other time during a race. We will just have to agree to disagree that a jockey at that moment would intentionally create a foul to get a “ tactical “edge.

Really?

[westernmassbob]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Really?

Yes really. Also to add to that horses smashing out of gate before start, rearing up, getting stuck in get. All accident situations that can involve more then one horse at the same time. It just seems like the worst possible moment for a jockey to make a dangerous choice just to get some type of advantage. Again, a high percentage of race accidents happen at the gate.

[westernmassbob]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Really?

“The most frequent location where injury events occurred was entering, within, or leaving the starting gate (35.1%) (Figure 2). Of all injury events, 14.2% occurred in the turns and 15.9% occurred in the home stretch or at the finish line. The most frequently reported causes of injury were being thrown from the horse (44.4%), crushed (9.6%), and flipped and pinned (7.5%). Being struck by the horse's head accounted for 5.3% of injuries, being jerked accounted for 3.7%, and falls accounted for 3.3%. The location of the injury event on the track and the cause of injury were not reported for 18.9% and 8.1% of the injuries, respectively.”

[elhelmete]

So flipping in the gate should be actionable by stewards?