done with racing!

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by Onesome

I think there wasn't a chance 2 was doing better then 4th if no interference takes place.

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

It’s whether the interference cost a horse a position (impacting payoffs for horse players and purses for connections).

I'm still not seeing how Onesome, or the team of stewards can make that determination at that point in the race.

The had the same trip as the , just several lengths behind. Both fanned out into the stretch; the seemed to be following orders, the fanned out wider, causing some obvious interference. How can it be assumed that the couldn't close on the pacesetters? Beyer figs? Race record? It's not supposed to be that way.

[omar2]

Before i depart from this forum forever, i would be remiss not to answer you. Your answer is this, Braulio Baeza was a crooked jockey who could not train after retiring. NYRA put him in charge of the clerk of scales where he got caught fudging with the assigned weights. his penalty was they promoted him to the Stewards booth. What else could you expect from NYRA. I always said that NYRA should not have been given a contract extension. They were a crooked operation and they still are. A leopard can't change their spots. My advice to you is don't quit the game, play elsewhere. You can thank the NY politicians upstate for this mess starting with Spitzer and ending with Cuomo.

[iwearpurple]

I'm of the opinion that the stewards should post a written public explanation explaining why they made the decision(s) that they did in every case of an inquiry or objection. And it wouldn't hurt if all states used the same criteria.

Everybody in this thread has made good points. Personally, I thought both horses in these races should have been disqualified, but if the public was made aware of ALL the information that the stewards used, racing would be better off.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by delfman

I just can't take it anymore.
thanks dad for doing this to me.
turning me into a horseplayer.

Can turning your kid into a horseplayer be considered anything else but child abuse?

[Light]

Originally Posted by delfman

I just can't take it anymore.
thanks dad for doing this to me.
turning me into a horseplayer.
with horses racing full of drugs
and cheating/doping whatever you want to call it.


SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME
how SAR race6, they will take down a 13-1 shot for coming in some but still was the best horse in the race

and then SAR race8 they leave up the even $ shot who clearly should have came down for coming out big time on the 2 absolutely causing him a shot at a better placing.


Drugs = might as well just pick numbers and horse names.
Stewards = are so ****ed in the head I just can't take it anymore.
There is absolutely no consistency to DQ's or deciding to leave a horse up.
and in my 40 years of playing horses, there never really was either.


Goodbye horse racing. you lost another fan.
Will just focus on sports betting and fantasy sports from now on.

You forgot having your horse's odds drop in half after the bell rings and he wins.

You forgot not being able to get your bet in that returns boxcars because of technical issues with your adw.

You forgot losing a photo cause your hall of fame jock acts like he never rode a horse.

You forgot Paul Simon's song "There must be 50 ways to lose at the races".

All those things don't bother me anymore. Been there done that.

I've realized its part of the territory. If you play this game be ready for what is not fair. (Hey, like life !) Stick to what you do best and let the chips fall where they may WITHOUT ruffling your feathers. Or you will rub salt into your own wound.

[Suff]

off hand comment.


You know who assisted in these decisions? Greg Wolfe and Paul Loduca.


Both lobbied hard that the 2 was not winning or placing.

And both lobbied hard to have the 8 put up the 6th.

Almost like their multi-race wagers depended on it.

or my less cynical view of that they want as many people paid or alive on tickets

I'm assuming the Stewards have FS2 on in the room?

They both worked the decision imho.

less cynical view is thats what they are paid to

[Robert Fischer]

The pattern is as follows: Stripes + stripes = white. Black + black = white. White + black = white. Black + white = stripes. Stripes + black = white. Black+black = striped.

thus, the answer is

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

are you back in town RR?

Yes...

[cj]

Originally Posted by Suff

off hand comment.


You know who assisted in these decisions? Greg Wolfe and Paul Loduca.


Both lobbied hard that the 2 was not winning or placing.

And both lobbied hard to have the 8 put up the 6th.

Almost like their multi-race wagers depended on it.

or my less cynical view of that they want as many people paid or alive on tickets

I'm assuming the Stewards have FS2 on in the room?

They both worked the decision imho.

less cynical view is thats what they are paid to

I would say little no chance they are watching that show. And even less chance the are listening when LoDuca is on. Who doesn't mute him?

[jimmyb]

Originally Posted by cj

I would say little no chance they are watching that show. And even less chance the are listening when LoDuca is on. Who doesn't mute him?

I agree. LaDuca sounds like a drunk Joe Biden

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Love it or hate it, it seems the criteria in NY is not whether there was interference. It’s whether the interference cost a horse a position (impacting payoffs for horse players and purses for connections). I happen to want the stewards to make as few DQ decisions as possible. So I actually like their criteria. My only problem with either of these decisions is that if you aren’t going to DQ some clear interferences because no position change was involved, you have to follow through with fines or suspensions to discourage reckless and rough riding.

Class, we had this discussion before and I believe it is California that requires the offended horse be required to have been costed a position, in NY it's either or. (see below). So a horse can be taken down for a careless ride.


NY Horse Racing Rules & Regulations Results
Rule number 4035.2.

(a) When clear, a horse may be taken to any part of the course provided that crossing or weaving in front of contenders may constitute interference or intimidation for which the offender may be disciplined.

(b) A horse crossing another may be disqualified, if in the judgment of the stewards, it interferes with, impedes or intimidates another horse, or the foul altered the finish of the race, regardless of whether the foul was accidental, willful, or the result of careless riding. The stewards may also take into consideration mitigating factors, such as whether the impeded horse was partly at fault or the crossing was wholly caused by the fault of some other horse or jockey.

(c) If a horse or jockey jostles another horse, the aggressor may be disqualified, unless the impeded horse or jockey was partly in fault or the jostle was wholly caused by the fault of some other horse or jockey.

(d) A jockey shall not ride carelessly or willfully such that the jockey’s mount, equipment, or any item or object under his or her control interferes with, impedes, intimidates, or injures another horse or jockey in the race, including that a jockey shall not carelessly or willfully strike another horse or jockey or such other jockey’s equipment with his or her whip. The stewards may disqualify the horse ridden by the jockey who committed the foul if the foul was willful or careless OR may have altered the finish
of the race. The stewards may also take into consideration mitigating factors such as whether the impeded horse was partly at fault or if the foul was caused by the fault of some other horse or jockey.

https://www.gaming.ny.gov/pdf/legal/...%202019-08.pdf

[airford1]

So sour grapes are still the choice of Losing Handicappers.

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Can turning your kid into a horseplayer be considered anything else but child abuse?

I was kind of hoping that you might acknowledge that I agreed with you... I think.

[dlivery]

Originally Posted by airford1

So sour grapes are still the choice of Losing Handicappers.

Like having the best horse in the Race

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by delfman

...I've known this since I was very young,
order of finish should stay as finished regardless of anything else.
Suspend and or fine the jockeys if deemed so.
Even go so far as to changing the purse payouts,
But do not change the order of finish to affect the bettors.

The Ghost of Still Riled Up (SRU) lives. I think he was banned a while back, but his catch phrase was "pay the winners!"

I agree that the "qualitative" assessment by stewards in North America only sheds more potential corruption in a sport which can't afford it, especially at the smaller tracks.

The surprising DQ of Maximum Security a couple of years ago in the Kentucky Derby signaled to me that the issue isn't seeing any improvement in racing.
(Full disclosure - I did agree with the decision per the CURRENT rules of racing, but was still surprised the CD stewards took him down, especially being the Derby and all)

My advice would be to look at some of the foreign race track circuits, where DQs are much less frequent, and pretty obvious. The stewards in Aussieland, Japan and Hong Kong have less motivation to interfere (pun intended) with the results. They let the riders ride!

Otherwise I can't argue with your decision to pursue sports and fantasy wagering, though of course there's been known (on occasion) to be just a wee bit of flim-flam with those investment opportunities.