FINALLY I got a chance to look at the two races at Saratoga:
Regarding Race 6
Every horse is entitled to a clear and unobstructed path.
had that until
drifted in several lanes.
bumped and impeded
causing her to check and lose position. Then the question becomes was
cost an opportunity at a better placing. I definitely think so. When
ran alongside
that horse responded and was battling bravely to try to stay with
certainly holding her own as both were gaining on
The rider on
really has some stones too because he didn't really take a hard hold until
pushed him over the heels of
Although it's close to the wire
actually was coming again in the final few yards and galloped out strongly past both
&
IMHO The Stewards made the correct ruling.
Regarding Race 8:
This one to me was much more interesting and fun. This is where we get into the debate over "a foul is a foul & "better placing" First before going forward let me say as a current and former Steward A FOUL IS A FOUL is a terrible rule that doesn't work. It's why it doesn't exist anymore anywhere I know. If a horse is on it's way to a 10 length win and brushes a horse that WAS 10 in front but is now tiring badly. But the brush by the letter of the law could be considered a foul. Is it just to take that horse down and place it last when there's zero chance the "foul" altered the order of finish or cost the tiring front runner a better placing? Of course not. Race 8 though was MUCH closer and IMO a great learning tool. Did
foul
? IMO 100% yes.
shifted into the path of
forcing that rival to check and lose position. So now the question is was
cost an opportunity at a better placing. Boy that's a close one. I'd lean towards no but could not tell anyone they were wrong if they voted yes.
At the time of the incident
"seemed" pretty much all in and not making a forward advance. But of course we've all seen horses that "seemed" finished can find new energy and rally for a win. The margin from 3rd to 4th was 3 1/2 lengths. So now a steward has to decide do they think
could have finished 3rd if the incident didn't happen. Is that a SUBJECTIVE viewpoint? You bet it is. That's what the stewards get paid to do. Make those tough calls. Until the rules are written differently they HAVE to make a decision based on training, expertise and years of watching thousands of races. If I was in the stand that day I "think" I would have voted to leave it as is. But for me it was very very close. One thing that swayed it for me. Was the effort the rider of
made after the incident which was tepid as best. It tells me he didn't think he had much horse left under him. I'll tell you one thing I would do. Have a VERY stern talk with Mr. Santana the next morning. His ride was careless and dangerous. He was on a horse that was miles the best and rode like a bug boy when they straightened away. No excuse for a rider of his quality. There's no need for him to get the stewards involved and no need to make us have to decide about disqualifying a horse that was so much the best. I would have voted AS IS and for Santana to receive a careless riding suspension.