Belmont R3

[jameegray1]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

yup, and the next questions i have are

* was there a steward's inquiry into the start following the race?
* will the official chart mention that their was an inquiry into the race?

if I were as irrational as the stewards i'd probably also curiously/apprehensively look at odds, placing, connections

There was a "general inquiry into the start" but no changes were made.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by jameegray1

There was a "general inquiry into the start" but no changes were made.

That's good. They are following some protocol/rules. Also communicates it to us/bettors/public that they are making a decision regarding the incident.

[cj]

Originally Posted by jameegray1

Same thing happened today R4 at Belmont once again.

broke through the gate and this time....

....no change. No DQ and no non-starter.

It seems we need a three-sided coin.

To be fair, the horse was eased and finished last. If the new precedent is to DQ, you can't DQ a horse from last.

[SG4]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

That's good. They are following some protocol/rules. Also communicates it to us/bettors/public that they are making a decision regarding the incident.

Just having an inquiry into an obvious problem isn't good, it's a no-brainer. What would be good is if after they made one of these decisions about horses breaking early they explained what rule they were applying, considering as mentioned, this is now the 3rd different way they've handled this situation in a very recent sampling size. Can anyone attest to if there was any explanation given today? The Stewards Decisions link on the NYRA website is lacking information on any of these earlier decisions, which is not a good look.