Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 08-25-2021, 08:43 PM   #16
ReplayRandall
Mount Rushmore
 
ReplayRandall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by westernmassbob View Post
In race 8 the impeded horse could have very well fell down and thatís what I donít get with the inconsistency of stewards. If the horse fell down then the favorite would have automatically been taken down. Even though that didnít happen it mind as well have. One of the worst calls in the history of horse racing IMO. I would investigate those stewards.
Now that you've chimed in WMB, we can expect TLG in 3....2....1.....
ReplayRandall is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:04 PM   #17
delfman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 92
I mean sure I'm most pissed because they took my down
but then 2 races later an even $ chalk completely takes out another horse costing him at the very least several lengths yet stays up for the win.
watch the replay and tell me the finished 3.5 lengths behind the 3rd place finisher.


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.

a week and half ago they took my horse Busker Allie down too in Del Mar's 1st race that was wholly BS



delfman is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:25 PM   #18
jameegray1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by delfman View Post
the fact Javier never claimed foul is a mute point because they posted the inquiry sign way before the horses got back to the winners circle. I mean what is he gonna say to the stewards that they can't see on video?
In my experience the jockey will still claim foul if they wish to object, whether or not an inquiry has already been called.
jameegray1 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:30 PM   #19
Nitro
Registered User
 
Nitro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 17,641
I had no problem with either call. My god come on now this is horse racing where anything can happen. Thatís one of the reasons why I donít look for Winners per se. I look to make Winning plays by making Vertical exotic bets and of course hedging my bets to cover many possible outcomes.

Race #6 - Post #202 & Race #8 Post #206
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...165750&page=14

These are animals not machines and the humans riding them can certainly make mistakes from time to time. The humans judging these races are also prone to making errors. I mean any seasoned player should be aware of the variety of consequences that they face when playing this game. They also might consider playing accordingly.

Yes, even those playing the game can make a myriad of both selection and wagering blunders.
In this mutual betting game "One man's garbage is another man's gold"!
.
.
Nitro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:33 PM   #20
westernmassbob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReplayRandall View Post
Now that you've chimed in WMB, we can expect TLG in 3....2....1.....
Yeah its kind of creepy that he stalks all of my posts like hes tracking me or something. BTW I was at Saratoga today and bumped into Ron Nicoletti from Gulfstream. Very astute capper and provides great info on races with no schtick needed. Nice guy all around.
westernmassbob is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:52 PM   #21
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 13,797
Really did not see a problem with any of the stewards decisions today at Toga. Even though the last race DQ took me out of the exacta.
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 09:59 PM   #22
Poindexter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,284
The first dq looks right to me. He carried the horse in a long way and eliminated any chance he had and the horse was clearly in contention. . The 2nd dq, brings up something I always hated in the rules. If the interfered with horse gets nipped for at the wire(or falls) they have to take down the favorite, since he didn't, you have to make a determination that the interferred with horse could have finished ahead of any of the 3 horses that finished in front of him. In this case that is an impossible determination to make (one way or the other). If they took down the favorite, imo, that would have stirred up even more anger. No matter what rules are used, there will always be frustration and controversy. Nothing more frustrating than having a 13-1 horse who was likely clearly best get taken down, but he did eliminate any chance the other horse had of doing better.


Inquirys are unfortunately part of this game and with many folks betting superfectas, every take down or non take down can cost someone a lot of money. You just have to assume that the stewards will do their best to make the best decision they can. A lot of times the decisions are very tough and very tricky. Sometimes they will get it wrong. Sometimes I think they make a purposely wrong decision just because they don't want to take a horse down (I cannot provide an example it is just a conclusion I have formed in my head). I don't think they were were wrong in either of the 2 Saratoga races.

Last edited by Poindexter; 08-25-2021 at 10:00 PM.
Poindexter is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 10:34 PM   #23
rastajenk
Just Deplorable
 
rastajenk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lebanon, Ohio
Posts: 7,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
I'm not a track steward, I'm just a lowly horseplayer...but even so, I couldn't help noticing that the maligned was gaining ground on the outside after the blatant interference. Is this what horses typically do when they are "out of gas"?
Good question. "The wasn't going to catch the top three" is one of the sillier defenses of a no-change that I have heard in quite a while. Well, no, not after the interference, he wasn't, but he outran the other two inside him down the stretch. He had a ground-saving trip behind the pacesetters, tipped out at the top of the stretch for clear sailing, and got bumped. Since when do we divine the outcome of races with an entire stretch yet to be run?

The sixth race was officiated properly.
rastajenk is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-25-2021, 11:56 PM   #24
lamboguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston+Ocala
Posts: 21,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by delfman View Post
the fact Javier never claimed foul is a mute point because they posted the inquiry sign way before the horses got back to the winners circle. I mean what is he gonna say to the stewards that they can't see on video?
i thought the 8 came over late in the race, but not sure if that would have cost a placing to the 3.

the 10 coming over on three had about a 90% chance of a placing. i did have a dog in this race, I had the 3.
lamboguy is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 01:27 AM   #25
Onesome
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 170
Stewards got both races right, easily.

Race 6, winner did drift inside massively hearding 3 into the 8 causing the 3 to lose momentum when it probably would get the 8 if the 10 had ran in a straight line.

Race 8 Did the 5 interfere the 2? No doubt yes imo; did it cause the 2 a placing? I think there wasn't a chance 2 was doing better then 4th if no interference takes place. No dq, give the jockey a week vacation.
Onesome is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 01:32 AM   #26
Onesome
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by rastajenk View Post
Good question. "The wasn't going to catch the top three" is one of the sillier defenses of a no-change that I have heard in quite a while. Well, no, not after the interference, he wasn't, but he outran the other two inside him down the stretch. He had a ground-saving trip behind the pacesetters, tipped out at the top of the stretch for clear sailing, and got bumped. Since when do we divine the outcome of races with an entire stretch yet to be run?

The sixth race was officiated properly.
you don't want a system where any foul is an insta-dq, things get messy fast, the current way isn't great but it's the most fair IMO. And it does bring up weird scenarios where if the 2 in the 8th had finished 5th instead of 4th, then a dq would be the right call since the interference did cause the 2 to lose purse money for the owners.
Onesome is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 02:17 AM   #27
Suff
Beat up 💪
 
Suff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Beach life in Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 11,557
I would've left up the 10 because it was 2 YO fillies routing , all but 1 for the 1st time. Sewards should allow for some wandering in deep stretch.

I would've taken down the 5 because he crossed 2 or 3 paths. And it was a body slam. Also he's a lightly raced 4 year old. Not my problem a 4YO is still green in the stretch. or needs blinkers next time.


I got shut out in the 6th. The FS2 feed is delayed and I got caught watching them load on TV while the gate had already popped irl.


I bet the 8, Giocare in the 8th race.

So I was not involved.
__________________
Here for entertainment.
Suff is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 10:07 AM   #28
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 21,530
There's the 'cost a placing' justification for ruling, itself.
Sometimes this is the main emphasis of a ruling. Sometimes it is either incompetently applied or deemphasized.

Within the 'cost-a-placing' idea - I think it's crazy to suggest that if a horse proves best and wins, but happens to make the 2nd best horse finish 4th, or the the possibly 3rd best horse finish fourth (etc...), that the best horse should then be DQ'd due to 'cost a placing' concerns.

That is mind boggling to me. Betting has an emphasis on picking winners.

When you take down a horse that has proven best, you hurt bettors.



I'd like to see some more creative ideas.

If a jock like Cancel in the 6th causes the 2nd and 3rd best horses to possibly flip-flop positions? - Fine Cancel up to $10,000 (or a figure better calculated than 2seconds of RF's morning thoughtless rant) - use that Fine to then Pay both the 2nd and 3rd fuzzy best horses for PLACE (2ND money).
If it's a stakes race, and $10k or $30k or whatever they feel is a good hard fine to hit these jocks with when they recklessly endanger other horses/riders/bettors? - then compromise with the best distribution while using that $10k. I'd guess it should cover most purse distributions pretty well.

It's great to have nice reliable Stewards who have served the company, and check all the boxes, and have connections and history with the track, but if you keep the same people, they need to learn some fundamental common accepted practices to consistently enforce, and be able to pass testing on these, or undergo training until they pass.

Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe the owners aren't getting enough excitement in racing horses, and prefer or insist on the randomness that we get once race goes to the stewards? If that is the case, - disregard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReplayRandall View Post
chimed in
are you back in town RR?
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.

Last edited by Robert Fischer; 08-26-2021 at 10:12 AM.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 10:19 AM   #29
TonyK@HSH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 468
The problem is magnified as different states/tracks use different criteria when evaluating fouls. For example stewards at Penn National will tell you that a foul is a foul. They do not consider if a horse was cost a placing. While other venues key on whether or not a horse lost a placing.

This lack of consistency can be very frustrating to those of us who wager.

TonyK
TonyK@HSH is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-26-2021, 11:28 AM   #30
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 17,802
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.
__________________
ďTruth is Treason in an Empire of LiesĒ

Last edited by classhandicapper; 08-26-2021 at 11:40 AM.
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
Vote NOW!
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2021 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.