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 01-09-2018, 08:41 AM   #31
theiman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 355
There was a horse about 5-6 years ago, at Hollywood Park, DQ'd after the race was official because he wasnt eligible for the condition.
I believe it was a Paul Aguirre trained horse who had a race at Turf Paradise in the Maiden OC $30K condition. I dont remember all of the details but I think he was entered in the straight maiden portion at Turf Paradise and it turns out the DRF lines and/or the horses papers showed he was entered for the claiming $30K portion. This made him eligible for a starter allowance in So Cal, which he won. Stewards got a tip after the race was run and official, that he was never in the claiming portion of the race at Turf P. I guess the stewards investigated and DQ'd him from the purse.
theiman is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 09:07 AM   #32
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by HuggingTheRail View Post
Heads or Tails, they use a quarter...
You sure it's not a Loonie?
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 09:14 AM   #33
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by onefast99 View Post
The horse that won should be disqualified and the purse monies re-distributed. I don't see any difference if a horse tested positive for an illegal substance or this. Both carry the same weight. is he fighting the claim as well?
This is different because the track knew beforehand that he didn't meet the conditions but allowed him to run. That's why I don't hold the trainer responsible. While the horse must still come down, in my opinion, and the second place horse be declared the winner and paid the purse, I'd let the owner of the DQd horse also keep the winnings since they used up a race on this horse. I see this as entirely the track's fault.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 10:07 AM   #34
onefast99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 5,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fager Fan View Post
This is different because the track knew beforehand that he didn't meet the conditions but allowed him to run. That's why I don't hold the trainer responsible. While the horse must still come down, in my opinion, and the second place horse be declared the winner and paid the purse, I'd let the owner of the DQd horse also keep the winnings since they used up a race on this horse. I see this as entirely the track's fault.
In a perfect world this would be the outcome, but since we have so many chiefs and very few Indians those who are in charge seem to "wait" long periods of time to decide these matters. That in itself makes all of those involved in this game very suspicious.
__________________
Remember the NJ horseman got you here now do the right thing with the purses!
onefast99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 10:26 AM   #35
Dave Schwartz
 
Dave Schwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
The conditions of the race were clear, and two trainers in the race were allowed to race despite clearly not meeting the printed conditions. It was the very first race with the new conditions. Obviously not much thought went into this.
That seemed to be left out of the original post.

So, who can blame the guy for suing?
Dave Schwartz is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 10:53 AM   #36
jeebus1083
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 875
Most of the horses in Charles Treece's care are Quarter Horses. If the race in question is a Thoroughbred race, and Treece doesn't have more than 20 head in his barn of Thoroughbreds, then in my opinion, Treece did not violate "the spirit of the rules" here. When was the last time Santa Anita ran a Quarter Horse race?

Of course, you can argue that the wording of the condition was poor (it never specified any particular breed). However, if Treece was a Standardbred conditioner with over 20 head, and suddenly entered a Thoroughbred, could this trainer have had grounds for a protest, especially since Standardbreds don't compete against Thoroughbreds?
jeebus1083 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-09-2018, 10:58 AM   #37
elhelmete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeebus1083 View Post
Most of the horses in Charles Treece's care are Quarter Horses. If the race in question is a Thoroughbred race, and Treece doesn't have more than 20 head in his barn of Thoroughbreds, then in my opinion, Treece did not violate "the spirit of the rules" here. When was the last time Santa Anita ran a Quarter Horse race?

Of course, you can argue that the wording of the condition was poor (it never specified any particular breed). However, if Treece was a Standardbred conditioner with over 20 head, and suddenly entered a Thoroughbred, could this trainer have had grounds for a protest, especially since Standardbreds don't compete against Thoroughbreds?
Treece has over 20 TBs in his barns, pretty well known.
elhelmete is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-12-2018, 08:41 AM   #38
upthecreek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,956
More on the Controversy

http://www.latimes.com/sports/more/l...a051b-82323621
upthecreek is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-17-2018, 01:53 AM   #39
ultracapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by theiman View Post
There was a horse about 5-6 years ago, at Hollywood Park, DQ'd after the race was official because he wasnt eligible for the condition.
I believe it was a Paul Aguirre trained horse who had a race at Turf Paradise in the Maiden OC $30K condition. I dont remember all of the details but I think he was entered in the straight maiden portion at Turf Paradise and it turns out the DRF lines and/or the horses papers showed he was entered for the claiming $30K portion. This made him eligible for a starter allowance in So Cal, which he won. Stewards got a tip after the race was run and official, that he was never in the claiming portion of the race at Turf P. I guess the stewards investigated and DQ'd him from the purse.
Yes. I remember this race very well, and we actually discussed it on the board a year or two ago. It was indeed Aguirre, and the scenario you laid out is exactly what happened...except, in the form, it showed that the horse had not run for the tag with the N right there designating that the horse had not been eligible to be claimed, therefore running, and winning, under MSW conditions for the race. This was when the StAlN2L was for horses that had broken maiden at $40,000 or less, rather than the way the condition is written now, for horses that have run for $40,000 or less. Aguirre lost the purse a couple months later.

Here's another instance, from just the past week or two, showing all the things a trainer will do to get his horse in a favorable situation, and the stewards needing to be alert and ready to act. Cerin entered a horse in a StAl eligible to horses that had run for $12,500 or less and had not won a race since. His horse had been entered at EMD (if I'm not mistaken) in a claiming race priced at $15,000 back to $12,500. However, it had been the first race this horse had been entered in for about a year, and was eligible for the claiming waiver allowance, so therefore the horse was not eligible to be claimed in that $15k back. Cerin entered in the StAl, stating the race at EMD was open to horses for a tag of $12,500, and since this horse was ineligible to be claimed, wanted his horse to be considered entered in that race for $12,500, therefore making him eligible for the StAl race. The stewards must have just said to themselves, we're taking the easy road here and just scratching him as there is no real way to determine whether the horse was a $15k claimer or a $12,500 claimer in that EMD race since the horse had run under the waiver allowance.

The "20 head or less" condition is stupid. It's just a lame condition. They're trying to help the smaller outfits, and Treece qualifies in that way. But to help those outfits, they'll need to write it differently. It's a noble effort, if they can get it right.

I don't mind a "home-bred" MSW condition near as much, if the condition ever took hold. However, in Cali, the state-bred races are stuffed with home-breds as it is. Even Cali breds that sell at auction, for the most part, aren't really going anywhere but to the local circuit, but a home-bred, state-bred condition could potentially encourage breeding and running in the state. Just a home-bred condition would still get filled with Pegrams and Zayats and those Ky types when they're trying to accommodate the Ziebarths, Warrens, Tommytowns and Reddams.
ultracapper 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
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- 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.