The Opener at Mountaineer on 6/1/22

[judehaz]

Experts here, I need your help!

Please watch the head-on down the stretch of R1 at Mountaineer on 6/1/22, and explain to me how the stayed up. I have watched thousands of races and cannot understand how a horse (the ) that loses by a diminishing half length or head isn't declared the winner after clearly being forced way wide by the winner in mid-lane. It seemed like a no-brainer to me. Maybe I'm not as smart as I think. I'd love to understand how I'm wrong to re-instill my confidence in the track and learn the game better.

It just seemed so obvious to me, both live and on the replay. Also, FYI, I had no money on the race. Was waiting out the rain to see the effect on the turf course.

[jay68802]

Hate to say this, but you are correct, IMO. Should have been DQ'ed.

[NorCalGreg]

LOL...even the track announcer was hesitant to call the 6 the winner.
He said the 6 "crossed the line 1st", like he figured that one might be coming down.

[the little guy]

I can see why the winner didn't come down, and part of it may be because it's not a true head-on, but it's fair to say he should have.

It's still not as bad as the non-DQ in the 2nd at Belmont on 5/8....but that doesn't mean it wasn't a blown call.

[Bombay Duck]

Brutal no-call. Cannot remember another that I would consider as big a miss as this one.

The stewards lit the inquiry sign before the field was more than 100 yards past the wire, then took all of about two minutes before deciding that there would be no change. Mark Patterson mentioned on his broadcast that Eddie Jurado, the rider of the runner-up, did not claim foul and was observed animatedly explaining this to trainer Don Blankenship after dismounting.

I didn’t play the race and rarely, if ever, criticize the stewards. They have a tough job and usually get it right. But it’s hard to say that they did on this one. Check out the pan and the head-on and see what happens inside the 1/16 pole. Maybe the head-on angle is deceptive, but, man, it’s hard not to see this one as a bad decision. I would be very curious to hear the judges’ reasoning behind it.

[mountainman]

Will weigh in later. Made my opinion pretty clear on air.

[teach21]

what i'm interested in, is how much weight that the jock NOT lodging an objection HAS, and how much SHOULD it have...

if 'the little guy' could weigh in on this part, that would be cool. love his stuff on the fox show, plus an opinion from someone from a major circuit, and not associated with the mount would help.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by teach21

what i'm interested in, is how much weight that the jock NOT lodging an objection HAS, and how much SHOULD it have...

if 'the little guy' could weigh in on this part, that would be cool. love his stuff on the fox show, plus an opinion from someone from a major circuit, and not associated with the mount would help.

I don't honestly have an opinion on what influence, if any, a rider has. In my opinion, the Stewards should never speak to them, as they should be able to adjudicate it properly themselves. It seems pretty clear that was a foul and there is a real chance it cost the runner up the race. That should be enough.

I have no idea why some Stewards seem to make some of the choices they do. Anyone that has been around this game a long time has pretty much seen it all as far as their decisions go.

[mountainman]

I did not like the no-call, and was clear enough about that on the show. Also, I DO think had Jurado lodged foul, the number would have come down. Stewards are human, and lacking protest from the aggrieved rider, rarely have the inclination to DQ without that traditional support.

But isn't that what the inquiry button is for? To override the sort of personal and business alliances that can make jocks reluctant to claim foul?

As stated on the show, Jurado and Blankenship had a very animated conversation in the tunnel after the race. I am very friendly with Don, and later learned from him that his rider felt that the place horse was already drifting when the winner came out to make contact. This is true, but all things considered ( the narrow margin..the point of infraction..how.far the winner came out..etc), I think the numbers still should have been reversed.

Was it an unquestionably horrible decision? No, not in my opinion. But , again, had it been my call, the winner would have come down.

And that is not a knock on our stewards whom I work under and respect, just my take on the incident.

[cj]

Have to disagree mountainman, that is an egregiously bad call IMO.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by cj

Have to disagree mountainman, that is an egregiously bad call IMO.

No point in word semantics when agree it was a bad call. How bad is bad? Very bad according to about a dozen of the irate texts i started recieving the instant the race went official.

Some characterized it as the worst steward's decidion they had ever witnessed. I won't go that far.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by mountainman

No point in word semantics when agree it was a bad call. How bad is bad? Very bad according to about a dozen of the irate texts i started recieving the instant the race went official.

Some characterized it as the worst steward's decidion they had ever witnessed. I won't go that far.

Please excuse bad spellings and typos. Can't find readers..should not post with phone..

[mountainman]

Now...Jurado's failure to claim foul just might BE the worst decision ever...LOL..

[Bombay Duck]

Originally Posted by mountainman

I did not like the no-call, and was clear enough about that on the show. Also, I DO think had Jurado lodged foul, the number would have come down. Stewards are human, and lacking protest from the aggrieved rider, rarely have the inclination to DQ without that traditional support.

But isn't that what the inquiry button is for? To override the sort of personal and business alliances that can make jocks reluctant to claim foul?

As stated on the show, Jurado and Blankenship had a very animated conversation in the tunnel after the race. I am very friendly with Don, and later learned from him that his rider felt that the place horse was already drifting when the winner came out to make contact. This is true, but all things considered ( the narrow margin..the point of infraction..how.far the winner came out..etc), I think the numbers still should have been reversed.

Was it an unquestionably horrible decision? No, not in my opinion. But , again, had it been my call, the winner would have come down.

And that is not a knock on our stewards whom I work under and respect, just my take on the incident.

This is great information and a reasoned analysis. Thanks for both, Mark.

[cj]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Now...Jurado's failure to claim foul just might BE the worst decision ever...LOL..

Yeah, that makes no sense. And I agree, it isn't the worst I've ever seen.