Horse Racing: BELMONT dates move to AQUEDUCT; SARATOGA opens July 11

[Hunter Gathers]

I would counter that it's stupid to let a horse that blatantly broke the rules win, regardless of who was second.

It's a damn miracle that multiple horses arent being euthanized right now. I still dont know how War of Will and Max Sec didnt tangle legs and fall

The horse itself is an animal. An animal that clearly just changed course. What are you actually penalizing, here, by disqualifying him? Do you think the jockey is going to take him behind the shed and discipline him? It's a horse. It got scared. The jockey immediately changed course. I don't see how punishing a horse getting spooked is really a proper thing, frankly. That would seem to me to be part of horse racing in general.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

It doesnt matter who objected. CH was the second best horse. The winner got DQd. Who else are you going to declare the winner?

CH finishes fourth if the event doesn't happen, IMO.

 

[bluesfan94]

It doesnt matter who objected. CH was the second best horse. The winner got DQd. Who else are you going to declare the winner?

But Country House wasn't. That's my point. The only reason CH ended up in that spot was because the horses that were running better were impeded by Max Sec

 

[PredsV82]

You wonder too if Maximum Security sort of backing into the favored slot and winning played a role in decision. I’m not sold if this was a massive favorite who was a triple crown threat if they make the same call

No. This was a very huge gutsy call by the stewards. The easy call is to let it stand.

 

[bluesfan94]

The horse itself is an animal. An animal that clearly just changed course. What are you actually penalizing, here, by disqualifying him? Do you think the jockey is going to take him behind the shed and discipline him? It's a horse. It got scared. The jockey immediately changed course. I don't see how punishing a horse getting spooked is really a proper thing, frankly. That would seem to me to be part of horse racing in general.

Yeah, Saez immediately brought Max Sec back into the lane. If it were cars, it would be one thing.

 

[PredsV82]

But Country House wasn't. That's my point. The only reason CH ended up in that spot was because the horses that were running better were impeded by Max Sec

No.... that's just false. War of Will faded badly and had no shot even if unimpeded.

 

[bluesfan94]

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Preds noted it but somehow both Long Range Toddy and War of Will avoided serious injuries in all of that. Toddy nearly got tangled up with Maximum Security which would have been disastrous and War of Will had to be pulled up very hard on a sloppy track. Thankfully all the horses are fine, which is the most important thing.

 

[bluesfan94]

No.... that's just false. War of Will faded badly and had no shot even if unimpeded.

Perhaps. Perhaps losing momentum and rhythm cost War of Will a step. But let's just grant War of Will. Long Range Toddy was ahead too

 

[PredsV82]

CH finishes fourth if the event doesn't happen, IMO.

Who do you think finishes 2nd and 3rd? If you say War of Will you're just wrong

 

[GKJ]

They did, but there was no objection. The jockey may have said he was impeded on the call, but the only official objection came from Country House.

I really dislike the fact that someone who literally benefited from an incident knocking back a competitor could actually then benefit even more by objecting to the conduct that knocked a competitor back. I find that absurdly unfair, frankly. There's a good possibility that Country House doesn't finish second or even third if not for the events. Yet he whines himself into a win.

The 1 wasn’t going to win to finish in the money, they typically don’t put in an objection, but the stewards can still claim an inquiry. Who knows if that would’ve happened.

Worth noting just how difficult it is to get a DQ. I don’t have numbers to back that up but it’s not very often it happens just on a daily basis, so for better or worse I’d say they felt this foul was pretty egregious, especially if he was DQ’ed to last.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Not convinced War of Will was tiring. He was there turning for home. We don't know if he digs in.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Who do you think finishes 2nd and 3rd? If you say War of Will you're just wrong

Fine, at the best, he finishes third. He still doesn't win. The horse that won this race, officially, benefited from the impeding event. That's bullshit no matter how you cut it. Especially when the other horses didn't object.

 

[Messrules11]

Horses are fine jockeys are fine, sloppy track , that’s racing. Max Sec should have retained the win. Garbage call.

 

[PredsV82]

The horse itself is an animal. An animal that clearly just changed course. What are you actually penalizing, here, by disqualifying him? Do you think the jockey is going to take him behind the shed and discipline him? It's a horse. It got scared. The jockey immediately changed course. I don't see how punishing a horse getting spooked is really a proper thing, frankly. That would seem to me to be part of horse racing in general.

It is exactly part of horse racing in general. And when it happens, regardless of whether it was malicious or not, the horse gets taken down. I've seen it happen many times

 

[bluesfan94]

Not convinced War of Will was tiring. He was there turning for home. We don't know if he digs in.

Yeah and if War of Will wasn't going to win regardless, then the impeding doesn't matter and @PredsV82 shouldn't be arguing for it. You either have to say that War of Will/Long Range Toddy were effected and thus would have finished better, or else you have to say the impediment was ineffectual.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

It is exactly part of horse racing in general. And when it happens, regardless of whether it was malicious or not, the horse gets taken down. I've seen it happen many times

I never said it wasn't part of horse racing. I said what I said since the rule itself is fairly senseless and doesn't actually punish bad behavior. If you're going to have a rule in place, it should punish bad behavior by a jockey. Not a random event where a horse got scared but the jockey did the proper thing and tried to control the situation.

It's not like this stuff isn't already incredibly objective in the first place.

 

[PredsV82]

Yeah, Saez immediately brought Max Sec back into the lane. If it were cars, it would be one thing.

If you're going to say "dont blame the horse" then you have to try to figure out whether the jockey was malicious or negligent. And it's almost impossible to determine that because the jockey can always say "it want me it was the horse".

 

[Dodospice]

Perhaps. Perhaps losing momentum and rhythm cost War of Will a step. But let's just grant War of Will. Long Range Toddy was ahead too

You can’t play that game though because there’s no way to prove that War of Will, Long Range Toddy or anyone else would have beat Maximum Security across the finish line.

Once it was determined that Maximum Security broke the rules, Country House gets the win. There’s no one else you give it too, even though he wasn’t impacted by the infraction.

I don’t like that he can object an incident that he wasn’t involved in but you can, so this is where we’re at.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Yeah and if War of Will wasn't going to win regardless, then the impeding doesn't matter and @PredsV82 shouldn't be arguing for it. You either have to say that War of Will/Long Range Toddy were effected and thus would have finished better, or else you have to say the impediment was ineffectual.

And that's exactly where I am. I feel bad for both of those horse's connections because they basically get screwed either way. They get taken out of the race and they don't benefit from the DQ.

Flavien Prat saying he got turned "sideways" on Country House as a result of Maximum Security moving out got a laugh from me and really rubs me the wrong way. At least admit that two horses who were right there with you were the ones who were impacted.

 

[bluesfan94]

You can’t play that game though because there’s no way to prove that War of Will, Long Range Toddy or anyone else would have beat Maximum Security across the finish line.

Once it was determined that Maximum Security broke the rules, Country House gets the win. There’s no one else you give it too, even though he wasn’t impacted by the infraction.

I don’t like that he can object an incident that he wasn’t involved in but you can, so this is where we’re at.

Which is silly. Country House was never going to beat Max Sec and we know that because Country House wasn't impeded and still couldn't beat Max Sec. So there's no way CH should win.

And that's not entirely true. The other time an objection has been won in a Derby, a horse got moved up to fourth because the stewards determined that's where he would have finished.

It just feels wrong to have a Derby winner we know couldn't have won the Derby but for an objection to an incident that horse wasn't a participant in

 

[PredsV82]

But Country House wasn't. That's my point. The only reason CH ended up in that spot was because the horses that were running better were impeded by Max Sec

Who? Neither War of Will or Toddy had anything in the stretch.... and even if they did, you cant assume anything and push CH down when CH did no harm

 

[GKJ]

If you don’t think it cost you a placing you’re not supposed to object. Sure you could object all the time, but that also wouldn’t be good business. Trainers and owners aren’t going to want to work with you. And stewards will think you’re full of shit.

Can’t prove anything definitive in placing but that’s what stewards are there for. They’re also not supposed to DQ unless it cost placings, unless something happened that was very dangerous.

With the number of horses that are in this race though, it’s surprising it doesn’t happen more often.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

I never said it wasn't part of horse racing. I said what I said since the rule itself is fairly senseless and doesn't actually punish bad behavior. If you're going to have a rule in place, it should punish bad behavior by a jockey. Not a random event where a horse got scared but the jockey did the proper thing and tried to control the situation.

It's not like this stuff isn't already incredibly objective in the first place.

The problem is it sets a dangerous precedent. Perhaps one of the more famous controversies was the 1980 Preakness where Codex moved out and purposefully angled into the filly Genuine Risk. He should have been DQ'd and wasn't which was a sham and robbed Genuine Risk of completing a Triple Crown bid.

Apples and oranges compared to what happened today involving Maximum Security but either decision the Stewards made was going to have its detractors. I think they took the time to consider all the information they had and made the right call in the end though. Moving out 2-3 paths like Max Sec is pretty egregious and blatant and jockeys need to control their horses in that situation. Especially in a field as packed as the Derby's is when there is always a little jostling turning for home.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Who? Neither War of Will or Toddy had anything in the stretch.... and even if they did, you cant assume anything and push CH down when CH did no harm

Again, one was pulled up hard. Horses don't run like they can after being pulled up hard.

Toddy and MaxSec almost tangled legs.

Saying neither had anything in the stretch is shortsighted considering they were severely impacted and had their opportunities to dig in taken away.