The horse is just o.k. Pretty much the same mediocre stuff that won the 6th, and 8th on Friday Night. Seems like whoever lays just 2-4 lengths off the pace has got some kinda force field helping them. Just rate some stopping speed n' all the sudden they got a shot right now. Tyler figured this out. He works a lot of horses in the a.m. Knows the track bias(if there is one.) I mean he is really the definition of a parasite. I can see my own blood on that bitch's mouth( and I didn't even bet today.)

Classy post. Honor to be part of this forum!

Even classier. One more and you get Hollywood park steak knives!

Yo, Vic

How come the CALI tracks don't show the full headon replays?

been asking that question for over a decade.....trying to save pennies on the video tape I would guess.

Time constraints. I don't agree. I think we should take the time. I'm only one vote.

they could still put up the full head on's on calreplays, no time issues there.

I'd like to think you are making an attempt at humor.

Classy? You're the mouthpiece for a circuit that does very little to actually punish trainers in any meaningful way. Exactly how many times has Cerin had a major infraction in the last 10 years? Gotta be atleast 6. There is no class involved with this circuit. Look at the 4th race Friday Night. Look at the stretch run of that race. Do you think, if Julien Couton had been on the winner of that race, the stewards (and the 2nd place Jockey) would have ignored what took place? No, sir. If Gomez wasn't on the winner, then they would of atleast told the crowd that there was an inquiry. In the last 3 years, how many times has Gomez been taken down by the stewards on this circuit? Very few. There's a whole lot of overlooking what certain trainers and jocks do on this circuit. Some trainers have 4 -6 major infractions, and are still going about their business as if they never did anything wrong. Espinoza can hardly win an inquiry, and Gomez rarely loses one(now they aren't even calling inquiries when he comes over to keep a horse with more run from going by.) Your getting a paycheck regardless of what takes place. Your interest is best served by making it appear every jock, trainer, steward etc. is doing the right thing. They aren't. They aren't classy. They break the rules repeatedly. They overlook infractions based on who the trainer/ jock in question is. So, you can keep acting like it's a "classy" circuit, but the majority on here aren't stupid enough to believe you. Sure, they will attack me, and prop you up, because you are on T.V. sometimes. They like talking to people they think are insiders etc., but they aren't stupid enough to think the circuit is "classy." There is a huge conflict of interest in having people on forums that are getting a paycheck from the industry involved. Your financial interests are best served by quieting any criticism of the sport. There is a lot of that conflict of interest involved with a horseracing forum.

Total hogwash.

Well, if I was you, I would go rhetorical as well. That being said, the fact is you have a conflict of interest (when writing about the industry that pays your paycheck.) That's simply a fact. It's a fact with more than a few on here. Now lets return to the whether it's a classy circuit. There are some issues there I wrote about. So, go ahead and tell us why certain trainers with 6 violations are still training. Why Garrett Gomez rarely loses an inquiry on this circuit. Why the stretch run in the 4th race Friday Night didn't even have an inquiry involved etc. Don't you realize people can see which horse has more run? They know why a horse with more run doesn't go by. It almost always has to do with a horse shifting out to do exactly what that Sadler horse did in the 4th race Friday Night. I don't care financially about the outcome of that race. I just know the horse with more run was kept from going by, and it was ignored for various poor reasons(the main one being a very popular jockey on the winner.) Then, when one of the commentators on TVG stated that it(not having an inquiry) showed inconsistency, he was attacked by a fellow commentator who was working at Los AL. It's like a little cult that punishes those who don't back the authority involved. He(the guy at Los Al) also used no facts. He attacked rhetorically(basically like a cult member telling another cult member to quickly move on.)

Ok. Since you were a little more civil I'll respond a bit. I can't answer about Garrett Gomez because I don't know the statistics. Also he has ridden here in So Cal only about half the year recently. I do feel supremely confident that the stewards DO NOT favor particular riders over others. I have the utmost resepect for their professionalism and believe strongly that they enforce the rules fairly and dispassionately.

Why a certain trainer has 6 violations and still trains is a matter to take up with the CHRB. I feel confident that the rules and procedure for sanctions are being followed.

As for a conflict of interest because I work in the horse racing industry. I love horse racing and will support it always. I WILL NOT however compromise my opinions or right to free speech regardless of who signs my paycheck. There have been numerous times both on these forums and when appearing on TVG when I've been critcal of racetracks and horsemen if I felt it was appropriate.

Thanks for taking time to share your opinions.

VJS

Just because the inquiry sign is not lit does not mean that the stewards are not scrutinizing the race and the rides.

They need to let everyone know, and let people see it going on. The reason they didn't call it is they didn't want people to see multiple replays of it. They showed it very little on TVG , and probably even less at the track. The horse with more run didn't have a fair shot to go by the winner. There was contact ,and intimidation(threat of further contact.) That is exactly why they don't call an inquiry(they don't really want people to see that horse coming over that way in a close race.) Gomez rarely loses an inquiry on this circuit. You would see that if you looked into it. He is constantly favored by the stewards on this circuit. To deny that would destroy any real credibility you have on here. They go against certain jocks, but mainly they protect this one jockey(a lot.)

Assuming I have any credibility on this site and in the business. I can assure you disagreeing with you will not have an impact.

I do not believe the stewards favor Gomez or any other jockey. BTW it would have to be a statewide conspiracy. There are 4 So. Cal. venues. The three biggies and Fairplex. The total number of different stewards that could normally preside over those meets could be as many as 7 or 8. Not likely they all got together and decided to help Garrett. And why the heck would they do that anyway? What would they have to gain?

He is the most popular jockey out here, and they certainly would like him to ride out here as much as possible. A couple weeks ago he lost a controversial inquiry at Belmont(on a Baffert horse.) That would easily of gone his way out here. It's a comfort factor (he has to feel more comfortable riding where he rarely loses an inquiry.) The fact you haven't noticed the great percentage of inquiries he wins here shows me you have blinders on. You don't want to see it. Watch the pan of Friday's 4th race. You knew the 2nd place horse started extending stride nicely(and was probably gunna go by,) and that's why you said "Now it's gunna be real close." Then, the horse seems to hesitate or slightly slow up. His stride is not quite as big and he doesn't quite cover the ground he looked like he was going to be able to cover. Why is that? That is because he is responding to being bumped ,and he has to move to his right a bit. That big stride he had an instant before now changes, and he doesn't cover the ground you thought he would have. You then said that the winner wouldn't let him by. That wasn't true. The horse had to slightly change what he was doing, and couldn't use his same stride. If the leading horse hadn't come over, then the outside horse would of gone right by late in that race. This so called "incidental contact" was enough to slow up the outside horse just enough to keep him from being able to go by. To not even have a public sign of an inquiry was out of line, and absurd. Sadler was expecting one. Everyone on TVG WAS EXPECTING ONE...........NOTHING!!..It was pathetic.

You said "NOWWW IT'S GUNNA BE REAL CLOSE." Look at what happens(ON THE PAN) just after you say NOWW. He has to hesitate slightly. After that he has lost that momentum that was gunna be just enough to get by. That's where the winner of the race was determined. In between the word "NOWW," and the phrase "It's gunna be real close." Something the winner did caused the horse in 2nd place to have to change what he was doing. What he was doing was gunna be good enough to go by.

When you say "It's," that horse on the outside comes towards the viewer watching the pan. His energy was all forward before that, but then he comes sideways towards the viewer. That's in response to the leading horse. Going sideways is not an efficient way to go forward. He went sideways because of what the leader did(came out on him.) The horse who ran 2nd was best. I know that. You know that. Whether you admit it is doubtful.

You say very odd things. What the heck is there for me to admit? Either I agree with you or I don't.

I think I'd rather debate this with Scud.

Dalakhani

Just more nebulous nonsense from the Fatman. BBB