I'm eagerly awaiting Byk's opinion on this, I got it at 1/2 that his head almost exploded as this was unfolding.

I think those were the ones, thanks!

No worries.

Bewildered Tom.. and then just disappointed how these embarrassments never end for the sport. Tina and I went downstairs for the race, so at ground level and without benefit of TV/audio, didn't know exactly what was going on until later. Here the vets were busy all morning looking for Saturday horses to scratch, but somehow are oblivious to a distressed horse on track that's one of the choices in one of the biggest races of the year. Great.

As I mentioned in a quick recap of yesterday in Selections, bad bookends to the day with some very nice things in between. But no matter how good the best portion of Day 1 was, the humiliating parts of the day will be get the focus (depending on what transpires today of course).

Steve:
Are you going to be at the track early today?
I would love to get some more insight into what they are doing to it today.
The rolling of the track you described yesterday sure didn't help the closers.

I have been going to the track for 30 years and I have never seen something like Life At Ten happen like that.
We have all had horses run poorly but she didn't run 2 feet.

Thank god I was watching the ESPN telecast and cancelled my bet on her.
She was my lock of the day and would have beaten the Mott filly if healthy.

I know fillies are very prone to tying up but that was too weird to believe. It was like someone TQ'd her before bringing her to the paddock.


Thanks for all the insight this week on the show.....it really helped me get a handle on the early part of yesterday's card.

It reminded me of Big Brown in the Belmont, except BB actually ran for a bit. LAT clearly was out of sorts.

Todd often watches big races from the horseman's office or similar areas. It's not strange. I do however get the impression that he knew LAT was not right but handed her off to JV, somehow washing his hands of her, placing the responsibility for her in John's hands. Yes, JV maybe should have pressed the issue more but he works for Todd and Todd works for the owner and if the two "higher powers" saw fit to send her out, what's he to do?

Vets on track can only do so much. They are looking for lameness, not uncharacteristic demeanor. I'm guessing that none of the vets there had ever seen LAT up close and thus wouldn't know her "typical" behavior.

I liked LAT because she stalked in the Beldame and thought she might get the same trip here, in fact I hoped to see her about where UB was. Inside was not great but I figured some of the speed would separate from the group (as it did) and LAT could ease out a bit.

G2W,

Thanks very much! Always glad to hear that the broadcasts contribute positively. Credit goes to Mig who pointed out that Butch Lehr was clearly tightening the track up.

Not rushing over there this morning actually. First relaxed a.m. in 2 weeks to be honest (though I've been up since 3:30 to get the Selections written.) Tina and I are going to breakfast and then packing up as we want to get to Columbus or so tonight after the races.

In terms of the surface, I'm confident the track will be no less fast than it was yesterday.

What you saw with Life at Ten was very frustrating and disconcerting. Even though the jockey dust-up will get all the publicity, the non SCR reflects much more poorly on the game. The danger to the horse and rider and the rest of the field is of course one part of the problem, but the indignity to horseplayers is inexcusable. We'll see what directions the fallout takes.

Good luck today!

got that right....with her out the next obvious horse is the winner...it was a definite bad deal for bettors. i'm glad they care so much about the horse and the betting public...of course i used her ...how could you possibly bet the 3 yo at those odds....blind luck....9-5...lol....lol. we done got screwed by the vets and stewards seeing that unrivalled belle never came within 2 lengths of life at ten (all year)...thanks churchill downs...everyone out there knew there was a problem except the officials. thats just dandy on the biggest day.....lol

I dont think it does, I think people who play the game are kinda used to this funny business with scratches/non scratches. I would have been MORE shocked had they scratched her.

I also dont think the fight means much to be people who play the game.

^^

I think Life At Ten should win the Eclipse for 3yo champion filly. I think beating older fillies and mares all year should trump what Blind Luck has done.

Kind of like the many of horses running at cheap tracks. Alot of those horses should be scratched and not allowed to run...but they are left to continually burn people's betting money on a daily basis.

I was pretty sure I posted this - Paulick on Life at Ten. If it disappears, I'll know for some reason it's not supposed to appear here. :confused:

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/br...-ten-incident/

Do a search on "Ray Paulick and Life At Ten" and all his blogs will come up.:)

Here she is in the post parade. I didn't know anything was going on with her, but someone next to me said she looked like she was tranquilized. That is one lifeless filly.

According to the latest Paulick report, the possible " solution " to the LAT incident is to gag the jockey pre-race .

So, a problem in communication is " solved " by cutting off crucial communication .

So much for the responsibility to the welfare of horse and jockey and the wallets of those who wager .

So much for culpability and responsibilty .

Thus if the horse breaks down with your money on its back--everyone gets hurt, and the bureaucratic press machine will call it one those unfortunate things that happen in racing--part of the game .

Mind if we gag you pre-post?

Sorry, that was very much low-hanging fruit.

i think he was freaked out by the 'mug' on the outrider..yesh eat a lemon before the race?

Please agree with that decision .

It is a quality sentiment for horse and wallet .

Jerry Bailey was the first to notice that something wasn't right with LaT and he went straight to Johnny V. with the question. Is Mr. Paulick suggesting that jockeys not say anything to anyone or that they not say anything on live tv?

I find the latest decision by Veitch/KHRC to be much more disconcerting.

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/li...ake-no-action/

Paulick wasn't suggesting it in the article " hear no evil, see no evil " ,he reported that the KHRB was considering a rule to gag the jockey pre race .

This was also reported in today's NY Daily News. I actually don't disagree, but that certainly shouldn't be the only thing that comes out of this. Jerry Bailey asking Castellano and Borel about their fight while they are mentally preparing themselves for the race as well as properly warming up the horse is absurd. Bailey can make any observations he wants to, but once the jockeys are on the track, leave them be.

The fight should not have been discussed, but I do not agree that a jockey should not be allowed to discuss a problem with a horse .

If the jockey has a problem with his horse the only person he should be talking to is the vet.

What specifically are you against in regards to talking to the jocks before the race? I'm for more information available to people...not less. I have to think at least a few people heard what Velazquez said and changed or cancelled their bets.

They were the lucky ones. Ultimately it is up to us to decide what we view as valuable information. But, as we have seen, sometimes as bettors we can't rely on officials to protect us from this sort of thing happening again.

Maybe if he was as straightforward with the vet as he was with Geraldo Bailey the horse would have been scratched and EVERYONE would have gotten their money back. Did it sound like Johnny V thought the horse should run to you?

Of course not and I agree with you that he should have said something to the vet. A lot of people dropped the ball here.

But I don't see what the problem is with talking to Bailey and you didn't answer the question.

To be fair this only takes about 10 seconds

I would just like to think that my jock would be thinking about the task at hand. Do you see Albert Pujols giving interviews before his at bats? It is really not that important in the grand scheme of things, whether Bailey should or shouldn't be talking to jocks. What is important is that the solution to the problem at hand is not barring the jockeys from talking.

Owner: Life At Ten Should Have Been Scratched

In the latest salvo in the imbroglio over the Nov. 5 Breeders’ Cup Ladies’ Classic (gr. I), the owner of Life At Ten said the filly should have been scratched prior to the race at Churchill Downs.

“Life At Ten, without equivocation, should have been scratched from the race,” a statement released by owner Candy DeBartolo and her racing manager, David Vance, said.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...been-scratched

You are making a big deal out of something that happens what, 4-5 times a year?
Johnny should be commended for telling the truth and that a few people were able to save their money. I didn't see the interview and had her bet, I just view it as an unfortunate incident sometimes happens in racing.
I'm not sure if she was ever checked out by the vets at the gate or not, but has anything come back from her post race checkup?

I would prefer my jockeys not think too much. They seem to do much better when they react to the situation presented to them as the race unfolds. If they haven't figured out the plan or how they want to ride the race by the time they get on, well, you know...

20/20

John Veitch, chief steward for the state of Kentucky, said neither Velazquez nor trainer Todd Pletcher notified the state veterinarians about any concerns over Life At Ten prior to the race. He said the protocol is for the veterinarian to be notified and that he or she will in turn notify the stewards.

If this is indeed the truth, I think that it was very foolish on the connections part.
Maybe Chuck can answer this, but are there any visable symptons from the Salix that the Vet would have been able to see to justify scratching the horse from the race?

The salix thing is a longshot theory. A horse acting sluggish would be tough to scratch as the 2nd choice in a 3 million dollar race. Even had Velasquez notified the vets I dont know that they would have scrathced the horse unless it appeared lame. Why JV didnt at least say anything to the vets is the biggest mystery.

I see more passing of the buck than anyplace but Washington. Pletcher knew clearly that the horse wasn't right when she was in the paddock. He still chose to pass her along to Johnny. Johnny's works for TAP who works for the owner and thus is low on the employment food chain. He doesn't want to "out" TAP so instead he tells Jery Bailey that the mare is not right.
ESPN producer, hearing the conversation alerts the stewards but honestly, what "standing" has she to call for an inquiry? Now, by speaking to Jerry (and the millions of viewers) JV feels he has "alerted" the world of a problem, he too has passed the buck.

Now the owner jumps into the fray. She's miffed, wants her $60k starting fee back, but she jumps in at the level of the stewards. I would presume (and here I don't know for certain) that she was in the paddock before the Distaff and observing the mare and aware of Todd's concerns. Funny, she wasn't so worried about her $60k when she thought the mare might "warm up" out of her funk and win her share of $2 million! She feels the stewards committed malpractice (as do I) but places no blame on her trainer who was aware that LAT was not right. When it comes to meds, the trainer is the "ultimate insurer." What about unhealthy horses? Who is responsible for them?

Clearly the stewards dropped the buck once it was passed to them (by Amy Zimmerman of ESPN!) and they took no action. They clearly feel that getting caught in their inaction was a bigger problem than their inaction.

Pletcher said that she was training well all week. It wasn't like she was favoring a leg and turned up lame. Apparently she had an allergic reaction, or at least that's what the story is. But was there a chance it could have been the crowd and or the first time running under the lights? I think that could have been a possibility. Does that warrent a scratch in a 5 million dollar race?

Like Chuck said, hindsight is 20/20. The only issue is why wasn't the track vet alerted to check her out.

The mare who is usually under stout restraint from several handlers was standing in the paddock looking like an old wagon horse. I could see it from Albany NY and TAP was standing next to her.

She may have looked like a monster at 9am on Friday but by that evening she was clearly not right. (Anyone with children can attest to how fast "the bug" can hit.) I am nowhere near the horseman that Todd is but if my usually peppy and eager horse doesn't pop his head out the door as soon as I open it (see my avatar) or he stands totally still for tacking up, or carries his head low I know something is wrong.

Whether it was some sort of virus or a reaction to Lasix or anything else, TAP should have brought it to the attention of more than just JV.

Interesting too is that she was pulled from the sale. TAP was concerned about asking bidders to buy when her health was questionable. He wasn't as worried about the $1.7m the bettors spent on her or the owners $60k starting fee a day earlier.