no, try not watching the head-on, its misleading. they never touch.

Wouldn't the head-on be a better angle?

Even Chris McCarron today said it was a great acting job by Kent in the race. Now, I know he is old as hell, but surely most of you have better eyes then him. Watch the pan view FIRST, and realize HOW FAR IN FRONT the 10 was on the 4, AND THEN watch the head on, and don't watch the 10 on the head on, watch the acting job from Kent on the 4, great jerking the head.

I again say, it is was so obvious, like most here are saying, where was the STEWARDS INQUIRY?

the head-on is a better angle to witness the drifting, but what you're perceiving as contact is misleading because the 4 was behind the 10 when he veered out. you see the 10 veer out and the 4 reacts simultaneously so from the headon it appears as a bump.
watching the pan replay there is never a moment when there isn't clear daylight between the horses. the chart comments don't mention anything about bumping either.

And I again say, Kent made the objection four seconds after they hit the wire.

Ok - even if he didn't bump him - I think the right call was still made. He veered out pretty badly.

i don't disagree with that.

Yes, I use Xpressbet and Youbet - usually I place the bets as they start to go into the gates. When I said "always 1 horse away", I was referring to my poor exact and trifecta choices this day :rolleyes:

please no more i had apick four for 6700 lost on this dis qual why no stewarts inquiry but after watching race iknew he would come down:confused: