NY Stews
 

They must have been away playing cards during the 4th race today in New York. How do they not review that race? I can understand the bug not lodging an objection, however in that case he shouldn't have to. Its the Stews job to at least go over that finish. Prado is clearly lefty into the 6's path, then hes righty back to the rail making it extremely tight. No trainer objection, no jock objection, no steward review, pathetic

Indian Rush never checked. I didn't see a foul but thought they'd at least look at it.

Watch the head on. He stopped riding her, that kid probably doesn't know how to check. That being said I think its a terrible injustice that doesn't at least get looked at by the stews. After Prado came out in the 6s path, he proceeds to make the rail tight. Not reviewing that is not doing their job

I've seen the head-on. Prado's horse did not maintain a straight path but also didn't impede Indian Rush. That's not ground for disqualification. If they had looked at it they certainly would have dismissed it within seconds.

To me the disqualification is secondary. Although I think you can certainly make a very good case for Prado to be DQ'd. Im more angry with the stews not putting up an inquiry. Throwing it back on a bug to lodge an objection on Prado.

I disagree he didn't impede

Veteran rider pulls a slight grandstand there and its a take down.

:tro:

I've watched the head on three times now. There should have been an inquiry, I agree with that. But the horse was never impeded IMO. Looked like race riding to me. Maybe if there was some grandstanding they would have looked at it, but to my eyes there was nothing worthy of a takedown.

But, as bettors do we really want horses taken down because of grandstanding? I know I don't.

I'd be all for euthanasia for said jocks.

What really angers me about that particular race is that Prado knows exactly what hes donig. Hes perfectly aware 6 is coming up the middle so he puts the 9 horse in his path. After taking that path, he switches sticks and comes back down a second time tightening up the rail. So essentially in a 16th of a mile he takes a horses clear run away twice. While I generally don't like to see horses taken down, I think at the very least an inquiry should have been lit. If these guys don't see a reason for that stretch to be looked at they clearly aren't doing their job. I think you can make a fair case for a DQ w/ no contact in this situation.

As a bettor I want these stewards to do their job. We put our money through the window the least we deserve is a fairly run race, and a review when called for

Grandstanding though I dislike it very much

LOL but hey, a win is a win is a win, if it takes some embellishment why not? Might not be right but if I knew I had three blind mice watching I'd be trying that stuff in a situation like that. The bug isn't on that level yet, and yes he got race rode. Live and Learn.

If the rider of the second horse had checked, whether fake or real, the horse would have blown second, and thus even with a DQ, the horse would have ended up in the same position.

I bet the second finisher.

How do you know they didn't look at it? They may well have,and decided it wasn't even worth an inquiry,or the time of day.These ain't SoCal stewards,who take you down for even thinking about changing lanes.

Your probably right, the real move was to get outside before Cornelio could put the lockdown on him. But I listen to the wonderful trips and traps, and I think this more applies to a bug rider focusing too much on saving ground ;).

PS. Grandstanding is cool and if it wins you a race, your the better rider. (sarcastic posters...bring it on).

Smoothie got the dart, so that won't be happening.

We do know that bug riders, and especially the one in this case, marry themselves to the rail, seemingly sometimes for better or worse. We also know why this is. In general, people who ride bug riders put a lot of credence in weight ( you can't fool me ), which means there is also a non-coincidental likelihood that they use the sheets, thus ground loss is also very important to them. Riding bug riders and demanding they stay inside goes hand in hand.

First they gave us the bounce....now they give us this.

So the inside isn't the fastest way around?

This is the kind of incident where competent stewards take action. I'm pretty confident that if this event took place @ WO, the 9 gets taken down. I'm aware of the arguments why the 9 is supposed to stay up: no contact; journeyman schooling an apprentice; etc.

But it's not exactly subtle that if the 9 doesn't take the 6's path TWICE, the 6 probably wins the race. I realize that the 9 was in the lead but the 9 should be required to keep some semblance of a straight path in the lane. Maybe taking the 6's path the 1st time wasn't intentional. Maybe this could've been overlooked. But coming in to take the 6's path AGAIN by Prado is clear intent on his part. And HE should be punished, not the 6 and those betting it. When stewards let things like this go; not really subtle things that cost horses wins; I tend to lose confidence in them. Not about their integrity but, rather, their ability to accurately access races.

As for Prado: he'll get his next time an 'accomplished' jock puts him in tight, causing him to wet his pants; an all too common occurrence the past few years.

You're absolutely right Fat Man. Even If the stews make no dq, which in this case I think there is reason, they are supposed to light up the inquiry sign. We as bettors put our money through the window, I expect these guys to show up to work

To the poster who asked me how I know they didn't look.... They made it official in about 45 seconds and I called to complain like I do when they blow one in florida.

Bid, is it safe to assume you bet the 6 here? If so, would you still feel the same way if you bet the 9? Be honest....

I bet the 6, yes, but I was over and under exactas for the same amount of money.

My main issue is the stewards not even flashing a light. They completely missed, or failed to think it mattered that the 9 took the 6's path twice inside the final 16th. We should expect, and hold our racing officials to an extremely high standard as players. We are vested each race, why should these guys be taking races off?

If the 9 would have been my bet I would have expected the same...Inquiry, and a possible DQ. The only thing I would have been thinking is....well its Prado against a bug, so I have a chance to stay up.

My point is not everyone thinks the 6 was impeded. I agree, they should have looked at it. But as a bettor I don't want these kind of horses DQ'd. I understand they should have looked at it. Again, I agree.

But no way the horse should have been DQ'd in my opinion. As a bettor I'm for less takedowns, especially in this instance where there is no contact and the jock on the horse that was supposedly fouled never checked. There are reasons for a DQ, but not this.

This was exactly my point as well. If a player thinks they were treated unfairly because there was no DQ then that's understandable. However, this would have been a TERRIBLE disqualification if there had been one.

This would've been a terrible DQ given the way the game is stewarded presently in the States. It's about what the player is conditioned to accepting. This is why this S h i t is allowed to go on.

In terms of the race itself, however, this would've been a justified DQ. Racing is not about a horse being allowed to take the path of it's main competitor repeatedly. The 6 was not allowed a clear and fair run to the wire. Why not? Just because the 9 is in the lead doesn't mean it has ubiquitous right of way. This isn't Roller Derby.

two words
 

Sunday Break

I think the players were treated unfairly because the stewards didn't even bother to blink that light. Why should we as players have to shrug our shoulders and move on to the next race. There is too much shoulder shrugging in racing, not enough accountability. Not at sales, not with owner trainer relations, nowhere in this game is there accountability and there should be.

The life at ten fiasco.....Players should have recieved their money back. I don't care if they send it a year from now, theres noway that horse should have ran. We have a trainer/jock/vet/stews system of check and balances and who is left holding the bag..... You and I, the guys who put it through the window. We accept this because its just racing? Things like that happen? Im sorry but thats total bullshit, stewards have a job to do and they need to do it or start flipping burgers.

I don't think this would have been a terrible DQ. In fact I think there should have been a DQ.

You think there should have been a DQ because you bet the 6. You're biased. It's understandable, but doesn't make it right.

You're right, as bettors we do take a lot of crap and it's not right. This is a bad example to use though. No one took anything on the chin here. The better horse won.