about that 3 to 5 bursting through the gate
 

im sure ill get Rupert and many others telling me im wrong
but understand this is my opinion

im always under the assumption that a horse knows when its race day
why? im not sure ,I just think somehow they know

and being led into that gate, there adrenalin is pumping and there want for trying is at its peak
so in my mind ,when they break through the gate
its like a pin pricking balloon and letting all the air out[in this case] the adrenelin,,and the want

there so high at one point ,only to lose it when something like that happens

in my view the horse should have been scratched
its like when a horse is got a ton ,, makes his move looks like a winner,, only to get blocked ,, and have to start all over with less time to do it
very rarely do they build that kind of move again in race,, like the balloon got popped
anyone argree with this old man? or am I paddling by myself?

I believe strongly and always have that any horse that breaks through the gate prior to the start should be automatically scratched.

No other country does this. Canada does it too, look at Pink Lloyd. Disservice to the wagering public at the least. At the worse, a disaster to the horse. Barbaro.

In OZ, HK and UK they are scratched immediately.

thasts the horse im talking about
 

pink lloyd

I think it is very harmful on multiple fronts. To the horse, to the bettors and potentially to the jockeys. I'm in favor of if you break through the gate, you are out. I've seen too many bad things, the least of which is horses running badly at short odds (Pink LLoyd). The worst is Barbaro.

tough break for P.L.....and certainly not the norm. **** happens. Ialso have seen horses win after breaking the gate and harness horses win after going off stride.

one thing i am in favor of is quick scratches when a horse won't load. Australia pulls the trigger much faster than the us.

Barbaro was checked and cleared to race, he hurt his leg in the actual start, not the break thru....either way, sucks.

I agree with you that it's a negative when they break through the gate. It probably slightly decreases their chances of winning, I would think. I don't think there's ever been a study on it. But based on what I've seen and just using common sense, it can't be a good thing. But would I go so far as to say the horse should automatically be scratched? I would say probably not.

I don't think most owners would want to scratch their horse if the horse breaks through the gate. And if you are the owner and you are spending over $3,000 a month to train your horse, it would be pretty frustrating to spend all that money to get your horse ready for a race and then have the horse scratched just because he broke through the gate. Owners obviously don't want to run their horse if he gets hurt before the race. But there is a track veterinarian at the gate who will check the horse to make sure the horse is not hurt, if there is any incident at the gate.

By the way, they have a relatively new policy now where they automatically scratch any horse who flips over in the paddock, even if the horse appears to have no injury. I agree with that policy. A horse flipping over is obviously a much bigger deal than breaking through the gate. There could be internal injuries that are not visible. It is better to be safe than sorry. I think that is a good policy.

Going back to the specific discussion about breaking through the gate, there is obviously the interest of the bettor too. But the bettor can always cancel his bet if he sees his horse act up at the gate or break through the gate. My guess is that if they implemented a new policy where there was a 5 minute delay when a horse breaks through the gate in order to make sure people had plenty of time to cancel their bets on that horse, I would guess that only a small percentage of people would cancel their bet. If they also used that 5 minutes to contact the owner and trainer to see if they still wanted to run the horse, I would guess that 99% of them would want to run the horse, as long as the horse looks none the worse for wear.