View Single Post
  #17  
Old 06-14-2018, 10:26 PM
Rupert Pupkin Rupert Pupkin is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merlinsky View Post
Well if you make this about principle, Repole doesn't have a leg to stand on (I don't agree that most people who understand things like rank horses and rabbits would agree with Repole). It's ironic that he has the nerve to make the claim. He was trying to set up the race for himself. It takes a lot of nerve to argue that someone else got to it before you. And Noble Indy wasn't going fast enough to get that lead. He just wasn't. They argue things don't make sense that do, trying to create a sense of impropriety where none exists. Things that are observable. If you're talking how RH was behaving, Jay Privman saw it and he's not the only one I've heard bring the rankness up. As for why he was up there in the first place, are you gonna argue that Baffert horses are not typically forwardly placed versus back in the pack? That it's not better to use tactical speed in the Belmont Stakes? RH's position and ride made sense. Castellano claims Noble Indy hit the gate among other things. I didn't go back and look at it, but if Repole expected him to go up there and wear Justify out for Vino Rosso while being sacrificed, how's he getting around that ethical issue?

People are mad their horses lost, they shouldn't have expected to win, and it's tacky as hell to make it be the first thing out of their mouths when we just had a worthy TC winner. Maybe Repole and Coburn need to go have a beer and commiserate.
Rabbits have been used for years. They are part of the game. There is a difference between sending a rabbit and sending a horse that borderline fouls other horses. Geroux was right on the verge of fouling Bravazzo. He came in on him and caused him to check. And don't tell me I'm biased. I didn't like Bravazzo at all. I bet on Justify. I got +135 on him offshore. I wanted Justify to win. But I can still look at what happened objectively.

There are thousands of people out there including tons of trainers who had a problem with what happened. It's not as if it's just Repole saying something. He's simply saying the same thing that thousands of other people are saying. That is not sour grapes. How do you explain all the people out there who said the same thing as Repole?

What is going to happen next? Is a guy going to enter another horse to take out half the competition at the break? If that did ever happen in a big race, it would put the stewards in a tough position. The rider would obviously claim it was unintentional. Are the stewards going to disqualify the winning horse, if the trainer's uncoupled entry mate fouls a couple of other horses at the break?

I'm not claiming that anyone should have been disqualified in the Belmont. But I think it was an unethical, reckless and potentially dangerous thing to do. What if Bravazzo would have clipped heels and gone down? It would have created a huge scene, even if nobody got hurt. Would they have disqualified Justify? I would say probably not, but you would have people screaming twice as loud as they are right now. By the way, the stewards do have the power to disqualify an uncoupled entry mate (even with a different owner), if he fouls someone to the benefit of the other entry mate.
Reply With Quote