Rainbow 6

[Boomtowner]

I didn't have a dog in the fight, but don't think there should have been a DQ.

Bad day for the single ticket holder, good day for the track.

Oddly, the eventual winner, who went off at 39-1 paid $9k(for .50) less than the 15-1 horse who was dq'd would have paid in the P5.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Boomtowner

I didn't have a dog in the fight, but don't think there should have been a DQ.

Bad day for the single ticket holder, good day for the track.

Oddly, the eventual winner, who went off at 39-1 paid $9k(for .50) less than the 15-1 horse who was dq'd would have paid in the P5.

This leaves me confused as to where you believe the conspiracy lies. Is it the track to keep the rainbow six pool going?

Is it a bettor who had pounded the 13 in the pk5? Several bettors who conspired together?

A combination of all these mysterious people?

Lee Harvey Oswald?

[Boomtowner]

Originally Posted by pointman

This leaves me confused as to where you believe the conspiracy lies. Is it the track to keep the rainbow six pool going?

Is it a bettor who had pounded the 13 in the pk5? Several bettors who conspired together?

A combination of all these mysterious people?

Lee Harvey Oswald?

Sorry you got so confused. I think you are the one with all the conspiracy theories. I stated a few facts.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Boomtowner

Sorry you got so confused. I think you are the one with all the conspiracy theories. I stated a few facts.

If you didn't imply a conspiracy on the call, how were those "facts" relevant to your conclusion on whether the call was correct?

[Boomtowner]

Originally Posted by pointman

If you didn't imply a conspiracy on the call, how were those "facts" relevant to your conclusion on whether the call was correct?

The "facts" are not relevant to my conclusion on whether I though the call was good...your honor.

Originally Posted by Boomtowner

I didn't have a dog in the fight, but don't think there should have been a DQ.

Bad day for the single ticket holder, good day for the track.

Oddly, the eventual winner, who went off at 39-1 paid $9k(for .50) less than the 15-1 horse who was dq'd would have paid in the P5.

How is the Pick 5 that paid less is good for the track? The takeout is fixed regardless who wins.

However, having the Rainbow 6 carryover at 1.3 million is a good promotion for the track and was possibly the incentive for the DQ.

[Boomtowner]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

How is the Pick 5 that paid less is good for the track? The takeout is fixed regardless who wins.

However, having the Rainbow 6 carryover at 1.3 million is a good promotion for the track and was possibly the incentive for the DQ.

Again, I didn't say the P5 that paid less is good for the track. I said it was a bad day for the single ticket holder in the P6 and that was good for the track. I guess that last sentence could have been clearer, referring to the P5 instead of the P6.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

However, having the Rainbow 6 carryover at 1.3 million is a good promotion for the track and was possibly the incentive for the DQ.

It is also great for the bettors, except the one bettor who had the lone ticket.

Call it being politically correct.

[Unbridled90]

Unfortunately nothing is cut and dry when it comes to the stewards but how can anyone here say that it was the worst call ever after watching the head on? Come on people that horse needed to come down! Whether one person stands to cash big should have no bearing on it.

[Cannon Shell]

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart...22214USA12.pdf

According to the chartcaller this was the right call

If you bet the horse who finished 2nd and the chart reads "bothered rival stretch" for the winner and you lose by a neck and dont come down?

The conspiracy theory is ridiculous.

[South Beach Luv]

Couldn't find the head-on replay but this Trakus Aerial view is a good one if you haven't seen it, you can FF it.

http://tmedia.trakus.com/dsi/dsivide....wmv?WMCache=1

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart...22214USA12.pdf

According to the chartcaller this was the right call

If you bet the horse who finished 2nd and the chart reads "bothered rival stretch" for the winner and you lose by a neck and dont come down?

The conspiracy theory is ridiculous.

I agree about the conspiracy theory being ridiculous, but so is citing the chart caller as evidence.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I agree about the conspiracy theory being ridiculous, but so is citing the chart caller as evidence.

Really? The official transcript of the race is a ridiculous reference point?

So an impartial view of the race by a professional with years of experience, a good vantage point, and access to various camera angles of the race isn't a valid source in your eyes?

Please explain how the chart callers interpretation has no validity since it is his job to describe the race for the official record?

If there is a hearing about this incident it is a sure bet that the chart will be referred to as "evidence".