11/6: Gulfstream West ($47k P5 C/O)

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by lazytom

Steve- Just a note to thank you for your B.C efforts. That to me is the best two days of racing. It's one of those times that you don't have to be a very good handicapper because it seems like many of the horses can win. Giving me more chances to just bet on a gut feeling or looking at the horses. The way the classic ended still bothers me. All that anticipation, and it ends in such controversy. Worst part was the stewards saying it was a unanimous decision. I didn't hear anyone have that opinion after the race. As if it was that easy of a decision. Sounds like a cowardly way out. And I thought Baffert could of had more class then blaming the 9 horse for causing more of a disruption. If it happens next year they better be ready to make the same call. I guess that stewards are like politicians. And they no whats best for us ,the racing fan. Even if it doesn't come across as honest or fair. Thanks again. Take care

Tom..

Thanks for the appreciative note. On-site BC lead up very different than Derby season and I try hard to get everyone as acclimated for the cards as possible.

I understand the frustration with how the Cup weekend ended. But while the aftermath of the Classic leaves many unsatisfied, remember that there would be an equally disgruntled post script with Bayern (and/or Toast of New York) taken down and randomly placed by the judges. Would they be placed 4th (and/or 5th) behind Shared Belief? Or even last behind Moreno? Is that somehow a more equitable ending? Though Baffert was attempting to deflect attention from Bayern suggesting Toast's beeline for the 3 path was DQ-worthy, there are plenty of people out there that agree. Had Bayern been DQ'd only, there'd be howling that Toast deserved a penalty too.

The point being steamrolled is that this set of CA stewards don't call tangles out of the gate. Calling one Saturday wasn't the place to start. Every race, every day has the potential to be decided in the stewards stand. It's part of the game. You accept it going in. The philosophy of stewards and the rules they administer can be adjusted to suit industry sentiment and there may be some positive response to how Saturday went down including the end of conversations by stewards with jockeys.

But we constantly ask that stewards be consistent in how they view the action and every long term California viewer agreed 100% that this panel held to their day in, day out policy when it comes to early jostling off the break. From that standpoint, we shouldn't be surprised at the no change and appreciate that they didn't take what was actually the easy way out. And I say that because there would have been screams that they never take down horses on a regular basis for what happened, so why now? From that standpoint, the decision is in fact 'fair'..

The only people 'happy' when races go to the judges are those that benefit. No matter what happened Saturday, you'd have had the same percentages of those happy and unhappy and those miserable no matter what.