Saratoga Robbery

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by pointman

Trolling as you usually do. The call is 100% indefensible. Christ is full of it here and had an interest in the call on the pk6 ticket. The 1 barely touched the 3, that is if he did at all. Even so, the 1 was clearly better in the stretch and would have won regardless. We have seen much worse interference this meet that did not result in a DQ.

The call was criminal and it should be investigated.

Now go away troll.

How am I trolling?? You make a fool out of yourself, you really do. Your steaming and lost, so Im trolling?? So Durkin and Crist are trolling also, right? I am entitled to an opinion and like I said I thought it was close, but correct. Sorry you lost.
I would like anyone who reads this thread to comment if you think Im trolling here??

[pointman]

Rocktard proves once again that he is not only a troll, but not too bright. Yesterday he calls the Msawish DQ horrible and then tries to justify the DQ of Coordinate today. Clearly if one thought the call was bad where the contact made by Msawish was much worse than the contact made by Coordinate, logically he cannot really think the latter was a justified DQ.

Therefore the board dipshit is clearly trolling again.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by pointman

Rocktard proves once again that he is not only a troll, but not too bright. Yesterday he calls the Msawish DQ horrible and then tries to justify the DQ of Coordinate today. Clearly if one thought the call was bad where the contact made by Msawish was much worse than the contact made by Coordinate, logically he cannot really think the latter was a justified DQ.

Therefore the board dipshit is clearly trolling again.

LOL I really hope people are reading this stuff.... So Serling was wrong also? Because on twitter he did not seem to thrilled with the Msawish DQ.
Here is whats happening right now, and its crystal clear to anyone who takes 5min and reads this. I said this DQ today was close, but I felt it was correct.... Because you lost you went crazy and started with the personal insults again. Stay classy and again, Im sorry that you lost.
Now you tell people how to think logically? I said today's call I felt was close but correct. You must think you are like the horse god kingpin steward now. Because Im wrong, Crist is wrong and everyone is wrong, except you. And Im not going away. If you want to keep this up and Byk feels I should be gone for this then so be it. I have said nothing wrong in this thread, at all. Nothing. You lost, your steaming and your acting like a 3yr old. Those are the facts.

[degenerate5]

The point I'm making is they left horses up all meet who did much worse. As usual there is no consistency from the Stewards. You really have to hold your breath every time the inquiry sign goes up. It's not fair to the bettors.

[Calzone Lord]

Rosie is the queen of the frivolous foul claim. She should have a bright future as an actress, one day.

She must be convincing on the phone, too. The stewards looked at Startup Nation, for about five minutes, after her preposterous foul claim in the With Anticipation stakes earlier in the week.

Alvarado's horse did come over and intimidate her, even brushed with her horse, but it was a sell-job on her part to stop riding.

It's a simple solution:

* The incident in question didn't have any impact on the outcome of the race. It didn't cost anyone a placing. The horse who was intimidated in deep stretch still managed to finish 2nd.

* Leave the winner up. Fine or suspend the jock.

That way, the jock is properly punished. However, the bettors who played the winner, the trainer of the winner, and the owner of the winner aren't punished.

Unfortunately, if the incident does result in a horse being cost a placing, there has to be a DQ.

The stewards have been great this meet, imo. But this was the wrong call, today.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Rosie is the queen of the frivolous foul claim. She should have a bright future as an actress, one day.

She must be convincing on the phone, too. The stewards looked at Startup Nation, for about five minutes, after her preposterous foul claim in the With Anticipation stakes earlier in the week.

Alvarado's horse did come over and intimidate her, even brushed with her horse, but it was a sell-job on her part to stop riding.

It's a simple solution:

* The incident in question didn't have any impact on the outcome of the race. It didn't cost anyone a placing. The horse who was intimidated in deep stretch still managed to finish 2nd.

* Leave the winner up. Fine or suspend the jock.

That way, the jock is properly punished. However, the bettors who played the winner, the trainer of the winner, and the owner of the winner aren't punished.

Unfortunately, if the incident does result in a horse being cost a placing, there has to be a DQ.

The stewards have been great this meet, imo. But this was the wrong call, today.

DId you read the drf article with her comments about the Startup Nation race? She said Joel put all the other jockeys in danger.

[ateamstupid]

Could've been retribution for Junior's ridiculous comments about the non-DQ in the Woodward.

[Storm Cadet]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Rosie is the queen of the frivolous foul claim.

Calzone, today's claim of foul was a trainer objection...not Rosie! But she must be good on the phone!

[ranger5830]

Looking at the head on of the whole race, a case could be made for disqualification, but more for Coordinate blowing the far turn and causing several horses (most notably #12) to take up. By the looks of things, the stewards didn't even look at that. To me, that impacted the race a lot more than anything that happened in the stretch. He should have either been left up or placed farther down the field, but placing him second was not the right call.

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I would like anyone who reads this thread to comment if you think Im trolling here??

I didn't see the race, didn't watch the replay, am only commenting on this part and ONLY cause you asked...

I think the problem is that whenever Pointman has a strong feeling on something and vocalizes it you usually show up and, inevitably, disagree.

... and then it escalates.

Maybe you should think about just stepping away from it next time... don't comment at all. There are plenty of people to engage in conversation. If you're always right there to have an opinion on his (opinion) then yeah... it could be construed as trolling.

Does this make sense?

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat

I didn't see the race, didn't watch the replay, am only commenting on this part and ONLY cause you asked...

I think the problem is that whenever Pointman has a strong feeling on something and vocalizes it you usually show up and, inevitably, disagree.

... and then it escalates.

Maybe you should think about just stepping away from it next time... don't comment at all. There are plenty of people to engage in conversation. If you're always right there to have an opinion on his (opinion) then yeah... it could be construed as trolling.

Does this make sense?

well said

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat

I didn't see the race, didn't watch the replay, am only commenting on this part and ONLY cause you asked...

I think the problem is that whenever Pointman has a strong feeling on something and vocalizes it you usually show up and, inevitably, disagree.

... and then it escalates.

Maybe you should think about just stepping away from it next time... don't comment at all. There are plenty of people to engage in conversation. If you're always right there to have an opinion on his (opinion) then yeah... it could be construed as trolling.

Does this make sense?

You have always been nice to me, you have defended me and you know I appreciate it. But I respectfully disagree with this. I commented an hour later on a race I wagered on. I used 4 horses in the pick 3 the DQ horse and the put up horse. I cashed, but would have cashed huge if they left it.... I was just giving my opinion on what I saw. I am entitled to an opinion. I also posted Crists opinion. He did not like that either and I believe he said Crist was full of it.
Its not always either, I dont post on everything he says. I hardly quote him at all. Thats what he likes to say to justify the personal attacks, calling me a troll,etc....

[pointman]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

You have always been nice to me, you have defended me and you know I appreciate it. But I respectfully disagree with this. I commented an hour later on a race I wagered on. I used 4 horses in the pick 3 the DQ horse and the put up horse. I cashed, but would have cashed huge if they left it.... I was just giving my opinion on what I saw. I am entitled to an opinion. I also posted Crists opinion. He did not like that either and I believe he said Crist was full of it.
Its not always either, I dont post on everything he says. I hardly quote him at all. Thats what he likes to say to justify the personal attacks, calling me a troll,etc....

What a bunch of nonsense. The most telling part that this is complete BS is that you didn't use the 1 on any ticket. Don't post some fake numbers and put "Accepted" next to it, that is evidence of nothing. You are a pathetic trolling liar.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Originally Posted by pointman

What a bunch of nonsense. The most telling part that this is complete BS is that you didn't use the 1 on any ticket. Don't post some fake numbers and put "Accepted" next to it, that is evidence of nothing. You are a pathetic trolling liar.

very well said!

[NTamm1215]

Just my $.02...

This was the wrong call, but it was a (relatively) close call. Junior Alvarado was negligent in not ensuring his mount maintained a straight course. As DrugS alluded to on Twitter, the proper punishment would have been to leave the order as is, and simply fine Alvarado (both for the stretch issues and the far turn bear out). However, the 1 did take the 3's path ever so briefly in mid-stretch. It is my opinion that this did not cost the 3 a placing and that's why the number should have stayed up.

The problem with the Mshawish race was that the instigator was really the 3, who was herded out into his two rivals to his outside. That forced Irad Ortiz, Jr. to move Mshawish out, even after contact had been initiated by the 9. For the numerous situations this meet where numbers stayed up, these were two pretty weak DQs by a group of stewards that are, at best, inconsistent.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Just my $.02...

This was the wrong call, but it was a (relatively) close call. Junior Alvarado was negligent in not ensuring his mount maintained a straight course. As DrugS alluded to on Twitter, the proper punishment would have been to leave the order as is, and simply fine Alvarado (both for the stretch issues and the far turn bear out). However, the 1 did take the 3's path ever so briefly in mid-stretch. It is my opinion that this did not cost the 3 a placing and that's why the number should have stayed up.

The problem with the Mshawish race was that the instigator was really the 3, who was herded out into his two rivals to his outside. That forced Irad Ortiz, Jr. to move Mshawish out, even after contact had been initiated by the 9. For the numerous situations this meet where numbers stayed up, these were two pretty weak DQs by a group of stewards that are, at best, inconsistent.

Just to be clear... You just said pretty much what I said other then you thought the call Monday was wrong. I thought it was close, but correct.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat

I didn't see the race, didn't watch the replay, am only commenting on this part and ONLY cause you asked...

I think the problem is that whenever Pointman has a strong feeling on something and vocalizes it you usually show up and, inevitably, disagree.

... and then it escalates.

Maybe you should think about just stepping away from it next time... don't comment at all. There are plenty of people to engage in conversation. If you're always right there to have an opinion on his (opinion) then yeah... it could be construed as trolling.

Does this make sense?

Exactly. He knows what he is doing.