Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Rye Miles #13621

Kentucky Derby

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

This is the first time in 145 yrs that a winner has been overturned!

 

https://www.cbssports.com/general/news/2019-kentucky-derby-results-country-house-emerges-as-winner-after-maximum-security-is-disqualified/

Edited by Rye Miles #13621

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the amount of money , and future fame,  in the balance.........I see appeals and lawsuits for another 50 furlongs, easy.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be like that Indy 500 that traveled through the courts for years!!  On that wet track, I don't see overturning the race.  The declared winner, who protested, wasn't involved in the altercation and it slowed the horse that crossed the finish line fist as well.  The protesting entry really didn't deserve the win.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the race and then the replays over and over and IMHO they screwed up disqualifying the horse that won. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Horse Racing in GOOP like that was STUPID in the first place.  The Stewards, or Marshalls or whatever they call them are/were blinder than a Major League Umpire.  What a FARCE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has pissed off a lot of horse racing fans. Crap like what happened happens all the time. Bad call on the officials. Not to mention the winning ticket I was holding until it was overturned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sedalia Dave said:

Follow the money. ;)

Yep, it sure looks fishy and smells that way too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sedalia Dave said:

Follow the money. ;)

Not sure you can make that case, as the long shot was given the win.  Probably hit the windows pretty hard making that payout.  Not sure why the rider changed his line when he had the inside rail , and I can see where moving to the outside could be seen as a tactic to slow the horses behind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the video over and over and I see where the horse did run out of his lane, kinda like a car beside you coming in your lane and forcing you to swerve a little. It was so slight of a move though, I can't imagine that has never happened in 145 years!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Smoky Pistols said:

Not sure you can make that case, as the long shot was given the win.  Probably hit the windows pretty hard making that payout.  Not sure why the rider changed his line when he had the inside rail , and I can see where moving to the outside could be seen as a tactic to slow the horses behind

On a wet, sloppy track things like that can happen with no action by the jockey. The horse could have slipped with the bad footing that it had. Why didn’t the stewards grant any interviews or meet with the disqualified horses owners and trainers? I’m certainly not convinced that in 145 years something as slight as this is cause to disqualify the winning horse.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS came out at least 3 paths quickly but didn't appear to be done intentionally. If you looked at the replay, you would have seen WOW's legs in between MS's!!!!!!! MS caused several horses to bump and check which impeded their momentum. It is unlikely that anyone would have passed MS, but if racing luck hadn't occurred, there could have been a monster pile up. Who knows if any deaths would have occurred. Kudos to Tyler Gafflione (WOW) who had to massively steady his mount. I feel bad for MS and his connections, but like it has been said, if this happened in a claimer, they would have done the same thing. We like to say with SASS that the rules should be enforced evenly regardless of who it involves or if it is a monthly or big match. Right? You need to look beyond CH at how it affected the other near horses such as WOW and LRT. We lost big on most tickets, but we did have W,P, S on CH. Of course this didn't affect how we viewed the DQ. Trust me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best horse did not win due to whatever the call by the officials. He swung wide on the one curve but to quickly check him back in that slick mud may have caused him to slip and then there would be a pileup. I did not realize their rules were so stringent. Running wide open and making a quick turn to catch a calf cost me a broken leg and I always get nervous now riding in the mud.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yul Lose said:

On a wet, sloppy track things like that can happen with no action by the jockey. The horse could have slipped with the bad footing that it had. Why didn’t the stewards grant any interviews or meet with the disqualified horses owners and trainers? I’m certainly not convinced that in 145 years something as slight as this is cause to disqualify the winning horse.

 

18 minutes ago, Grass Range said:

The best horse did not win due to whatever the call by the officials. He swung wide on the one curve but to quickly check him back in that slick mud may have caused him to slip and then there would be a pileup. I did not realize their rules were so stringent. Running wide open and making a quick turn to catch a calf cost me a broken leg and I always get nervous now riding in the mud.

I agree with you both.  The horse could have easily taken upon himself to change his line.  Who knows exactly what horses see, but I've been on and around them enough to know that they have a pretty good sense of when not to try going certain places--normally better than their riders.  Except for an old endurance racer I had years back.  He had this uncanny habit of going through anything, so long as his head would fit (he never did understand that His riders wasn't as small as his head--he just keep plowing ahead!)  I also find it hard to believe that they made the call without any discussion or interviews with the jockeys.  More questions should have been asked.  The rules are really no more stringent than other forms of racing-every aspect has a caveat for interfering with the progress of others. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the race live, my wife and I both saw the momentary jumble of horses as it happened and commented that something was going to come of it.  As much as I wish the race would have been run clean, the stewards made the right call, not only from a fairness perspective, but from a safety perspective. (And I do not believe any rider or horse did anything with mal-intent. I think it was poor footing coming out of the turn that caused the swing.)

 

Kudos us to all the jockeys for keeping their mounts and preventing a catastrophe of epic proportions.  

 

My issue with the current state of the Derby is how Churchill Downs and the racing establishment are putting horses and riders at risk by allowing up to twenty horses on the track, especially under those conditions.  In the 70s when I started following racing, there were between nine and fifteen horses for the race.  But more horses mean more chances to waiger, which increases the house take.  Also, more rich owners can say they had a Derby runner, which increases the stud fees even if the horse doesn’t do well.  As someone noted earlier, follow the money.

 

What I saw Saturday was a hair’s breadth from 150,000 people in the stands and millions on television watching horses being put down and ambulances carrying off jockeys through the mud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the stewards seem to think they're in Congress.  :mellow:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Charlie Harley, #14153 said:

Watching the race live, my wife and I both saw the momentary jumble of horses as it happened and commented that something was going to come of it.  As much as I wish the race would have been run clean, the stewards made the right call, not only from a fairness perspective, but from a safety perspective. (And I do not believe any rider or horse did anything with mal-intent. I think it was poor footing coming out of the turn that caused the swing.)

 

Kudos us to all the jockeys for keeping their mounts and preventing a catastrophe of epic proportions.  

 

My issue with the current state of the Derby is how Churchill Downs and the racing establishment are putting horses and riders at risk by allowing up to twenty horses on the track, especially under those conditions.  In the 70s when I started following racing, there were between nine and fifteen horses for the race.  But more horses mean more chances to waiger, which increases the house take.  Also, more rich owners can say they had a Derby runner, which increases the stud fees even if the horse doesn’t do well.  As someone noted earlier, follow the money.

 

What I saw Saturday was a hair’s breadth from 150,000 people in the stands and millions on television watching horses being put down and ambulances carrying off jockeys through the mud.

You’re correct on too many horses running the race. They should go back to 14 especially when the track is in that condition. The stewards didn’t make the call from a safety perspective, they had no way of doing that and as far as the fairness goes that’s in question also. How can you penalize the horse and rider if they didn’t do anything wrong, your own words?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Yul Lose said:

You’re correct on too many horses running the race. They should go back to 14 especially when the track is in that condition. The stewards didn’t make the call from a safety perspective, they had no way of doing that and as far as the fairness goes that’s in question also. How can you penalize the horse and rider if they didn’t do anything wrong, your own words?

I said there appeared to be no mal-intent, but the fact remains that MS did shift several lanes and contacted other horses. This rule exists in order to maintain a fair and safe race. 

 

I’m sad about the outcome on several levels, and I wish the stewards had talked more to the riders involved. This was an unfortunate incident that could have been prevented with a smaller field. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Charlie Harley, #14153 said:

I said there appeared to be no mal-intent, but the fact remains that MS did shift several lanes and contacted other horses. This rule exists in order to maintain a fair and safe race. 

 

I’m sad about the outcome on several levels, and I wish the stewards had talked more to the riders involved. This was an unfortunate incident that could have been prevented with a smaller field. 

You kinda wonder what it will take to get them to run fewer horses. Will it take a catastrophe like you mentioned in your earlier post or jockeys, owners and trainers refusing to participate because of the potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much money for the owners and trainers not to race a crowded field.  Jockeys might have some influence, but I don’t know how much they might wield.

 

Negative publicity like is hitting Santa Anita might start the discussion.

 

I’m afraid that leaves a catastrophic incident to wake people up.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People not tuning in and decreasing attendance might get the message across!

 

I’m not likely to watch again.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What TV viewers see is action distorted by very long telephoto lenses. What appears to be a move just a step in front of another often occurs over a longer distance. Probably not as dramatic or overt as things may appear on TV.

 

Adding on, I don't care about any sporting event that can be decided by a committee of lawyers and race officials after the fact. That ain't racing, IMHO.

 

Before long, there will be a race where the jockeys start berating and beating on one another just like NASCAR...  :rolleyes: 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard on the news tonight that as far as the racing commission is concerned the matter is closed as disqualifications cannot be appealed. Only place to challenge the results now is in civil court. Even if the DQ is overturned in Civil Court the payout for the bettors will not change.

 

Also heard that there were two jocky's that filed a protest.  Country House actually filed a protest against War of Will but a review of the video of the entire race showed that Country House was actually at fault not once but twice. The first instance happened at the 1/2 mile pole and was not as egregious as the second incident. War of Will then filed a protest against Maximum Security resulting in the DQ ruling.

 

Derby trainer: Don’t blame War of Will. Maximum Security cut us off not once but twice.

 

Maximum Security has pulled out of both the Preakness and Belmont Stakes.

 

Country House will not run in the Preakness due to a cough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.