|
|
11-11-2017, 02:20 PM
|
#1486
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,320
|
How did they not DQ Bauti Boy today in the Objection with The X in Gulfstream R5. The race was a head bob photo finish. Coming into stretch, Nauti Boy bumps The X hard, pushing him out wide around turn. SHOCKED to see them not allow the objection!
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 04:41 PM
|
#1487
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
I am not complaining about the Los Al DQ but man that feels like the 5 caused the initial issue and the 3 was best, I just dont see it.
Heck I could have gone with a double DQ since it felt like the 5 and the 3 both caused the 1 to be bumped
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 04:46 PM
|
#1488
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 562
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP
I am not complaining about the Los Al DQ but man that feels like the 5 caused the initial issue and the 3 was best, I just dont see it.
Heck I could have gone with a double DQ since it felt like the 5 and the 3 both caused the 1 to be bumped
|
The 5 and 3 both fouled the 1. How you disqualify the 3 to give the win to the 5 is something I will never in a million years understand. IMHO, there are east coast jurisdictions that wouldn't have even looked at that race.
__________________
Picks on Twitter @horsetickets
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 04:50 PM
|
#1489
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,830
|
Preposterous DQ.
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 05:16 PM
|
#1490
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 93
|
It was painfully obvious it was going to occur because the horse that finished 2nd was named after a man near and dear to Los Al.
The cheer that erupted and the winner's circle photo was ridiculous. I think they had to wait until the 2 stewards that vote for DQ made it down to winner's circle before they could take the photo. There were probably only 15-20 left at the track that weren't in the winner's circle.
I agree that if the 3 comes down, the 5 has to come down as the 5 made the initial contact. I thought it would have been cool to seek both Bafferts DQ'd for squeeing the 1.
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 08:38 PM
|
#1491
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,830
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stringmail
It was painfully obvious it was going to occur because the horse that finished 2nd was named after a man near and dear to Los Al.
The cheer that erupted and the winner's circle photo was ridiculous. I think they had to wait until the 2 stewards that vote for DQ made it down to winner's circle before they could take the photo. There were probably only 15-20 left at the track that weren't in the winner's circle.
I agree that if the 3 comes down, the 5 has to come down as the 5 made the initial contact. I thought it would have been cool to seek both Bafferts DQ'd for squeeing the 1.
|
Normally I'd laugh this stuff off, but I think this call was so bad nothing would surprise me. Only in North America could a horse that was at the very least partially responsible for the traffic problems be ELEVATED to first.
|
|
|
12-09-2017, 10:39 PM
|
#1492
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 506
|
Absurd DQ decision. Baffling, irrational, and incorrect.
|
|
|
12-29-2017, 07:52 PM
|
#1493
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 146
|
Delta Downs race 2 on 12/29
Any thoughts on leaving the 7 as the winner and not placing him second to the 4 horse? Delta Downs is a joke and I will never bet it again. I just wonder if others watching the replay and head on replay agree that the 7 did not cost the 4 first place.
|
|
|
01-12-2018, 01:39 PM
|
#1494
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,956
|
Tam R1 0112
Someone with no dog in the fight take a look at R1 @Tam today and see if the #4 should of came down The pan view doesn't look bad, the headd on , maybe The horse was 8/5 tote , I had him @6-1 on NJX
Thanks
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 03:55 PM
|
#1495
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
SA R2 2/15/18
Did anyone else not like the non-starter ruling regarding the ? It didn't look to me like anything other than she reared up at the start on her own accord. She was 2-1 though and the stewards might have been bailing out the bettors.
|
|
|
02-19-2018, 12:49 PM
|
#1496
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 161
|
SA 2-18 9th Race
I thought for sure somebody would have posted about this DQ. I have watched the replay many times and have NO IDEA how they could make this call. It was even early in the race when they very seldom take down ANYTHING unless a rider or horse falls.
It didnt cost me anything in that race but makes me very worried moving forward. Incompetence has been screamed many times in the past regarding these California stewards and nothing ever happens.
Last edited by dasch; 02-19-2018 at 12:53 PM.
|
|
|
02-19-2018, 05:58 PM
|
#1497
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasch
I thought for sure somebody would have posted about this DQ. I have watched the replay many times and have NO IDEA how they could make this call. It was even early in the race when they very seldom take down ANYTHING unless a rider or horse falls.
It didnt cost me anything in that race but makes me very worried moving forward. Incompetence has been screamed many times in the past regarding these California stewards and nothing ever happens.
|
cost me some money in a contest, I didnt understand it and TVG was too busy showing pacers in the snow to show us.
|
|
|
02-19-2018, 06:46 PM
|
#1498
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Stewart Elliott's horse went to his knees and Elliott almost fell off. Apparently it was the horse's fault.
The thing is, it was DEFINITELY rough and dangerous riding. I could totally see them imposing a fine or suspension on Guttierez. But there's no way in the world you could conclude there was enough evidence that this cost the a placing. He was well beaten by the 4th place horse and had 6 1/2 furlongs to recover and get back into the race after this incident.
Yeah, a bad call, and not consistent with the way the California stewards usually operate (e.g., the non-call on Bayern in the BC Classic).
|
|
|
02-20-2018, 03:37 PM
|
#1499
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Did anyone else not like the non-starter ruling regarding the ? It didn't look to me like anything other than she reared up at the start on her own accord. She was 2-1 though and the stewards might have been bailing out the bettors.
|
And now I have proof! In the 4th race yesterday (2/19), a longshot, the Kennedie Sky at 42-1, did the exact same thing, and they didn't rule her a non-starter!
They are using the non-starter rule selectively to protect horses who get significant betting action.
|
|
|
02-20-2018, 03:40 PM
|
#1500
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,830
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
And now I have proof! In the 4th race yesterday (2/19), a longshot, the Kennedie Sky at 42-1, did the exact same thing, and they didn't rule her a non-starter!
They are using the non-starter rule selectively to protect horses who get significant betting action.
|
Seems it would be the other way around. Scratching a horse after the fact that has significant betting action costs the track a lot more money.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|