a theory: the foul was deliberate

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

https://twitter.com/RosieNapravnik/s...37666250002432


https://twitter.com/GStevens_jockey/...79884107722753

1. I think jockeys have a pretty big bias. They hate suspensions. And they don't want to admit that jockeys "herd" other horses, because that is unsafe.

2. Stevene' statement is nuts. The legislatures and horse racing boards contol the definition of a foul. That's never going to change. It is integral to the regulation of gambling.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by papillon

You have a platform that people pay money to hear from.

Have you tweeted or blogged about thinking the foul was intentional? Have you contacted Ray Paulick?

Race riding is always intentional after all.


What's funny is that War of Will has to win the Preakness now, and Pratt and Gafflione cannot risk to ride aggressively for the foreseeable future, to retain any good will.

Nobody whose opinion matters buys the smearing of Prat and Gafflione. That's purely a fabrication of the lawyers.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by papillon

If you mean in a Danerys buring down King's landing sort of way.

No. The stewards made the courageous call.

[FenceBored]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

1. I think jockeys have a pretty big bias. They hate suspensions. And they don't want to admit that jockeys "herd" other horses, because that is unsafe.

2. Stevene' statement is nuts. The legislatures and horse racing boards contol the definition of a foul. That's never going to change. It is integral to the regulation of gambling.

3. I don't think they're factoring in the whole context. Maximum Security's behavior from the 5/16th pole to the finish line was not just the big foul. When you include racing back in to bump Code of Honor and then further herding War of Will inside the 3/16th pole you have a horse who didn't seem like he was being ridden in a straight line much at all in the stretch, and bothering other horses in the process. Add to that Saez's response to being taken down and you have the stewards looking at a jockey who was not only (in their view) wrong on racing's biggest day, but brazenly defiant about it. Toss in his lawyer's video blaming everything on somebody else and their response translates as "don't bring that muck in here."

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by FenceBored

3. I don't think they're factoring in the whole context. Maximum Security's behavior from the 5/16th pole to the finish line was not just the big foul. When you include racing back in to bump Code of Honor and then further herding War of Will inside the 3/16th pole you have a horse who didn't seem like he was being ridden in a straight line much at all in the stretch, and bothering other horses in the process. Add to that Saez's response to being taken down and you have the stewards looking at a jockey who was not only (in their view) wrong on racing's biggest day, but brazenly defiant about it. Toss in his lawyer's video blaming everything on somebody else and their response translates as "don't bring that muck in here."

+1

[46zilzal]

I have watched the race replay multiple times and from various angles in slow motion, and the RAIL colt (as had been his movement the entire race, RANK with the rider fighting for his head ALL TRIP) initiated the majority of the interaction...The real winner did not move laterally until that one goosed him...follow the harrows AT the time of the interaction and two strides later.