The only horse I can think of that ran well coming off of an X is Invisible Ink. I just can’t see this horse putting up a good number with this pattern.
Thunder Gulch.
With the scratch of Haikal, he moves one post to the right. It is probably still not he place to be, but the inside is not quite as bad.
Bravazzo ran pretty well in derby last year off X. Ran 6th but did run well.
Rail may turn out to be place to be after all the rain tomorrow, have to see. Lots of golden rails at CD in the slop.
I love WOW tomorrow. I believe he moves forward off his competitive numbers in Louisiana prior the La Derby debacle. He has never been better, loves the surface, if it rains all the better. He gets sent from rail, hopefully clears and get\'s the ground saving trip. I don\'t think the 10f is an issue as his brother, the ill-fated TACTICUS was a stakes winning dirt marathoner.
I watched all his workouts, and he couldn\'t be doing any better. He\'s set for a top effort for sure. The rail is a huge issue for me though, rain or shine, and I\'ve not determined how strong the Louisiana prep races are, but I\'m thinking they may be better than usual this year. The inexperienced jockey doesn\'t excite me, but the price is right enough to allow for the downsides. So I can see the upside.
It is when they get to the first turn. He’s not the best breaker. He better like a mud bath and carrying another pound in weight.
Very true. I’m now rethinking this horse
I REALLY want to like this horse because it looks like he\'s ready to fire. Can a fan of his convince me that he\'s going to handle mud getting kicked in his face after Max Security or Vekoma come down on top of him? Because all signs point to no in my eyes.
I\'ll use him a little just in case but maybe Baltimore is where he fires.
He might need this and the setup seems bad.
Preferred trip looks like outside stalking.
No indication that he can relax eating dirt/slop behind horses.
They might want the lead but is he quick enough to get it?
If he\'s on the front end isn\'t he gonna pay the price late?
Casse stats for tops/pairs bouncing back off an X kinda weak.
At 16/1 I\'ll pay to find out.
He\'s won over an off CD track before. If he can break sharp enough to get some type of position, maybe he can work out a trip.
There are a lot of horses that can potentially have rough trips, so why not take one of the fast ones at a price??
Would love to have seen what would have happened if WOW doesn\'t have to check
They won\'t have the balls to do it, but the winner should be taken down
But country house put up? That\'s tough
They might!
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They won\'t have the balls to do it, but the winner
> should be taken down
I guess they have some. 100% the right call
I disagree. If you think that horse should be taken down you have salt from not taking him. WOW didn\'t even claim the objection.....incredible.
If that was a Baffert, inquiry lasts 2 minutes and result stands.
I think Jason Servis is a huge cheat, do believe that had something to do with change.
dcost328 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree. If you think that horse should be
> taken down you have salt from not taking him. WOW
> didn\'t even claim the objection.....incredible.
That DQ would have taken 45 seconds at any track in America, any night in America other than tonight.
Clear and obvious foul that stopped the momentum of two horses.
Karma, politics or both.
but to take him down and put up a horse that was clearly beat? Country House ran his eyeballs out but he wasn\'t the best horse in the race at all.
He beat a cheating pos.
dcost328 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree. If you think that horse should be
> taken down you have salt from not taking him. WOW
> didn\'t even claim the objection.....incredible.
Maybe you have salt from getting DQ\'d.
That is a DQ in less than 2 minutes any other day of the week at any track. He came over 2 paths into the #1 and almost caused the biggest catastrophe in Derby history
No way they are taking in to account things like that in that situation. The whole world is watching you make the decision, you are going to make the call based on the rules and your professional judgement and nothing else.
But no objection from WOW at all. Comical.
I don\'t think they singled him out, but if you think they would make that call against Sheikh Mohammed or Claiborne you have more faith in humanity than I do.
Both, Jason Servis -- Firenze Fire running off the screen last BELMONT day -- Karma.
No way the bluebloods of Kentucky wanted a 16K MCL winning the Kentucky Derby.
Horse didn\'t deserve to come down, Saez floated WOW out and WOW was at his neck 3-4 jumps later. Checked/steadied every so slightly, and the 20 or 13 would have won if good enough.
Did he technically cause an infraction, yes, but didn\'t think it warranted a DQ in the KD...bad call
I would like to know what the exact wording of the rule is, it matters. The wording in California (which is ridiculous and I think still in effect) is why Bayern stayed up, and would have kept this one up as well.
dcost328 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But no objection from WOW at all. Comical.
Comical is you thinking that wasn\'t a big deal
Saez corrected immediately, did not cause any horse a better placing, was the best horse in the race, should of stayed up!
Who claimed the objection? #20 or #1?
Did MS come out? Sure did. Was it corrected immediately and didn\'t impact the winners of the race? Sure was.
Did WOW claim an objection on what was \"such an obvious horrendous foul\"? Sure didn\'t.
Did Flavian Pratt take a shot and back his way into what should be an embarrassing win for all connected? Absolutely.
We now know what YOUR rule is.
Thought it was a bad reversal for a lot of reasons:
Clearly the best horse eliminated,
Tradition in a Rough and Tumble Race of needing a finishing order reversal to take a winner down,
Slop track likely affected outcome. Saez likely sloppy in what he told the steward
Red Outfit Woman in Stewards Booth likely ignored 1-3 above. (Though 2nd steward must have joined her)
Sleepy Bill Mott lobbying like a Petroleum Lobbyist on National T.V. needing a Derby \"Win\" and they seem to have obliged him.
Bad Bad reversal. Disqualified horse was mine and I won\'t say...but man. Could do no wrong today until that disqualification. Thought I fired off my pick, but don\'t see it here.
Tony
Um those happen to be the rules.
Horrific call, never shoulda happen
I\'m Blaming TRUMP
philywheel
I don’t know what you’re smoking buddy but it must be good.
He\'s spot on
That disqualified horse laid over these, especially when the track changed. He hoofed it pretty hot up there, clearly gave away lengths on the wide turn and gained them all back and then some.
He went off second choice and we\'ll see if he stays together.
Running for that low tag first race is puzzling.
sekrah was right when after the Oaks he said \"the earth should open up and swallow the whole sport.\"
I saw it T sev, nice pick, unlucky DQ.
The real bad beat this week is Omaha Beach I guess, I never fancied him and wouldn\'t have cashed any tickets on him, but now I think he would have bolted up this race.
I think it got deleted due to not being involved in the run up this year.
Way too busy. But thanx. Thought that horse laid over them. Looking forward to seeing the red board tomorrow.
Chuckles,
Good to see they let you out for Derby Day....
I was wondering when your yearly appearance would come.
Richie ðŸ was missing you.ðŸ˜"
Theres some good folk here. Salute to you and Richie.
Just got extremely busy. Hot because that was a tough beat, I used Motts horses and liked Shug too.
Don\'t know how long that Servis, (Jason), horse is gonna stay together but he\'s a freak.
FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuckles,
>
> Good to see they let you out for Derby Day....
>
> I was wondering when your yearly appearance would
> come.
> Richie ðŸ was missing you.ðŸ˜"
Tough take down if you bet the winner.
2 sides to every coin but I don’t see it in this race. When the jock/horse that was bothered doesn’t even claim. If it was that flagrant? Where was the immediate Stewards Inquiry?
Exactly your points, Frank.
A flagrant foul is going to draw a stewards inquiry regardless, and it didn\'t.
A flagrant foul against you is going to draw an objection from the jock who was impeded against. It wasn\'t.
Those are facts.
I don\'t know how after these 2 facts, you take a look after an objection by a horse that was not even bothered and was handily beaten.
The only other side of the coin is people who have something against Servis or who took a stand against this horse completely and were just flat out wrong in thinking he couldn\'t get it done.
T Severini Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just got extremely busy. Hot because that was a
> tough beat, I used Motts horses and liked Shug
> too.
Stop being so modest. You private messaged me just before the race with the EXACT order of finish of all 19 horses.
Incredible! I am in awe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
At Equibase they still haven\'t put the chart up. That tells you the craft going into this one.
dcost328 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Exactly your points, Frank.
>
> A flagrant foul is going to draw a stewards
> inquiry regardless, and it didn\'t.
>
> A flagrant foul against you is going to draw an
> objection from the jock who was impeded against.
> It wasn\'t.
>
> Those are facts.
>
> I don\'t know how after these 2 facts, you take a
> look after an objection by a horse that was not
> even bothered and was handily beaten.
>
> The only other side of the coin is people who have
> something against Servis or who took a stand
> against this horse completely and were just flat
> out wrong in thinking he couldn\'t get it done.
We may not have to wait for that to happen, the way things are going.
So you believe War of Will’s chances of a better placing were not compromised?
That question only needs be asked of Tyler Gaffalione, and he already answered it resoundingly.
And now it’s off to Pimlico, or at least half of it. Perfect flower for that race. Black-eyed Susans.
I didn’t hear what he said. What did he say?
That\'s the point.
He\'s 24 years old in his second Derby. The kid shit his pants. It happens.
What is the rule, any statement from the stewards yet?
If floating out a couple of paths is an infraction, why wasn’t Scrappy T disqualified in the Preakness, he kept his second place placing.
That wasn’t floating a horse wide. The was impeding a horse.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is the rule, any statement from the stewards
> yet?
> If floating out a couple of paths is an
> infraction, why wasn’t Scrappy T disqualified in
> the Preakness, he kept his second place placing.
Because Afleet Alex won, no placing was affected by it. If Afleet Alex would have went down, Scrappy T would have been DQ\'d.
When the review took as long as it did without an inquiry and the two \"Most\" inmpacted horses clearly not having their placing affected...you knew the explanation was going to be crafted. Its gonna be a beaut.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is the rule, any statement from the stewards
> yet?
> If floating out a couple of paths is an
> infraction, why wasn’t Scrappy T disqualified in
> the Preakness, he kept his second place placing.
But he impeded the horse, should of been placed last according to this ruling.
Need more uniformity.
Bayern, Maximum Security, racing’s biggest stage.
Should not have to be this difficult of a subject.
The slo motion replay I think makes it worse than it was.
Umm.. Long Range Toddy lost all kinds of placing from this. Did you watch something else?
T Severini Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When the review took as long as it did without an
> inquiry and the two \"Most\" inmpacted horses
> clearly not having their placing affected...you
> knew the explanation was going to be crafted. Its
> gonna be a beaut.
>
> Roman Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What is the rule, any statement from the
> stewards
> > yet?
> > If floating out a couple of paths is an
> > infraction, why wasn’t Scrappy T disqualified
> in
> > the Preakness, he kept his second place placing.
Yes, looked like LRT and WOW were backing up.
No.. Long Range Toddy who had some momentum was stopped because of this incident. MS was put behind LRT.
The rulings make perfect sense.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But he impeded the horse, should of been placed
> last according to this ruling.
> Need more uniformity.
> Bayern, Maximum Security, racing’s biggest
> stage.
> Should not have to be this difficult of a
> subject.
> The slo motion replay I think makes it worse than
> it was.
LRT and WOW were backing up? No. They weren\'t.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, looked like LRT and WOW were backing up.
Maximum Security was almost clear a length when he came over.
How can Mott’s rider claim an objection without being bothered?
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, looked like LRT and WOW were backing up.
WOW didn\'t back up until late. He was making a move until MS nearly dropped him.
Anyone saying WOW wasn\'t affected is nuts.
He was backing up in the stretch, even if he didn’t go wide on the turn, if he would of kept his path, still wins,
Unspoken rule is that jockeys won\'t claim foul if the DQ won\'t move them to a money position. My question is why didn\'t the stewards launch an inquiry?
He was not clear a length. C\'mon man.
Yes he interfered. Would I have taken him down to 17th, probably not. But there was a clear foul.
The \"what would have happened anyway\" game is not really knowable, which is why these rules exist.
He was the best horse, and it\'s a tough loss. Not a crime against humanity.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maximum Security was almost clear a length when he
> came over.
> How can Mott’s rider claim an objection without
> being bothered?
Gotta guess WoW was the \"system horse\"...really?
Simple really, when it took that long to manufacture a reason it was manufactured.
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He was backing up in the stretch, even if he
> didn’t go wide on the turn, if he would of kept
> his path, still wins,
That tends to happen after you clip heels and have to be taken up
Not a good look for the sport.
Not a crime against humanity yes,
But a travesty in the call.
WOW, LRT trainers and riders no objection, no inquiry by the stewards, result not impacted.
He came right back up to his flank after the incident.What did I not see?
Hope he don’t win the next to legs
complete BS....was the \"winner\" affected? I made money more $$$ with the DQ but disagree 110%. Hopefully a full feild at the preakness can expose the \"winner.\"
And feel for bad for Mott.....I would not want to win one like that,
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He came right back up to his flank after the
> incident.What did I not see?
So you don\'t think checking off heels, while making a move, after running a mile, has no bearing on performance.
Ok.
john9969 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> complete BS....was the \"winner\" affected? I made
> money more $$$ with the DQ but disagree 110%.
> Hopefully a full feild at the preakness can expose
> the \"winner.\"
>
> And feel for bad for Mott.....I would not want to
> win one like that,
Right.
Because every horse that lost the Preakness, after winning the Derby, has been exposed as frauds.
that wasn\'t my point but I forget a bunch of derby winners if they don\'t follow it up...i attend the Preakness and my comment was more pointed to hopefully having a full field there.....as the Derby \"winner\" is certainly suspect....and suspect isn\'t in quotes even though that is how the derby winner won.
Tradition. Tradition. Tradition. Look what affect it had on the party down there. It was embarrassing.
Amen.
MS bore out several paths on the turn impeding WOW and LRT, was pulled back down to the inside where he lightly brushed with COH who was rallying up the now open rail, then gathered himself and rebroke, finishing gamely to the wire.
WOW baking up? Watch it again. Watch the jockey. He stands up. WOW lost all kinds of momentum in that incident. Who knows how he would have finished if not impeded.
I think MS wins by 4 or more if he didn’t duck out on the turn.
You have no idea what would have happened had the incident not occurred. All we will ever know is that it did and the horse got DQd.
That’s a nice thought.
Didn\'t cost any horse a better placing? What were you watching? The 2 horses between War Of Will and Country House both stumbled badly and almost fell and immediately dropped out of being on the lead to being well back in a very short time. MaxSec was placed, not behind War Of Will, but 17th, behind Toddy, the worst finisher of the 3 horses he fouled.
Congratulations on your assessment. Unfortunately that doesn\'t change the fact that MS obvious foul cost 3 horses multiple placings.
These rules exist for reasons and one of the main ones to protect jockeys and horses from falls that would damage the sport.
100% correct decision
Roman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think MS wins by 4 or more if he didn’t duck
> out on the turn.
This forum looks like a thorograph sheet. How do we play this one? ... trying to find humor after a heart breaking defeat.