Any thoughts about the DQ?? It was analysis pick. Cost me big in $75 double.
Would 5 have gotten by??
Edgorman Wrote:
------------------------------
> Any thoughts about the DQ??
> It was analysis pick.
> Cost me big in $75 double.
> Would 5 have gotten by??
Didn\'t hear the explanation, but it looked to me
like Bisono hit the #5 horse\'s snout with his whip
in deep stretch.
Seemed pretty minor bump -- especially when running on a wet/slick surface...
The DQ was crap. Very minor contact. I had the dime super which would have paid at least 2x more with the 9-1 winner on top.
The INQUIRY sign went up real fast. Makes you wonder sometimes???
Again, very weak call -- if you have a chance, watch the head-on of the stretch drive on Jan 17th, race 3 -- a race the same stewards ruled no change warranted and then the head on of the race yesterday -- I don\'t get it.......
Verrrry tough takedown, a gift for the 3 pick six winners put up!
Had no horse in the race, but thought it was 75/25 that the winner would stay up and was very surprised listening to the banter on TVG as they all unanimously thought the winner had to come down. (used to clueless banter from Todd Schrup, but not from all of them).
I don\'t like the inconsistency in the calls. Have seen that type of infraction stay up way more than come down.
It used to be (at least in NY) that a foul was a foul, and there was no judgement call about whether it afected the outcome of the race. Things were a lot simpler that way.
Awful DQ. Minor bump in deep stretch.
Watch the head-on replay and watch the hind legs of the 5 horse. The winner knocked his back legs out from under him probably more to do with the wet track than contact but definitely cost him the win. Easy DQ imo.
The California judges normally leave up the winner if it doesnt affect the outcome. Unfortunately, in my opinion, they\'re not looking for gameness/herding/hanging and they\'re solely looking at margin of victory. Because the margin was small, they made the DQ even though the winner was digging in and not letting that other horse go by.
Also, the other horse really had the entire stretch to surge past and didnt want to or wasnt good enough.
With 70 yards to go, if you had the 2nd place finisher, you had to be thinking \"i hope the leader comes out and bumps me because it doesnt appear that i\'m going by on my own\"
The outside horse was under the left handed whip early in the lane and drifted away from the leader and there was a bigger gap in midstretch, but the outside horse came in a lane or two under the right handed whip and \'tightened it up\' on the leader and that\'s when the bumping took place.
The physical 2nd place finisher did not keep a perfectly straight path, the jock let him come in a lane or two to \'engage\' with the leader and when you do that and the horses are very close together, sometimes there is contact.
I would have left up the winner on the grounds that not only did it probably not cost the 2PF a board placing, but the 2nd place rider did not perservere thru the wire and try to win. Once he got bumped, he \'gave up\' and hand rode to the wire and started to stand up before they hit the line. I dont want to reward a chicken ride like that, if the jock would have got more aggressive late in the stretch and tried to still win, i might have been more apt to reward him. Not as apt to reward him for stopping riding his mount and hoping the judges get him the win, no excuse for the 2nd place jock to stop riding.
I dont think it was the worst decision that the So Cal stewards have made in recent times, but it wasnt the best either...i leave up the winner if it was me.