Bettors don\'t collect more money on their bet if the jockey wins more money for the owners (and himself) of the horses he rides. To me, a cheap claiming race is just as important as the BC Classic if it\'s a race I happen to bet. Mikes success does ME no good I only care about how wide he is when I bet him in an overnight race.

The guy is no friend of the horse player that\'s for sure. Maybe he failed math and figures that rebate players are stupid and will keep betting at the same rate despite the percentages getting carved up.

He should just take all the rebates away from all his tracks and he can see what happens to handle.

Why would a 3rd rate track take away the rebates ?

This is odd considering the cuomo family, at their core, is probably the most honest family in America. Shocking how people close to him would have been engaging in this type of behavior when he is such an upstanding guy. Craziness!!

I guess you get a kiss at the gates before, well, you know. Kisses have to be part of the package you would think.

Thanks !

Maybe the judges just determined this was \'race riding\' and has been part of the game for centuries.

As a gambler, you can yell and scream \"MAKE THAT CHANGE\" but when judges alter results, they tend to keep altering results and more and more races down the line get tampered with. Forgetting about individual specific races for example, it really comes down to how quick do we want our judges to be with their trigger finger. Since i don\'t really trust politially appointed hacks to begin with, i\'d prefer they generally not tamper with physical results, a \'wrong dq\' is more damaging than not putting up a horse who physically lost.

With \'quick trigger finger\' judges, its only a matter of time before they rob your legit winner and pay someone else.

BO, this is a good point and it really comes down to philosophy on what is a disqualifiable (hope that\'s a word!) offense.

If you really wanted to nitpick, I\'m sure you could theoretically make at least 1 dq per race in every race on every day, but would that really be a great idea?

If the standard was zero tolerance and any brush or bump at any point in the race was an automatic dq, is that the judging we would want as bettors? 10 minute inquiry for every race to decide where to place every runner who brushed another runner?

There needs to be a judging standard and while maybe the op\'s example would be a dq in another life at another track at another time, this brush or whatever you want to call it wasn\'t enough to pass the dq standard that these judges have set.

The bigger problem would be is if a similar situation DOES result in a dq a month from now by these same judges.

Hard to make a dq there without a rear view as well as a direct head on. There was a point where it appeared that the inside horse came out and bumped the winner. Would a dq there have been the worst dq ever? No, but i don\'t think leaving it up was the worst leave up i\'ve seen there either.

Watch the head on of the first race at Saratoga on Sept 5th. Probably not coincidentally, the same rider involved in what i though was an easy dq, they left this one up also, the 1-5 shot drifted out 10 paths and carried the 2nd place finisher into the parking lot. No change here either. to me, this was more obvious than the one Weds.

I won\'t disagree that the sport isn\'t run the right way, but as far as this specific inquiry goes, i didn\'t see anything, i\'m not even sure why there was an inquiry to begin with, what did i miss?

52k pick 5 carryover.

if they leave obvious crashes alone, doesn\'t that mean they\'ll more likely to leave a borderline claiming race alone? my biggest fear in this game isn\'t not NOT getting placed first when someone crashed into me or another runner, its having money taken from me on a borderline situation. ill put up with all the other stuff if i can just cash my ticket and win on merit all the time when i deserve to win. so cal does that as well or better than anyone judges out there.

Please god no.

Why do you think the so cal judges are bad?

Not one person in the 20 comments I read in paulick article agreed with the decision. In my estimation, if you ask 20 horse players or fans if a dq should have been made, if you don\'t have an overwhelming bias in favor of a dq, you leave the result alone.

One thing I\'ve noticed about judges decisions from track to track is that judges never seem to take \'precedent\' or recent similar decisions from their track or any other track into consideration, a lot of the decisions are just based on their current mood. Not good for the health of the game. If you\'re going to meddle in result outcomes, there needs to be razor sharp consistency from track to track.

Most of us bet more than one track so we are dealing with different sets of judges, quite often gamblers will be on the wrong side of similar situations that had different judging.

great place for betting, wish they were open tomorrow, not sure why there\'s a day off, anyone know? odd schedule.