Robbery at DMR

[colt]

Did anyone catch the robbery at DMR (race# 9) - where is the California Highway Patrol?  The Bums who call themselves Stewards need to face charges after rendering this DQ.  This group of bums are second to none with their irrational and inconsistent rulings day-in-day-out.

[shanahan]

I am with you completely here...still staring at my pik 4 ticket (now a loser thanks to the genious stewards) & wondering what the hell...

the woman steward has a very hot/cold support system out there....Fermin.

[Lost Cause]

colt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did anyone catch the robbery at DMR (race# 9) -
> where is the California Highway Patrol?  The Bums
> who call themselves Stewards need to face charges
> after rendering this DQ.  This group of bums are
> second to none with their irrational and
> inconsistent rulings day-in-day-out.


I looked at the replay on this..It looks like the #2 kept bearing in and did hit the #9 looks easy enough to take him down considering the margin of victory.  I don\'t think this can be classified as ribbery.  Anybody else feel this was a wrongful DQ?
I had no bet in the race..

[Rick B.]

Disclaimer: I had $0.00 invested in the race.

I saw the race on TV, saw the replays, saw the DQ explanation, and watched the whole thing again on the \'puter.

Couple of observations:

1. #2 horse drifts in the entire length of the stretch, from about 11 or 12 wide coming out of the turn, to about the 5 path at the wire. There would be nothing really wrong with this, if he was in the clear...but he wasn\'t. He had horses inside of him the whole way, the main one being the #9.

Mickey Baze either didn\'t have control of the horse, or was doing it intentionally, but in any case, SoCal isn\'t the only place where a rider gets taken down for this.

2. While the bumps were very slight, the rider on the #9 has got to be distracted by a horse to the outside that KEEPS DRIFTING IN...so instead of focusing on trying to get the most out of his mount, he instead has to keep an eye on the #2, and has to alter his course to the inside the whole length of the stretch.

IMO, the #2 gained an unfair advantage by drifting in at least 6 paths, and put the rider of the #9 at a clear disadvantage.

I\'ve seen worse left alone, and others DQ\'d for far less. This one could have gone either way, so I must disagree with the \"robbery\" characterization. Before you get mad and fire off a NastyGram (tm) back at me, please answer this:

What if you had the #9 -- would you have been OK with nothing being called on the #2?

[colt]

I just watched the head-on replay via twinspires TV, and I am convinced that this was a manufactured DQ.  In fact, the #9 (declared winner) did not establish a solid position when the alleged so-called bump occurred - was sliding all over the track, which is the norm on pollywood.

[colt]

\"What if you had the #9 -- would you have been OK with nothing being called on the #2?\"

I would have no issue since Joel Rosario and others constantly shift-in on their rivals with this pattern overland moves which usually cost others a better placing without a peep from the stewards.  MC Baze sweeping move was in line with what has become the norm on the SoCal circuit - shift in as you will when making the sweeping move.

BTW, I have already moved on and looking forward to a great-great w/e of racing from coast to coast.

[miff]

In another show of ineptitude, the clueless clowns running racing and the conspiracy idiots apparently strike again!!

DRF:Dubious science behind oxygen ban

When New York regulators hastily issued a directive Tuesday that prohibits a horse from racing within seven days of spending time in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber, the New York State Racing and Wagering Board appeared to be getting out in front of a potential problem by making it illegal to use the chamber for performance-enhancing purposes.

New York was the first state to issue a specific rule on the use of hyperbaric oxygen chambers, though two Florida tracks - Gulfstream Park and Calder Race Course - adopted house rules earlier this year restricting their use to no closer than 72 hours prior to a race. The policies appear to have good intentions - if someone told a horseplayer, horse owner, or trainer that a horse had received pure oxygen within 24 hours of winning a race, very few people would blame that person for contending that the horse had an advantage.

The only problem with that opinion is that it\'s wrong, according to most veterinarians and a review of the available science.

\"The only way it could possibly be performance-enhancing is if you led them out of the chamber directly into the starting gate,\" said Foster Northrup, a Kentucky-based veterinarian who has studied the use of hyperbaric oxygen for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission and the American Association of Equine Practitioners\'s Racing Task Force. \"We all know that\'s impossible. And even if you did that, I don\'t know if it would be performance-enhancing. Pure oxygen can make you feel a little weird.\"

Hyperbaric oxygen chambers are airtight containers in which horses receive doses of pure oxygen (atmospheric air is approximately 21 percent oxygen). The higher concentration results in a larger concentration of oxygen in the blood. The chambers are the reverse of altitude chambers, in which the air is starved of oxygen to mimic conditions at higher altitudes.

Despite the fact that no scientific evidence associates hyperbaric oxygen with performance enhancement, regulators will probably push forward in other states to restrict the practice. The reason is simple: Most horseplayers and trainers will simply maintain that the science is incomplete or wrong, so racing ends up with regulations banning a practice that doesn\'t do anything at all, and, perversely, validates the opinion that it enhances performance. Why else would it be illegal?

It\'s not that uncommon for racing to adopt a zero-tolerance policy on drugs or treatments that do not influence performance. Take the well-publicized case of Steve Asmussen in Texas. The trainer was recently issued a six-month suspension by the Texas Racing Commission for the finding of a minute quantity of lidocaine in a post-race test, despite the fact that the concentration of the drug indicated that it could not have possibly influenced how the horse performed. Asmussen has appealed to the civil courts.

Hyperbaric oxygen treatments are not necessarily new in racing, but the treatments - which can cost from $250 to $400 per session - have steadily gained in popularity over the past several years. Nearly all scientists and veterinarians agree that the treatments can be beneficial, especially for horses who have suffered injuries or infections. By increasing the concentration of oxygen in a horse\'s bloodstream, the body is better able to repair tissues and fight viruses, according to scientific literature. But those benefits almost instantly disappear after the horse exits the chamber.

However, like all treatments or therapies that are new and expensive, the claims have steadily outgrown the facts. And though no one is openly advertising that the treatments can enhance performance, the subtext is out there.

In fact, Gulfstream passed its house rule this year restricting the treatments after the owner of a mobile hyperbaric chamber was accused of allowing horses to use the chamber on raceday. The complaints came from trainers who weren\'t using the chamber and who feared that the competition was getting a leg up, according to racing officials.

\"This is the racing industry, and there\'s a lot of superstition out there,\" said Dr. Mary Scollay, the equine medical director of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission. \"It\'s the blue sock theory. If a trainer wears one blue sock one day and he gets a winner, everyone shows up wearing a blue sock the next day.\"

Scollay is one of a number of racing officials who believe that the racing industry is better off tackling errors in public perception rather than passing rules against blue socks, even if it means conspiracy theorists will have a wider platform.

\"At some point, you have to go head-to-head with public perception and say, \'Hey, you guys got this one wrong,\' \" Scollay said. \"Then it\'s up to us to create a compelling message to convince people that the science is right.\"

[shanahan]

listened to everyone interviewed or at the track on the radio shows today...not one person, inlcuding M. Baze obviously, could understand it.  robbery indeed...

[imallin]

Maybe they took M Baze down because he\'s incompetent in general and they wanted to punish him for his consistent lug ins.

MC Baze \'lugs in\' on almost every horse he rides, he\'s one of the weakest \'high profile riders\' in So Cal, how this guy keeps getting mounts is beyond me, anyone who uses him on their horse doesn\'t know the game very well or doesn\'t watch this guy compete on an everyday basis.

Can\'t really explain what\'s happened to him, he\'s a shell of his former self.

Adding this:

I think, and this is just a hunch, that the DMR stewards are very sensitive now to ANY horse who drifts in or out. With all the breakdowns so far at the DMR meet, they want to tell these riders that there\'s no tolerance for anything but a perfectly straight line, no race riding, etc. The last thing they want is a replay of Rene Douglas. By taking this horse down they are saying \"be extra careful out there, we won\'t tolerate anything that\'s even close to dangerous\"

Had their been no Rene Douglas incident and no breakdowns so far at the DMR meet, this horse probably stays up.

[Rick B.]

Having listened to the various racing shows for some time, I\'m not surprised that each host and their 3 - 4 guests reached a \"unanimous\" decision on the DQ -- when was the last time there was any REAL disagreement between people on these shows?

Here on the TG forum, we have a few \"ayes\" and a few \"nays\", and a neutral or two -- far more indicative of how the racing public views some of these not-so-clear-cut calls.

(Plus, there could be a few more here that were in favor of the DQ, but we won\'t hear from them -- if they had the #9 in this race and kissed in, they are wisely clamming up about it, lest they further inflame those that were taken down on the #2.)

These \"incompetent\" stewards just might have a little tougher job than we give them credit for.

My recommendation is: let it go. More races, tons of good ones coming this weekend, and you don\'t want to disrupt your gambling psyche.

Easier said than done, I acknowledge. Shanahan, if I recall correctly, you are a St. Louis Cardinals fan -- are you still steaming about Denkinger\'s call (aka \"The Call\") in the \'85 World Series? Was yesterday\'s DQ worse than that?

[P-Dub]

colt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just watched the head-on replay via twinspires
> TV, and I am convinced that this was a
> manufactured DQ.  In fact, the #9 (declared
> winner) did not establish a solid position when
> the alleged so-called bump occurred - was sliding
> all over the track, which is the norm on
> pollywood.


Nothing alleged or so called. He was bumped at the 1/8 pole, and was bearing in the entire stretch. The #9 did have a position, and was bumped by the #2. He was not sliding all over the track.

Agree with everything Rick B had to say. I\'ve seen worse stay up, I\'ve seen less taken down. Its a tough beat, and for those of you that had the #2 I feel for you.

But this was not robbery. It was a tough call and I see nothing wrong with the decision.  Don\'t blame you for being bitter, but just let it go.