BC CLASSIC

[mjellish]

Agree completely TMW.  If the 4 & 7 duel early it probably would have been a different race.  

And IMO they should have taken the 7 down.  I know the start is the start, but in this case it was egregious enough to warrant a DQ.  Especially considering the 6 was the undefeated favorite and not a 50-1 shot (technically this shouldn\'t matter, but it does).  Can\'t believe the connections on the 6, or for that matter the 5 or 4 did not object.  Maybe that would have changed things.  And I find the purely subjective explanation from the stewards that the 7\'s hard Veer-In at the start did not significantly impact the outcome of the race outright insulting.  For full disclosure purposes I did not have a penny on the 6, and the 9 winning would have been good for me especially with the 13 taking 2nd.  Pretty sure it isn\'t clouding my judgment though.  

Can debate it forever.  But what can you do...  

Race over, the money had been paid.

I\'ve seen them taken down for less, and not taken down for worse.

[jerry]

Projecting how the race might have been run and what the final result would have been is as foolhardy as the CHRB projecting that the horses involved \"were not cost the opportunity to place where they were reasonably expected to finish\" which is the ultimate boner line of the year. The bottom line is, after waiting all year for a showdown between the best of the best, we\'ll never know. Ruining the race is reason enough to disqualify him.