Sword Dancer: ? for the board

[covelj70]

hey all

I very rarely weigh in on these debates (on this board or anywhere else) because one\'s views are understandably influenced by how one played the race and passions tend to run so high on these issues but...


....to criticize how Gryder rode the race without criticizing how Johnny V rode the race is a tough one for me.

Johnny V. race rode Flintshire from the first steps out of the gate.  He was trying to box him in down the backside and prevent him from getting outside in the clear until the far turn by which time Flintshire was hopelessly buried inside (so Johnny race rode very effectively)

Now, to anyone who wants to say race riding is different than what Gryder did, I would highlight that this strategy did not give his horse the best chance to win the race.  There was no reasonable expectation that he was going to win this race by staying back next to him early and matching turn of foot with Flintshire late and he knows this.  His only chance would have been to get first run on Flintshire and open up a big lead on him at the top of the stretch to see if he could force Flintshire to move early.  By boxing him in as long as he did, he absolutely compromised his chances for whatever reason he choose to go after Flintshire. Anyone who watched the NBC telecast heard Chad call this point out immediately after the race.

As an aside, I fully agree with Steve Byk\'s and JB\'s points that rabbits should run as a coupled entry but either way, to only focus on the Gryder ride and not the Johnny V ride isn\'t looking at the whole picture in this one

full disclosure as to my bias is that my only play in the race was singling Flintshire in the pick 6 and pick 4.

[jbelfior]

Hi Jimbo:
Then I think I need to start joining you guys. I\'m not seeing anything clearly as of late.

Good Luck,
Joe B.

[richiebee]

NYRA is run like a business now, and coupled entries mean shorter fields and
the possibility of purse money only runners, both of which negatively affect
the bottom line.

In days of old, coupled entries were required when there was any common
ownership or runners were being saddled by one trainer, and the understanding
was that this was to protect the betting public.

Someone with a better reputation for sobriety can help me with this, but I do
seem to recall instances where a foul committed by a lower placed part of an
entry resulted in the DQ of a higher placed entrymate. Hypothetically, if
Gryder\'s actions were egregious, and contributed to Flintshire\'s victory,
maybe the stewards would have put both (hypothetically coupled) Juddmonte
runners behind the Maker horse (Joe you still would not have had the
exacta)(all Juddmonte turfers who need firm ground and Lasix immediately moved
to Woodbine).

Other possibilities:

a) Gryder stays on the rail; Flintshire leaps over him and draws off.

b) Castellano swings Flintshire four wide going into the far turn and draws
off, JB has to give another jumbo #.

This is a brilliant racehorse, whose brilliance is diminished by the lack of
competition he has faced in his NYRA races. Flintshire is a
Nureyev/Baryshnikov on a stage with some amateur rap video dancers.

Richie Rooftop*

----------------
* Never been in a (the?) rooftop bar in Saratoga. Didn\'t even know Saratoga
had a skyline. Now if you want to go to the rooftop at the Perfect Pint on W
45th Street....

[Niall]

I totally respect anything that Jim C posts here but really see this race differently. Flintshire could have tipped out at any time on the back side and went 5 wide and may have won for fun. Johhny V went overland and we know where Flintshire went. The wagering premise of this race was betting MM and hoping for a bad trip for Flintshire. Remember this is a horse that hasnt closed the deal in quite a few races, albeit overseas. If MM gets a good jump who knows. The Stewards Corner on the NYRA website is less than useless. There was an article in DRF that said the stewards talked to all involved. Any idea what it said? I hope Gryder gets the winter off. He\'s an anchor !!

[TempletonPeck]

I agree that a person can be influenced by their bets when comes the time to decide a case like this, so in the interest of full disclosure: I didn\'t bet a thin dime on the race.

As far as criticizing one ride or rider without criticizing the other, that\'s easy, watch:

Velazquez is a moron.

Gryder is a cheat.

I could print those sentences together, or not, and be right or wrong about either or both without any dependence on the other.

Johnny V may have ridden the race in a way that you felt did more to compromise Flintshire\'s chances than maximize his own, and you may even be right about that. That doesn\'t mean he cheated, it means he\'s stupid (or at least, that he made a poor decision on how to ride his horse).

Regardless of what Velazquez did though, Gryder (and this was very clearly visible, as others have pointed out) took an action specifically to maximize the chances of another horse winning without regard to his own chances.

The difference is intent. One may have intended to increase his own chances by decreasing the chances of another while hoping not to cause a corresponding decrease in his own chances, while the other never intended to attempt to win the race, only to maximize the chances of another winning.

[headstr8ner]

Disclosure...First, let me say that I have been a small time "licensed" (important word for this post) horse owner for 30 years. Secondly, I had Flintshire in my Pick 6 and Pick 4.
I have no problem with the art of strategizing with jockeys in the paddock in order to help the athlete (horse) achieve a goal to perform well and make some money. Trainers are the experts with knowledge of the athletes' health and psychological challenges.  What I do not like, is to strategize with the intent of not caring if you hit the board or superfecta, but just to ride defensively in order to help the stablemate get the prize.  This is a why I asked the "ethics" question in my post yesterday about Rabbits. I am a licensed professional that is closely monitored by two State Boards. I am required to take many hours of continuing ethics courses and each year "attest" that I completed these workshops.  As a licensed horse owner, I would be willing to do the same in order to bring a higher degree of integrity to the business and for the protection of the betting public. The arrangement between Chad Brown and his two jockeys appears to be collusive and somewhat unethical.  In addition, it would be more of an injustice if the jockeys equally split the $53,500 first place jock mount and fifth place $2000.00. Maybe the Racing Commission needs to let us know if, in fact, that happened.

[SoCalMan2]

Why are the stewards getting a free pass here?  

The trainer of the horse that was interfered with claimed foul against the horse that did the interfering.  It doesnt seem like anybody is questioning the fact that the rail horse interfered with the horse just outside of him.  Why isn\'t Roman Approval entitled to move up with Gryder\'s horse moving down?

Fair disclosure -- I am still very much smarting over the Stewards Non-Call in the 4stardave.  I still cannot understand how they can say they are disallowing the 7 horse\'s claim of foul against the 8 horse because the 1 horse fouled the 2 horse.  It doesnt pass the redface test.  

Why is the only steward to ever get punished for anything is John Veitch?  

Shouldn\'t the stewards be subject to some form of censure or punishment if they completely blow a call (not bad judgment, getting something wrong I am talking about)?  They get to DQ horses and their connections, but the stewards cannot be DQ\'ed.  They should have to sit in the penalty box for a while.  They might do a better job if that was hanging over their head.

A poster here mentioned one of the 2yo stakes were the DQ was completely ridiculous.  

I cannot believe I am saying this, but it might be fair to say that the Stewards are having an even worse meet than the linemaker.  I wouldnt have thought that was possible, but is there anybody who can defend their failure to DQ Gryder\'s horse?  (BTW, I like Richie\'s point -- if an entry mate is run as a pick (basketball) for its other half and fouls somebody, shouldn\'t the whole entry suffer?  If not, why not just enter lots of entry mates (goons) and just check all the competition every step of the way.....might be a cool new sport (not).

[jimbo66]

Sorry SoCalMan,

But NOBODY is having a worse meet than the linemaker.  I am having my worst saratoga meet in 15 years and I am still doing better than Travis Stone.  

The way he butchers the morning line, day after day after day, reminds me of being 14 years old and fumbling with bra straps (of the 1 or 2 girls who were too dumb to run far away from me......)

Point taken on stewards though.  

Jim

Edit - Because RichieBee was tired of me (and others) whining about the hack that is Travis Stone, I took his advice last week and wrote a long email to NYRA, pointing out 15 egregious errors stone had made and also pointed out 4 errors that he made in the Friday card (I wrote the note before racing had begun).

Of course - no response from NYRA.....

Maybe the reply is in the mail.

[FrankD.]

To hell with Travis Stone and your Jersey bimbettes.

I\'m getting my butt kicked and you wanted to kiss me!!!!!

WTF could be worse?

[TGJB]

I can tell you for a fact there\'s internal discussion at NYRA about the morning lines.

[FrankD.]

For the days races or for the pokeymon go dash for poke coins?

[TheBull]

Jim, I rarely say this, but I could not disagree with you more in this case. Gryder\'s ride and Johnny V\'s ride could not have been more opposite, both in substance and most importantly, intent. When you race ride AGAINST the big favorite to box him in, the idea is by hurting his chances, you in turn are giving your mount a better chance. Whether or not that was the way to do it is up for debate I know, but the point remains, he rode the race which he thought benefitted HIS mount the most. His decisions were for the sake of his mount and their connections.

Gryder\'s version of race riding was the complete opposite. He intentionally harmed his chances and the chances of others for the sole benefit of ANOTHER HORSE. Johnny V did what he thought was best for his horse, Gryder did what he thought was best for Flintshire. The two are not at all comparable.

Im surprised I havent read more about how incredibly dangerous it was. What if the other jock had went down and gotten paralyzed or worse? What if you owned the horse who got smashed and the horse went down? Fairness is important, but let\'s not forget how completely wreckless and unsafe it was too. Gryder has ALOT of explaining to do if Im in charge.

[TempletonPeck]

SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why are the stewards getting a free pass here?  

Unfortunate answer: because none of us will quit betting NYRA over their failure to DQ/refund bets/take any other appropriate action in spots like this.

And FWIW, if you ask me what the appropriate steward\'s response for this is, I\'d say something like this: give Gryder and Brown each the rest of the year off, approximate what each of them earned on the race, fine them that much money, and refund all bets.

[covelj70]

Thanks for the thoughts

just to clarify, my point is that he did not ride the race that gave his horse the best chance to win.  I am arguing that his ride was focused on hurting the chances of Flintshire and not maximizing his own horses chances.  

I don\'t agree with the ride that either Johnny or Gryder gave their mounts, I just don\'t think it\'s fair to criticize Gryder without criticizing Johnny.

of course, if you don\'t think Johnny did anything wrong, then there\'s nothing to criticize.  Obviously that\'s not my position here but I understand that others may see if differently

thanks again for the thoughts

[SoCalMan2]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can tell you for a fact there\'s internal
> discussion at NYRA about the morning lines.


Although I plead guilty to being a vocal complainer about the Morning Lines, I respectfully disagree with Jimbo66.  I think it is a close call as to who is having a worse meet as between the Linemaker and the Stewards.  

Also, I think the Stewards are in a position to do far worse damage than the linemaker can, no matter how bad he is.  

Although I am quite unhappy about the Morning Line situation, I think there is no question that the problems with the stewards should be a higher priority.

Can anybody figure out what they are saying in their published decision on the Sword Dancer?  Here is a link to it --

https://www.nyra.com/saratoga/racing/stewards-decisions/aug-27-2016

Maybe I am a poor reader or lacking in reasoning skills, but I cannot for the life of me understand what the reason is that they made the decision they made.

At least in the 4stardave, I could understand what they were saying -- it was pure Lewis Carroll, but at least it was comprehensible.