Baffert to enter Rabbit???

[skitimber]

A couple of thoughts from a neutral corner:

First, the game wouldn\'t be on it\'s last leg even if every race were thought to be fixed; people love gambling and would always enjoy the idea of predicting the fix.  People bet on dog fights and dog races and bet their last few dollars on the lottery even when they know their chances of winning are less than that of being hit by lightening.  If they could see cockroach races, I bet (see - people will be on anything) they\'d bet on those as well.

As far as Justify, I don\'t think anyone claiming he isn\'t a deserving TC winner nor wouldn\'t have won the race without Restoring Hope entered, but the concern is simply that if the race had been closer, Restoring Hope might have made a difference.  To some, it\'s cheating and to others, not.

Finally, I hope we haven\'t seen Justify\'s last race and hope there\'s a horse that can give him a fight later in the year (and that Restoring Hope or similar not entered in the race so no questions after the fact.)

[Dana666]

Any of us are only as smart as the last ticket we cashed! I did not cash in the Belmont. I had a giant exacta with Justify over Hofburg, and I had Justify singled in pick 4. Smart would have been buying the T-G analysis. Then I would have cashed huge on the pick 4. I did not have that bomb in the turf race they nailed. I usually buy it on big days too, but for some reason I didn\'t on Saturday.

[JR]

I was referring to your ideas about race riding and protecting Justify, none of which are the supposed responsibilities of the jockey. This isn’t football. Blocking isn’t allowed.

[JR]

Cheating? I guess it depends on your tolerances. I’d like to think the race is about each horse against the other. Not teams. But, instead, the simple ability of each horse racing against the other on a particular day. But I also wish for drug free racing so I’m probably a bit too optimistic.

[P-Dub]

JR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was referring to your ideas about race riding
> and protecting Justify, none of which are the
> supposed responsibilities of the jockey. This
> isn’t football. Blocking isn’t allowed.

Just curious.

When did this blocking take place??

[JR]

The sport is descending to the depths of professional wrestling. They can have it. I’m losing interest.

[JR]

So you’re OK with Geroux “the man’s” ride? I’m sticking with Gulfstream.

[P-Dub]

JR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So you’re OK with Geroux “the man’s” ride?
> I’m sticking with Gulfstream.


You didn\'t answer the question

[moosepalm]

Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aren\'t those factors we need to consider as
> bettors? What is the intention here--why is this
> particular horse in the race? Is it that any
> different than a trainer dropping a horse in a
> claiming race who either runs last or runs off the
> screen? Can anyone fault you for taking a stand on
> a long-shot in a race where long shots (often very
> improbable ones) have often panned out very well?
> I certainly couldn\'t fault that logic because if
> you win, you\'re gonna get paid, but did you
> honestly think Baffert was going to try and beat
> his triple crown chance with his other horse?
> That\'s the only thing I don\'t really follow. But
> again, no one should fault the stand. I certainly
> don\'t. It\'s better than a jackass like myself
> betting Hoffburg, I also used Justify in
> multi-race exotics (but Hoffburg was throwing away
> money at terrible odds, respectively, like he had
> any chance to win--I\'ll bet a Mott horse again
> when Saratoga gets polytrack-and a Tapit no less,
> the most overrated sire in racing history).

A few things:

- Yes, trying to crystal ball trainer intent is a part of the game.  Like gauging pace in the race, or numerous other factors, it\'s assumption-based.  In this instance, let\'s forget the 20-20 hindsight we seem to have, and look at it from the front end.  Big Day Bob has an astounding record shipping into Belmont in prime time.  The Belmont itself is a race in which horses frequently make a big forward move and then disappear, but they have it on their resume for the breeding shed.  Most importantly, a 37-1 horse doesn\'t have to win for you to make money.  There was an $88 exacta with a horse who had as many question marks as Restored Hope, and he was 24-1.  So IF the horse was not well meant, and you didn\'t have x-ray vision into trainer intent, your money was flushed down the crapper.  

- Obviously, wagering in this game is a \"to each his own\" stratagem.  Personally, I couldn\'t be happier to see bettors dismiss Bill Mott or other trainers who don\'t get a 38% hit rate at some, but not all, meets, or who don\'t have an armada of three year olds ready for the Derby each year.  My disregard for Mott in the 2011 Breeders Cup Classic cost me what still would have been the biggest payday of my sad wagering life.  When he gets hot, as he frequently does at Saratoga, even with Todd and Chad lurking in the weeds, I won\'t ignore him simply because he\'s old school.

- Re:Tapit -- see Richiebee somewhere else on the board.

[Strike]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One of several things getting lost in this is the
> effect on bettors. If those two were being use to
> set up other horses, someone who bet on EITHER
> Noble Indy or Restoring Hope got screwed-- the
> horse was not in there to win. It is no different
> than betting on a horse that got stiffed.
>
> After watching 6 straight Baffert horses run tops
> on Belmont day, and with there being no chance he
> was being entered as a rabbit, I used Restoring
> Hope heavily. Every dollar was thrown away.

After reading many of the statements about the ride, the main concern I have is with the statement from the owner of Restoring Hope -- West declined comment on whether Restoring Hope was used to block for Justify, who settled into a comfortable, unpressured advantage that he never relinquished.

“Everyone looks at things differently,” West said. “We didn’t belong in the race, anyway, and that is my fault.”

It appears to me that he is basically saying that since his horse did not belong in the race -- and presumably Baffert told him so -- that it is kind of OK if his horse was used in such a way to assist Baffert\'s other horse who definitely belonged in the race -- (even though this owner of Restoring Hope was never informed of the strategy). I think the word \"anyway\" tips that off. If they were coupled (same owners) the outcry would be fiercer. And, it seems like West\'s apparent feelings about the use of his horse -- to block -- are true.

[JR]

Oh. Taking RH wide into the turn to prevent Noble Indy from challenging for the lead from the outside. Then, seeing that NI wasn’t a threat, bringing RH back over on to the flanks of Justify to keep the Lukas horse pinned down inside. You saw it a different way I guess. It was a weird ride.

[Topcat]

trackjohn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Couldn\'t agree more...breaks slow, rushes up,
> attempts to float half the field wide in the
> clubhouse turns, \'rides shotgun\' for more than a
> mile and conveniently slides over in front of
> Tenfold coming out of the far turn...whatever...



A disgraceful performance . . .  thirty days would be justified.  And I didn\'t risk a nickel on the race.

[Topcat]

JR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh. Taking RH wide into the turn to prevent Noble
> Indy from challenging for the lead from the
> outside. Then, seeing that NI wasn’t a threat,
> bringing RH back over on to the flanks of Justify
> to keep the Lukas horse pinned down inside. You
> saw it a different way I guess. It was a weird
> ride.


Anybody who harbored any doubts, shouldn\'t, given Smith\'s call-out immediately after the race . . .

[Paolo]

Those who think it was merely race riding will be the first to cry foul next year when TAP has 5 entered in the Derby and he turns it into a rodeo. Since the stewards took no action, the ride was clearly legit... but IMO it sets a piss poor precedent. All thoroughbred owners should boycott Frenchie for a year! Of course that is a joke, since we all know that there is zero collaboration in this industry... except for the collusion necessary among participants to \'guarantee\' the outcome of certain races, like this year\'s Belmont...

[boardedup]

This was EXACTLY my point, (and exactly the same \"logic\"  I used to play the race)