I just don't get the DQ. The 4 and 2 BOTH come in leaving the gate. The 2 bumps the 1 while the 4, barely clear of the 2, veers in front of that one. The 1-2 jostle each other. Inquiry and the 4 comes down. OK fine, but why not the 2 for interfering with the 1. The 2 maintained about a straight a course as the 4!!!!!!!!! only diff, the 4 from what I see never touched anyone while the 2 made contact. I'd love to see the front and side views in sync. I swear the jostling was more from the contact with the 1 then the 4 veering in front of the 2. Seems the 1 decided to bump back at the point the 2 'loses it'.
If the 4 comes down, so should the 2!!!!! I'm off to the bathroom thinking I just hit an easy $20 double. I planned on increasing a later bet only to find the money isn't there. I hate DQ's ..... much like football penalties. One day we flag it, another, nah no problem. The Ray Lewis penalty in the end zone .... fine, it's a penalty, but the same hit later in the game is never called. Both damn horses did not maintain a straight line .... both should come down or it stands!!!!!!!
NYRA Stewards never cease to amaze me.They are consistantly inconsistant.I know I don't stand alone in this feeling,there should be NO DQ's ANYTIME.Should the officials feel a need to alter the outcome of any race,the penalty should be soley to the owner/trainer/jockey in purse money by the placing.Why penalize the bettor.I know sometimes these"fouls"do change the results,but many if not most seem like they wouldn't have.I have been on both sides as most who play the game.The fact is most are appealed and many are overturned.Makes you feel real good to find out that DQ that cost you,was reversed.No way will they give you your money back.The right thing would be to call it a no contest.But the tracks really don't want to start refunding.Costs them big in handle.
I feel your pain bro.
Doc, no DQ's...anytime? How does that help the bettor? Remember, for every bettor screwed by a DQ, another is helped, no? Like you said, you've been on both sides of the fence in the past and I'm sure that will continue going forward. Just gotta' hope you're on the "right" side more often!
it helps cause like I said,most are BS DQs.The part that really gets me is the appeals.I heard a steward say close to 70% of DQs are reversed after the appeal.The owners trainers have an process to reverse bad calls.The bettors don't,you ain't never getin your money back.How many times have you seen a DQ and said"that horse would have never won anyway".Good enough reason for me to scrap it.
At this point, the 2 is just bumping the 1 .... and the 4 might very well be veering in front of him .... not quite clear I'll admit, but still the 2 IS BUMPING the 1. The 4 had no part in the bump, done entirely by the 2, ON HIS OWN. As the 2 straightens up, the 1 bumps back and the 2 is clearly jostled but is it by the 1 or the 4???? LOL like in pro football I saw no inconclusive evidence the 2's 'jostle' was caused by the 4. If the 4 comes down for not maintaining a straight line .... so should the 2!!!!
Zig, fwiw, I just got a chance to review this race. I'm not taking any sides as to who should have come down, but the jock riding your assumed winner should be fined and given days off for that ride. He almost killed that jock (on the favorite)!
I don't have a problem with that .... my problem is BOTH horses did the exact same thing, veering in. The only difference is the 2 was not clear of the 1 enough to veer in front of him. No, he bumps the horse. If the 4 stays along side the 2, not slightly in front, and veers in and they bump, then who comes down?
The only thing I hated about my bet was Saez on the 4!!!! Not a fan!!!!
Zig, both horses appeared to be flying at the finish. The question is would the fav have been able to run down your horse given a better situation? Again, I don't think you or I can answer that question. But Saez was clearly in the wrong for cutting in and should be suspended. I think the stewards just wanted to make sure that HE didn't win the race.
In the NY Daily News today (or was it the NY Post?), the sports writer made a comment that if your horse was really guilty of cutting off BOTH horses, then shouldn't he really have been placed LAST behind the other runner? Food for thought...