Re: Thoughts on outcome of derby?

pigletsmom · ‎11-21-2011

@QueenDanceALot wrote:
I'm willing to bet that if Maximum Security were a Todd Pletcher or Bob Baffert horse that the contact would have been ignored.

I worked in the thoroughbred business for many years and have never seen so much talk about "lanes" as I have in the last 24 hours. It's laughable. People have been talking like a horse race is set up like a track and field event. They obviously have never spoken to anyone in the business (in the USA) who know how much contact there is between horses on the track during a race. But yesterday, the "rule" about "lanes" is front and center. SMH.

I didn't watch the Derby as I don't watch horse racing anymore, I find it awful as I have seen too much of racing's dark underbelly. All the "pretty" surrounding the Derby can't cover it up.

@QueenDanceALot I wonder about the connections issue myself. I do think the DQ was warranted because it was so egregious but I'm shocked they did it in this race. Especially since the guy who originally claimed foul wasn't even bothered. I thought they'd just move on. Probably would have helped with all the specualtion if they threw the inquiry sign up which they didn't.

I heard the jockey of War of Will today and he's a class act. He said it was pretty bad and he was glad they didn't go down but he and the trainer didn't see the need to claim foul. It onl would have moved him from 7 to 6 and the felt it wasn't worth it.

Snowhite714 · ‎06-30-2014

The decision was fair. But, sorry for Maximum Security and the jockey, but rules are rules.

QueenDanceALot · ‎04-18-2013

@pigletsmom wrote:
@QueenDanceALot wrote:
I'm willing to bet that if Maximum Security were a Todd Pletcher or Bob Baffert horse that the contact would have been ignored.

I worked in the thoroughbred business for many years and have never seen so much talk about "lanes" as I have in the last 24 hours. It's laughable. People have been talking like a horse race is set up like a track and field event. They obviously have never spoken to anyone in the business (in the USA) who know how much contact there is between horses on the track during a race. But yesterday, the "rule" about "lanes" is front and center. SMH.

I didn't watch the Derby as I don't watch horse racing anymore, I find it awful as I have seen too much of racing's dark underbelly. All the "pretty" surrounding the Derby can't cover it up.

@QueenDanceALot I wonder about the connections issue myself. I do think the DQ was warranted because it was so egregious but I'm shocked they did it in this race. Especially since the guy who originally claimed foul wasn't even bothered. I thought they'd just move on. Probably would have helped with all the specualtion if they threw the inquiry sign up which they didn't.

I heard the jockey of War of Will today and he's a class act. He said it was pretty bad and he was glad they didn't go down but he and the trainer didn't see the need to claim foul. It onl would have moved him from 7 to 6 and the felt it wasn't worth it.

@pigletsmom

I only watched part of the race replay where the incident occurred and all I thought was 1) I've seen worse not called and 2) it happened at the top of the stretch with 1/4 mile to go? There was plenty of time for a horse to catch Maximum Security, contact or no contact. Maximum Security seemed to be the clear winner.

I wonder if there was some sort of vendetta against Maximum Security's trainer.

QueenDanceALot · ‎04-18-2013

@pigletsmom

After speaking with a couple of long time thoroughbred horse people (who visit my gym in the morning) who did see the race and have extensive experience in racing, I have changed my opinion to yours (and others) that the right call was made, regardless of whether or not Maximum Security would cross the finish line first.

After I cleared my head of my bias from long stories of years in the business) I had to agree that the rules about interference had to be upheld, regardless of why it happened or how it happened or whether the rules are always enforced.

I am thankful that there were no injuries to horses or riders. As you all saw, there could have been a catastrophic outcome.

ROMARY · ‎04-28-2010

MARP: Nerve-wracking photo, for sure.

'More or less', 'Right or wrong', 'In general', and 'Just thinking out loud ' (as usual).

ROMARY · ‎04-28-2010

p.s.

I really feel sorry for those horses.

Seriously, each horse should have it's own 'lane'.

Same as human runners on a track.

The fastest one wins.

I can't imagine that nobody has thought of this.

Also, I don't know how true this is, but I THOUGHT that I overheard (on TV) something about the several horse fatalities in the past year? or this year?. I'm guessing it was last year.

Let's all wish upon our lucky stars that lucky stars will shine upon all race horses, and that they will be safe.

'More or less', 'Right or wrong', 'In general', and 'Just thinking out loud ' (as usual).

Spacrazy · ‎12-14-2018

Maximum Security was clearly ripped off but the entire race was an accident waiting to happen. It is amazing there wasn’t physical harm to man or beast so everything else is irrelevant to me.

CrazyDaisy · ‎03-20-2010

Funny how everyone thinks the "best" always wins. It is the team, person, horse etc that played the best game or ran the best race that day. There is strategy and implementation involved in any competition.

Someday, when scientists discover the center of the Universe....some people will be disappointed it is not them.

Hoovermom · ‎03-19-2010

@QueenDanceALot wrote:
@pigletsmom wrote:
@QueenDanceALot wrote:
I'm willing to bet that if Maximum Security were a Todd Pletcher or Bob Baffert horse that the contact would have been ignored.

I worked in the thoroughbred business for many years and have never seen so much talk about "lanes" as I have in the last 24 hours. It's laughable. People have been talking like a horse race is set up like a track and field event. They obviously have never spoken to anyone in the business (in the USA) who know how much contact there is between horses on the track during a race. But yesterday, the "rule" about "lanes" is front and center. SMH.

I didn't watch the Derby as I don't watch horse racing anymore, I find it awful as I have seen too much of racing's dark underbelly. All the "pretty" surrounding the Derby can't cover it up.

@QueenDanceALot    I wonder about the connections issue myself. I do think the DQ was warranted because it was so egregious but I'm shocked they did it in this race. Especially since the guy who originally claimed foul wasn't even bothered. I thought they'd just move on. Probably would have helped with all the specualtion if they threw the inquiry sign up which they didn't.

I heard the jockey of War of Will today and he's a class act. He said it was pretty bad and he was glad they didn't go down but he and the trainer didn't see the need to claim foul. It onl would have moved him from 7 to 6 and the felt it wasn't worth it.
@pigletsmom

I only watched part of the race replay where the incident occurred and all I thought was 1) I've seen worse not called and 2) it happened at the top of the stretch with 1/4 mile to go? There was plenty of time for a horse to catch Maximum Security, contact or no contact. Maximum Security seemed to be the clear winner.

I wonder if there was some sort of vendetta against Maximum Security's trainer.

@QueenDanceALot : What would that be?

QueenDanceALot · ‎04-18-2013

@Hoovermom wrote:
@QueenDanceALot wrote:
@pigletsmom wrote:
@QueenDanceALot wrote:
I'm willing to bet that if Maximum Security were a Todd Pletcher or Bob Baffert horse that the contact would have been ignored.

I worked in the thoroughbred business for many years and have never seen so much talk about "lanes" as I have in the last 24 hours. It's laughable. People have been talking like a horse race is set up like a track and field event. They obviously have never spoken to anyone in the business (in the USA) who know how much contact there is between horses on the track during a race. But yesterday, the "rule" about "lanes" is front and center. SMH.

I didn't watch the Derby as I don't watch horse racing anymore, I find it awful as I have seen too much of racing's dark underbelly. All the "pretty" surrounding the Derby can't cover it up.

@QueenDanceALot    I wonder about the connections issue myself. I do think the DQ was warranted because it was so egregious but I'm shocked they did it in this race. Especially since the guy who originally claimed foul wasn't even bothered. I thought they'd just move on. Probably would have helped with all the specualtion if they threw the inquiry sign up which they didn't.

I heard the jockey of War of Will today and he's a class act. He said it was pretty bad and he was glad they didn't go down but he and the trainer didn't see the need to claim foul. It onl would have moved him from 7 to 6 and the felt it wasn't worth it.
@pigletsmom

I only watched part of the race replay where the incident occurred and all I thought was 1) I've seen worse not called and 2) it happened at the top of the stretch with 1/4 mile to go? There was plenty of time for a horse to catch Maximum Security, contact or no contact. Maximum Security seemed to be the clear winner.

I wonder if there was some sort of vendetta against Maximum Security's trainer.

@QueenDanceALot : What would that be?

@Hoovermom

He has a very unusual win percentage. There has been speculation about his "methods" for quite some time. And some of those speculators are undoubtedly other trainers.

I have 0 idea if any of the speculation is well-founded. My wondering was only that, wondering.

ETA: But I have since spoken to a number of horse people about this race and watched replays and now believe that the right call was made, regardless of how it happened.