Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

The Triple Crown Races 2019

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I am very thankful for all the replies here. I was upset yesterday with the outcome of the race. The coverage made it seem like CH"s connections were the only ones lodging a protest, and that did seem like sour grapes to me.

    I think the seriousness of interfering with the progress of the other horses and the rule against not staying in your lane could have been better explained to the public. I think the stewards made the right call here considering the potential consequences.

    I was wondering if Saez could have avoided the swerve? It would be no surprise to me that such a green horse would spook at such enormous crowds but how do you train for that or ride for that?
    http://thepitchforkchronicles.com

    Comment


      Originally posted by vineyridge View Post
      You all know that NY banned gambling on horse racing at the end of the nineteenth or beginning of the twentieth century. More than a few rich racing owners moved their horses to France and GB and continued to race and breed over there. When WWI broke out, most of them moved their stables back to the US (and I think NY passed legislation allowing gambling on races again).

      So if PETA does manage to shut down racing in California, one would think that owners would just move. Racing will most likely always continue in "backward", "unwoke" places like Louisiana, Kentucky, and Arkansas.
      You are talking 100 year old history and that is another place and another day. Speaking as someone who actually races in California, my Calbreds can't necessarily just relocate. Losing California and the money collectively in California from owners who don't have graded stakes horses would cripple the breeding industry.

      Comment


        Originally posted by Where'sMyWhite View Post

        Mike Smith last May, 4 day suspension. Didn't keep him out of the Preakness but yes, top riders can get riding suspensions.
        Which is why I used the word "rarely" and did not use the word "never."

        Comment


          Originally posted by Where'sMyWhite View Post
          Only thing that I thought a bit unusual is in all the write-ups I've seen, no mention that neither Tyler Gaffalione or Mark Casse (rider and trainer of War Of Will) have been mentioned as lodging an objection and, IMO, War Of Will was most impacted during the race by Maximum Security's 3 lane drift.
          Tyler made a mistake in trying to swing wide into a hole that was not really there. Code of Honor then went up the rail and actually stuck his head in front for a brief moment. What if Tyler would have stayed on the rail a few more strides? He could have been 3 in front in the blink of an eye.

          Comment


            Going out on a limb: over the past decade, we have trended to less and less preparation going into the Kentucky Derby. I mean this in the sense of racing experience: 20 years ago, no one would have taken a horse with only four career starts seriously in the derby. People thought it was insane that Barbaro could come into the Kentucky Derby with only five lifetime starts and a long layoff... now his pathway has become the new norm. Nearly half the field had five or less starts on Saturday.

            We're putting increasingly greener horses into a situation unlike anything else they will face in their careers. There is no other time they will be in a 20 horse stampede amid one of the greatest parties on Earth.

            I don't think it's a total coincidence that War of Will and Long Range Toddy were able to avoid disaster given that they were the two most experienced racehorses in the entire field.

            I worry that we are going to see more and more "green" moments with the current trends. Yet I also don't know what the solution is; regulations can't fix this. Telling a trainer they need to make X number of starts before the Kentucky Derby is absurd. It will accomplish nothing and could also unintentionally lead to over-racing our young horses, which isn't any better. My feeling is that it's up to the horse racing community to better police themselves in this area; nothing can replace actual racing experience when it comes to combating greenness.
            Don't fall for a girl who fell for a horse just to be number two in her world... ~EFO

            Comment


              Originally posted by Sunflower View Post

              Perhaps we have different understandings of the meaning of the word "scandal." The Deflategate football incident was about cheating, if I recall, about whether footballs had the air let out in violation of the rules. On the other hand, the Kentucky Derby call is not about whether there was deliberate cheating. I am not seeing the parallels. Nor how the Kentucky Derby call is a "scandal." How? Are there claims of bribery, or corruption? Or the like?
              Scandal as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary: an action or event regarded as morally or legally wrong and causing general public outrage.

              I do believe that this spook and subsequent call have caused public moral outrage.

              Comment


                Originally posted by mkevent View Post
                I was wondering if Saez could have avoided the swerve? It would be no surprise to me that such a green horse would spook at such enormous crowds but how do you train for that or ride for that?
                Saez was doing a fantastic job of holding the horse on the rail to keep anyone from cutting the corner and getting the jump on him. As a jockey, you can't really avoid things like that swerve. He was riding forward, and was probably lucky to maintain his balance and mostly keep control of the horse. Jockeys have about half the ball of the foot and a few toes in the stirrup, so balance is easily compromised. I'm sure the trainer was thinking that he should have stuffed the horse's ears. You try to predict everything that can go wrong, and then you pray.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by vineyridge View Post
                  Racing will most likely always continue in "backward", "unwoke" places like Louisiana, Kentucky, and Arkansas.
                  Whoa whoa whoa, back the truck up. YOU ARE IN MISSISSIPPI.

                  Comment

                    Original Poster

                    Originally posted by mkevent View Post

                    I was wondering if Saez could have avoided the swerve? It would be no surprise to me that such a green horse would spook at such enormous crowds but how do you train for that or ride for that?
                    Not comparing myself in any way to a professional jockey, but when I think of the number of times I have found myself lying on the ground after a green horse's spook, I don't think even a pro can train or ride for that.

                    Comment


                      Pronzini. And Palm Beach

                      ​​​​​​​Have really appreciated your insight here.
                      Stay well. Stay safe. Stay home.

                      Comment

                        Original Poster

                        Oh, dear, now I am reading that MS's connections might be reconsidering a decision to appeal the decision of the stewards. I sure hope not--it is ugly and miserable as it is, and that would just drag everything out into uglier and more miserable.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by THE RULE IS:
                          The rule, as written, is below:
                          "If a leading horse or any other horse in a race swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with, intimidate, or impede any other horse or jockey, or to cause the same result, this action shall be deemed a foul. ... If, in the opinion of the stewards, a foul alters the finish of a race, an offending horse may be disqualified by the stewards."
                          https://heavy.com/sports/2019/05/max...of-will-video/

                          Put those there, just in case someone needs to see it.

                          Originally posted by Pronzini View Post
                          I think we came within two strides of closing down the sport.

                          The stewards had to rule the way they did.
                          Yes. I think you are very right. But War of Will is a fine horse. If he can DANCE that well at 40+ mph, I think he’ll sire some fine dressage horses. But that’s to be seen.

                          Originally posted by Event Horse View Post
                          No, I didn't miss anything. Every semester I see individuals who don't legitimately earn a passing grade (i.e., "win") try any manipulation they can by appealing the grade (i.e., file an objection to the stewards). These students are the snowflakes who cannot deal with any outcome other than what they feel they deserve. This parallels what Flavien Prat did. Mott very likely prodded him to it. So, think of Mott as the snowflake's parent. These parents are not helicopter parents anymore - they are "snowplows" who get involved and clear the path for their snowflakes. Seriously, I have been contacted by parents of 20+ year olds regarding grades.

                          Bill Mott needed to shut the *#%& up - he greatly exaggerated the incident as if everyone out there nearly took a tumble. Yes, it could have been nasty if War of Will had clipped heels with Maximum Security. But Mott made it sound like several horses and jockeys almost fell, and that is not what happened.

                          Maximum Security had that race stolen from him. He was clearly the best horse. At one point, there was a horse coming up on his inside that seemed to bump him and push him out, but no inquiry there.
                          Your first paragraph is apples and oranges. Two different issues with no connection at all.

                          Bill Mott did not exaggerate what happened. Just because EVERYBODY didn’t go down, doesn’t mean it wasn’t bad. Don’t you care about safety? And but for WoW's quick footwork, LOTS of horses and riders would have gone down. I hope he got a bushel full of carrots and apples that evening. (We all know what horses value!)

                          NO. The race was not stolen from him. He blew the race when he swung out and impeded other horses. Don’t like it? Read my first paragraph which states the rule. If you sign up to play, YOU SIGN UP TO PLAY BY THE RULES.

                          I can’t believe some of the things I’ve been reading here. Fer Cryin’ Out Loud, It’s Horse Racing. You pays your money and you takes your chances. As far as the horse-ignorant public is concerned – Well, they call it gambling for a reason! Easy to cry and yell when you think your sure thing winning ticket – isn’t.

                          For horsemen – I’ll say it again. If you sign up to play, YOU SIGN UP TO PLAY BY THE RULES. Jockeys especially, have every right under the sky to expect the stewards to uphold actions that affect their safety in races. I don’t care who reports it because IT DOESN’T MATTER.

                          Max ran well, but he made a bad mistake and it cost him a big win. The Derby is a bad race to make that sort of mistake, but guess what? Sh!t happens in racing – Even in the Derby. Because horses.

                          I didn’t see that part, but any booing was uncalled for. If you value the win and the money more than Jockey and horse safety, IMO, that makes you a pretty bad person.

                          “It’s up to you the voters to decide the future of our democracy. So get out and vote. ... As Abraham Lincoln said, the best way to predict the future is to choose it.” Professor Allan Lichtman

                          Comment


                            I too was sorry to be Maximum Security taken down. However I cannot imagine how his DQ can be considered detrimental to racing when the stewards followed the rules to reach this outcome. Had they not followed those rules, millions of people would have (rightly) cried foul.

                            This from a BloodHorse article by Bill Finley:
                            "Here’s the Kentucky Racing Commission rule: “A leading horse if clear is entitled to any part of the track. If a leading horse or any other horse in a race swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with, intimidate, or impede any other horse or jockey, or to cause the same result, this action shall be deemed a foul.”"

                            MS was much the best horse in the race but--under the rules of racing--that didn't matter. Once he went sideways and impeded other horses, he eliminated his own chances. That wasn't Bill Mott's fault. It wasn't Flavian Prat's fault. And it wasn't Country House's fault. Maximum Security took himself out of the running.

                            That rule is in place for the express purpose of keeping both horses and jockeys safe. So to me it seems hard to argue that it ought to be applied subjectively.

                            ETA: Sparrowette, we posted at the same time--and said much the same thing.
                            www.laurienberenson.com

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by LaurieB View Post
                              I too was sorry to be Maximum Security taken down. However I cannot imagine how his DQ can be considered detrimental to racing when the stewards followed the rules to reach this outcome. Had they not followed those rules, millions of people would have (rightly) cried foul.

                              This from a BloodHorse article by Bill Finley:
                              "Here’s the Kentucky Racing Commission rule: “A leading horse if clear is entitled to any part of the track. If a leading horse or any other horse in a race swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with, intimidate, or impede any other horse or jockey, or to cause the same result, this action shall be deemed a foul.”"

                              MS was much the best horse in the race but--under the rules of racing--that didn't matter. Once he went sideways and impeded other horses, he eliminated his own chances. That wasn't Bill Mott's fault. It wasn't Flavian Prat's fault. And it wasn't Country House's fault. Maximum Security took himself out of the running.

                              That rule is in place for the express purpose of keeping both horses and jockeys safe. So to me it seems hard to argue that it ought to be applied subjectively.

                              ETA: Sparrowette, we posted at the same time--and said much the same thing.
                              Great minds think alike!
                              “It’s up to you the voters to decide the future of our democracy. So get out and vote. ... As Abraham Lincoln said, the best way to predict the future is to choose it.” Professor Allan Lichtman

                              Comment


                                My initial reaction to the inquiry was "oh no" Country House was not bothered - even Jockey admitted such - that he had a clear path. And I was so impressed with the overall race run by MS. But the more I watched the video shots, and when I later read that Toddy's jockey also filed complaint and calmly read the rules this am, I'm now believing it was the right decision. Sucks for MS team but then s*** happens.
                                Quite frankly when I saw the horse veer out during the race, I thought he was done and others would go by him. The fact that he was first over the finish with decent lead says a lot about the capability of him.

                                Comment


                                  I was very confused with the disqualification, and since I don't know that much about racing, except as a spectator. The entire dust up was mind boggling. However, after seeing the slow motion of the interference, and an explanation of what could have happened if the horses went down, I think it was absolutely the right call by the stewards.

                                  Honestly, if the horses had gone down in a mass fall yesterday, with jockeys flying I think it would have led to a huge outcry against any type of horse racing. The MS crew is quoted as saying they're appealing, and if that's not upheld, then they're going to court. That is classless, and the sore loser action.
                                  Last edited by JanM; May. 5, 2019, 01:47 PM.
                                  You can't fix stupid-Ron White

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Maythehorsebewithme View Post
                                    Oh, dear, now I am reading that MS's connections might be reconsidering a decision to appeal the decision of the stewards. I sure hope not--it is ugly and miserable as it is, and that would just drag everything out into uglier and more miserable.
                                    It would be interesting, though; I don’t think they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning it, but if they did, how would the money be handled? All the bets have been paid out.
                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    Today I will be happier than a bird with a french fry.

                                    Comment


                                      Originally posted by charismaryllis View Post

                                      It would be interesting, though; I don’t think they have a snowball's chance in hell of winning it, but if they did, how would the money be handled? All the bets have been paid out.
                                      I don't think they have a hope of getting the stewards' decision overturned. But if it was, the bettors would be out of luck anyway.
                                      www.laurienberenson.com

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Texarkana View Post
                                        Going out on a limb: over the past decade, we have trended to less and less preparation going into the Kentucky Derby. I mean this in the sense of racing experience: 20 years ago, no one would have taken a horse with only four career starts seriously in the derby. People thought it was insane that Barbaro could come into the Kentucky Derby with only five lifetime starts and a long layoff... now his pathway has become the new norm. Nearly half the field had five or less starts on Saturday.

                                        We're putting increasingly greener horses into a situation unlike anything else they will face in their careers. There is no other time they will be in a 20 horse stampede amid one of the greatest parties on Earth.

                                        I don't think it's a total coincidence that War of Will and Long Range Toddy were able to avoid disaster given that they were the two most experienced racehorses in the entire field.

                                        I worry that we are going to see more and more "green" moments with the current trends. Yet I also don't know what the solution is; regulations can't fix this. Telling a trainer they need to make X number of starts before the Kentucky Derby is absurd. It will accomplish nothing and could also unintentionally lead to over-racing our young horses, which isn't any better. My feeling is that it's up to the horse racing community to better police themselves in this area; nothing can replace actual racing experience when it comes to combating greenness.
                                        I didn’t realize all the horses were so lightly raced in the Derby yesterday. I did definitely have a WTFreak moment when they said bodexpress was a MAIDEN. How did that horse even get into that gate? Much less belong there.

                                        Comment


                                          Originally posted by Event Horse View Post
                                          2019 Kentucky Derby: What Happens When Snowflakes Become Jockeys

                                          I say this only half tongue in cheek because I deal with college students who will cry foul at ANYTHING (even invent things) to improve their grade.
                                          I tend more towards thinking that the snowflakes are the ones who want to ignore a rule/regulation violation because "nothing bad happened, so just like, let it go man."
                                          Proud Member Of The Lady Mafia

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X