|
|
 |
|
#1
10-21-2012, 08:14 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Charles Town Stewards
They are the most brutal I've ever seen anywhere.
First of all, Charles Town is a bull-ring... the 6.5 furlong races are run around two-turns and the fields are often full with 10 horses. The turns are very tight and this makes for aggressive racing because horses have to cross. The stewards were petty to begin with there -- and after a race at Charles Town earlier in the year when every single horse but one fell in a race -- they've become even more of a joke. By the way, the incident where every horse but one fell, had nothing at all to do with rough riding of any sort. A horse on the lead simply broke down and caused a chain reaction in a race that was unusually close to single-file in behind him. Many of their disqualifications have been dazzling displays of poor judgement. They've been incidents were minor infractions have occurred that have impacted the outcome in no way. They were at it again in yesterday nights 4th race -- an $85,000 stake. A 76/1 longshot who is 1-for-12 lifetime with no second place finishes -- and was recently beat in a very weak 10K N3L West Va bred claiming race had absolutely no business at all even being entered in the race. The eventual 2nd place finisher in the race came over a SLIGHT bit on this 76/1 laughing stock horse going into Charles Town's hairpin 1st turn. The rider on the 76/1 shot checked back (it was a very advantageous check because it put the horse in a clear and isolated position instead of being up in traffic with wildly superior horses) Technically, the check might have "cost" the horse a length of position, but anyone who understands racing knows the horse actually benefited from it because it took him out of a stressful position and put him in a comfortable one. Anyway, the 76/1 shot finishes 6th -- she is beaten 20 lengths. The 5th place finisher was EIGHT FULL LENGTHS in front of her. So, in order to have cost her a placing of any kind, one would have to argue that the check cost her more than 8 lengths. No other horse in the race was anywhere close to being involved in the incident. But, it's Charles Town... and the stewards have to inject themselves into the race like they love to do at that track and the bettors have to be punished. The eventual 2nd place finisher was DQ'd (he gained nothing by making it tight on that bum in the 1st turn, he was 2nd beaten 2 lengths and the third place finisher was 5 lengths clear) The revised outcome of the race didn't even cost me this time, but the incident aroused some memories of recent and similar DQ's at Charles Town that set me off into a rage. Only difference was those didn't happen in stakes races. Imagine if you owned the 2nd place finisher? That DQ cost you $40,000. And yeah, this pathetic and petty display by the stewards really helped "teach the jockeys a lesson about safe riding" In the VERY NEXT RACE, and ALSO ANOTHER $85,000 stakes race ... there was a tedious 15-minute inquiry that resulted in the DQ of the horse who crossed the wire 1st. The horse who crossed the wire 2nd survived an objection and was declared the winner. Basically, the message is clear. Even though Charles Town is a freaking bull-ring and the races for position are more hotly contested than at most places ... you can't get away with stuff you can at other tracks. And even if a slight infraction has absolutely zero impact on the outcome, even to a someone who is clueless and has the wildest of imaginations, it will result in a DQ. 
|
|
#2
10-21-2012, 08:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
unbelievable
I hate when people sugar coat things and don't express their true feelings. Some of the calls Ive seen over the years defy description. I can't believe no one ever waited for these guys to leave and hit him upside his head.
|
|
#3
10-21-2012, 08:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Doug...what was your take on the dq in the second race at CT on Wednesday if you happened to see it? That was really the first time I noticed the stewards impacting the races there, and then last night...well you pretty much summed that up perfectly.
|
|
#4
10-21-2012, 08:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
"Really? Are you kidding?" Only at Charles Town would that horse have been DQ'd. He didn't seem to bother anyone or cause anything -- how they determined him responsible for the little bit of chain reaction bumping just after the break is a mystery to me and pretty much everyone I talked to. For those that don't know -- that horse finished 2nd and was about 10 lengths clear of the 3rd place finisher. He was DQ'd and placed 7th for some real phantom stuff. I wasn't involved at all betting that race. I was DQ'd in a race at Charles Town for a real score earlier in the year -- I happened to be at PID. One of the tellers, Angel, still loves to bring it up and tell the story. Security was looking for a straight jacket to put me in.
|
|
#5
10-21-2012, 09:07 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here's the form of the two horses involved in the incident.
The superstar who had to check out of tight quarters going into the 1st turn.  The eventual 2nd place finisher who was DQ'd and placed behind her because she was outside of her in that scrum into the 1st turn. 
|
|
#6
10-21-2012, 09:32 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
How did being dq'd from second in an 85k stakes cost them 40k?
Do they pay 45k to first and 40k to second?
|
|
#9
10-21-2012, 10:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The better thing to do is to fine the jockey and leave the result alone ... that way you don't punish both the bettor, owner, and trainer when something happens that has absolutely no impact on the outcome of the race whatsoever. However, in this case, it would be a travesty to fine the jockey of the horse who got DQ'd. He had very little room going into that hairpin 1st turn, and he did not do anything wrong. When several horses are battling for the same position going into the 1st turn at a bullring, someone might have to check out...and usually it's the slowest horse who does.
|
|
#10
10-21-2012, 10:32 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
DQ'd 3 times in a span of four days at CT, and twice in stakes races.
|
|
#11
10-21-2012, 01:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm still trying to figure out why you referenced the chain reaction spill that had nothing to do with stewards or anything other than bad luck. Any insight?
|
|
#12
10-21-2012, 01:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#13
10-21-2012, 03:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Pat, if you paid any attention at all to Charles Town, you'd have noticed this trend over the last few months. Obviously you haven't. Apparently, these pathetic disqualifications and the way the way the stewards are handling these races is in the name of safety.
|
|
#15
10-21-2012, 07:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
"The stewards were petty to begin with there -- and after a race at Charles Town earlier in the year when every single horse but one fell in a race -- they've become even more of a joke. By the way, the incident where every horse but one fell, had nothing at all to do with rough riding of any sort. A horse on the lead simply broke down and caused a chain reaction in a race that was unusually close to single-file in behind him."
|
Linear Mode
