And Maximum Security’s story will be compelling. Win The Preakness and Belmont and he becomes the first uncrowned Triple Crown winner.
Jeez, I feel awful for the jockey on Maximum Security.
Six-figure loss. Gut-wrenching.My heart hearts for the Maximum Security jockey.
It (an objection upheld) did happen once before, but not with the lead horse. In 1984 the 4th and 5th place finishers switched places when it was determined the 4th place horse (Gate Dancer) interfered with the 5th place horse (Fali Time).I can’t believe it’s never happened before. Huge fields every year means lots of horses crashing that turn.
The president disagrees. Although I never heard of the Kentuky Derby.It's telling- I see lots of stories about it this morning. I don't see any outcry of it being a bad ruling. It seems like most people who know the sport (I don't) accept that it was the right call- only noteworthy because it's the Kentucky Derby.
I work in the industry and think it was an abomination. It's like calling pass interference on a Hail Mary in the Super Bowl. There are 20 horses, there's contact in every running of the race, sometimes egregious contact, and other than when Gate Dancer was placed from fourth to fifth in I think 83 or 84, it's been let go, and certainly never impacted the winner.It's telling- I see lots of stories about it this morning. I don't see any outcry of it being a bad ruling. It seems like most people who know the sport (I don't) accept that it was the right call- only noteworthy because it's the Kentucky Derby.
I think this is the root of it--while this would almost certainly be called in a Thursday afternoon maiden claiming race, the tendency of the biggest races has been to leave the standings alone, whether that's fair or not. For me it brings to mind Bayern taking out Shared Belief and a few others at the start of the 2014 Breeders Cup, where he was not penalized.I work in the industry and think it was an abomination. It's like calling pass interference on a Hail Mary in the Super Bowl. There are 20 horses, there's contact in every running of the race, sometimes egregious contact, and other than when Gate Dancer was placed from fourth to fifth in I think 83 or 84, it's been let go, and certainly never impacted the winner.
Thanks.I work in the industry and think it was an abomination. It's like calling pass interference on a Hail Mary in the Super Bowl. There are 20 horses, there's contact in every running of the race, sometimes egregious contact, and other than when Gate Dancer was placed from fourth to fifth in I think 83 or 84, it's been let go, and certainly never impacted the winner.
Why did they choose to do it this year? I dunno....PETA has been given a voice in the sport, which is a massive mistake, and I think "safety concerns" probably played a big role.
I liked Tacitus and thought he raced well. Think he will have a big shot in the Belmont and I'll probably be on him again as long as the price is acceptable.Who was your pick prerace?
Agree with all the above except the sucks for MS's team part (at least with regard to Gary West).It was an obvious DQ.
I took a sports law class in law school and we had a couple officials from Saratoga come in one class and show us the angles officials see, which is much different than the TV angles.
I saw this one in real time and was very surprised e announcers weren’t talking about it. It sucks for MS’s team by it was clear.
Kinda surprised to read this as it seems like for the most part the people who are closest to the game have been supportive of the DQ.I work in the industry and think it was an abomination. It's like calling pass interference on a Hail Mary in the Super Bowl. There are 20 horses, there's contact in every running of the race, sometimes egregious contact, and other than when Gate Dancer was placed from fourth to fifth in I think 83 or 84, it's been let go, and certainly never impacted the winner.
Why did they choose to do it this year? I dunno....PETA has been given a voice in the sport, which is a massive mistake, and I think "safety concerns" probably played a big role.
Interesting. So people in the industry are suspicious with regard to the trainer. The owner has a reputation for bullying / litigating (excuse me, horses need to be drugged day of the race in this country or jockeys will die). The jockeys will be fine in other countries. The jockey swings the horse wide, coming frighteningly close to causing a pile-up, then swings the horse hard back to the rail and makes contact with the horse making a move on the rail. Then blames the horse and crowd noise. Sounds like a wonderful cast of characters.I think much of the "industry" is supporting it because they don't like his trainer. Jason Servis is a high-percentage win guy a lot of people think is a rule-breaker and steps up a lot of horses off people.
It doesn't matter...you can't ask the horse.You can't assume it was a puddle, or the sound of the crowd. Whatever. It doesn't matter. If was the 4th race at old Suffolk Downs on a Tuesday, the horse would have been DQ'd in about 2 minutes....you HAVE to maintain your path. Maximum Security moved out about 5 paths causing multiple horses to check and the number one horse was lucky he did not clip heels and fall. It was the right call, and if anything, gives the sport some credibility that regardless of the race, a foul is a foul....Yeah that was in no way Saez's fault or a deliberate act. Multi-time Derby winner Gary Stevens surmised on Twitter that the horse shied away from light reflecting off a puddle of water on the inside of the track, which is as plausible as anything...it was definitely some sort of action by the horse that the jockey had no control of.
Color me surprised at this view given what Petey noted above:Yeah that was in no way Saez's fault or a deliberate act. Multi-time Derby winner Gary Stevens surmised on Twitter that the horse shied away from light reflecting off a puddle of water on the inside of the track, which is as plausible as anything...it was definitely some sort of action by the horse that the jockey had no control of.
I am not sure if there was contact near the rail, but it sure looked like the MS/Saez combo veered way off line to the right to blunt those threats and then went way back left toward the rail when a threat appeared over there. Baseball folks used to talk about Mitch WIlliams pitching with a convenient wildness. MS/Saez looked to have a convenient skittishness.then swings the horse hard back to the rail and makes contact with the horse making a move on the rail.
Yeah, but this is why the intent is really kind of irrelevant.Color me surprised at this view given what Petey noted above:
I am not sure if there was contact near the rail, but it sure looked like the MS/Saez combo veered way off line to the right to blunt those threats and then went way back left toward the rail when a threat appeared over there. Baseball folks used to talk about Mitch WIlliams pitching with a convenient wildness. MS/Saez looked to have a convenient skittishness.
Could the swing back to the left have been an over correction? I know nothing, but that seems intuitively plausible to me.Color me surprised at this view given what Petey noted above:
I am not sure if there was contact near the rail, but it sure looked like the MS/Saez combo veered way off line to the right to blunt those threats and then went way back left toward the rail when a threat appeared over there. Baseball folks used to talk about Mitch WIlliams pitching with a convenient wildness. MS/Saez looked to have a convenient skittishness.
YesCould the swing back to the left have been an over correction? I know nothing, but that seems intuitively plausible to me.
The two breeders and owner who I'm friends with support it because it was an obvious infraction that shouldn't be ignored simply due to the fact that it was a massive stakes race. I appreciate your angle but between those personal relationships and virtually everyone of note saying similar it is interesting to hear this from another source even though I vehemently disagree.I think much of the "industry" is supporting it because they don't like his trainer. Jason Servis is a high-percentage win guy a lot of people think is a rule-breaker and steps up a lot of horses off people.
You are correct in that intent isn't any part of the rule and to Trump's point neither is the condition of the track. It was a clear foul and the magnitude of the race shouldn't change that. Yeah, but this is why the intent is really kind of irrelevant.
For whatever reason, MS veered right and then left, cutting off horses and causing at least two to check up hard. Whether caused by circumstances or design, that's a foul.
The commission cited Saez's "failure to controI his mount and make the proper effort to maintain a straight course, thereby causing interference with several rivals that resulted in the disqualification of his mount."