The NFL vs horseracing

Non-Tulane Sports Discussion
Anything that doesn't belong on the main YOGWF Sports forums e.g. Saints, Hornets, BC$, High School, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Fan Since '54
Regent's Circle
Posts: 9059
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 8:28 am
Location: Back home again...Oak Park sub division

The NFL vs horseracing

Post by Fan Since '54 »

Well at least horseracing knows how to get it right, even if it takes more than just a little while. Makes you wonder how many times before technology improved by leaps and bounds were there instances when rules were broken which went totally unseen. :roll:

Fan since '54
"...a hellava Hullabaloo"

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

Interesting topic.

If it’s a rule and the technology exists to correct a rule non-compliance, I have no problem with reversing a demonstrable error. Saints fans, of all people, should understand.
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

User avatar
doncecco
President's Circle
Posts: 3647
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: North Haven, CT

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by doncecco »

Two thoughts:

The now seemingly never-ending cries about officiating being so much worse these days and everything is rigged are beyond ridiculous. Clearly, technology has afforded a view never possible before. Technology has caused the same effect in teachers who sexually abuse children being caught. You can't possibly believe it happens so much more today than in the past. It's just way easier to get caught.

Secondly, the difference between the Saints no-call and the race is that this had never been done in 145 years of the derby. There have been no calls or bad calls in big football games before. But like the unwritten "playoff officiating is different" rules in football and basketball, there was 145 years of history that this doesn't happen in the world's most prestigious race. Thus why the outcry and although the Saints no-call affected me more personally, I can see how any ticket holders for Maximum Security, especially those with more than a few dollar mutual, would be losing their minds today.
Bring home da Wave!

User avatar
wave-em in
President's Circle
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 1:46 am

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by wave-em in »

Casual race fans and losing ticket holders need to realize that if not for the magnificent athleticism of the jockeys on the #1 and the #18 as well as the equine athletes, themselves, a tragedy of enormous proportions could have ended in multiple human and horse deaths.

Rules are in place for very good reasons and rightful enforcement of those rules got the placings correct.

User avatar
Johnny Mac
Regent's Circle
Posts: 8693
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 2:15 pm
Location: Charlotte

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by Johnny Mac »

wave-em in wrote:Casual race fans and losing ticket holders need to realize that if not for the magnificent athleticism of the jockeys on the #1 and the #18 as well as the equine athletes, themselves, a tragedy of enormous proportions could have ended in multiple human and horse deaths.

Rules are in place for very good reasons and rightful enforcement of those rules got the placings correct.
I just think it's admirable for officials to make a decision that they know will negatively impact horse racing... the odds of a triple crown candidate are way down with a 65 to 1 horse being the Derby Champ.. I imagine its odds for the Preakness will be around the same.
Image
YOGWF - of all the Tulane fans in the world, we're the Tulaniest

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

An interesting discussion now that we know baseball has achieved the Peter Principle.

Unless you are a degenerate gambler, and you know who you are, I think the money aspect of this ruling is not as stunning as the “never been done before” part noted above. It’s like when I learned a family I knew was going to name their newborn son...Arthur BLANK the Sixth...because it was an old Southern name and they dared not to break the string at The Fifth even though they did not particularly like the name or the George Foreman name confusion.

If there truly was a foul per horse racing rules then either this was the dirtiest Derby ever run (unlikely) or the previous 145 races were pristine (even more unlikely). What were the racing establishment paying the stewards, or whatever they are called, for all these decades? Unlike other big money sporting events the racing steward unknowns hide in some booth upstairs and can slink out relatively unscathed. Tell that to other officials, sometimes paid peanuts, who need a police escort out of the venue.

So the genteel veneer on The Derby is now a bit less so.
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

User avatar
PeteRasche
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23475
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by PeteRasche »

TUPF, I believe what you are missing is that there is a short period after the race ends for a protest to be filed, and if none are, the unofficial results become official. In past years, this happens generally within a few minutes of the race ending. This year I suspected something was up because the race results weren't official for a long time, even before the announcers started talking about there being a protest filed. So it's not like these people in a booth watching the results can just pick out something they saw on a win, and this year they did. Someone has to complain first. And from what I've heard, the sport is so dirty to begin with that no one dares complain because everyone has a closet full of skeletons they don't want to risk exposing.

I don't pretend to know racing rules but if that horse was supposed to stay in a lane, it definitely did not. And yeah, as said above, it came really close to being a disaster.

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

PeteRasche wrote:Someone has to complain first. And from what I've heard, the sport is so dirty to begin with that no one dares complain because everyone has a closet full of skeletons they don't want to risk exposing.
The money quote! :lol:
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

User avatar
doncecco
President's Circle
Posts: 3647
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: North Haven, CT

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by doncecco »

Degenerate gambler or not, a bad beat is a bad beat.
Bring home da Wave!

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

doncecco wrote:Degenerate gambler or not, a bad beat is a bad beat.
:lol: I had to look up “bad beat”. Q.E.D.
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

1309th WAVE
Regent's Circle
Posts: 7765
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:45 pm
Location: Omnipresent
Contact:

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by 1309th WAVE »

doncecco wrote:Degenerate gambler or not, a bad beat is a bad beat.
I realize how close we were to the biggest disaster in horseracing history but that is really what chapped me

Now, the people out there who were just about to throw away their 65-1 ticket on Country House, on the other hand...
Image

tjtlja
President's Circle
Posts: 4221
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:07 am

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by tjtlja »

The race can be questioned two ways. A jockey inquiry, or a steward inquiry. This was a jockey inquiry. The stewards don’t have the guts to do this in this type of race. Nevertheless, the jockey inquiry was correct, and the stewards decision was correct. The decision was an easy call even though it took 18 or 19 minutes. The horse was spooked and veered out impeding two horses. Nothing the jockey could have done differently. The best horse may not have won, but we will never know.

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

tjtlja wrote:The race can be questioned two ways. A jockey inquiry, or a steward inquiry. This was a jockey inquiry. The stewards don’t have the guts to do this in this type of race. Nevertheless, the jockey inquiry was correct, and the stewards decision was correct. The decision was an easy call even though it took 18 or 19 minutes. The horse was spooked and veered out impeding two horses. Nothing the jockey could have done differently. The best horse may not have won, but we will never know.
So does that jockey now become a pariah?
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

tjtlja
President's Circle
Posts: 4221
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:07 am

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by tjtlja »

No, not at all. He is one of the best in the country. The horse was spooked. People in the business know he couldn’t do anything different. Just one of those unfortunate things.

User avatar
Fan Since '54
Regent's Circle
Posts: 9059
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 8:28 am
Location: Back home again...Oak Park sub division

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by Fan Since '54 »

For a long time I have believed that owners (and less so trainers) have entered their horses in the Kentucky Derby not for just the prospect of winning the most famous horserace, but for just the pride of having their "colors" seen in the race itself. There are owners who KNOW beforehand that their horse, barring a miracle, can't win that race with that horse in that race that year. Horse just simply doesn't "have it" that year, or because of the overwhelming competition. And that makes for a very overcrowded field where things like what happened Saturday occur. And with the technology available now, something like this was bound to happen eventually. The "eye in the sky" doesn't lie.

Fan since '54
"...a hellava Hullabaloo"

User avatar
PeteRasche
Emerald Circle
Posts: 23475
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:52 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by PeteRasche »

TUPF wrote:
tjtlja wrote:The race can be questioned two ways. A jockey inquiry, or a steward inquiry. This was a jockey inquiry. The stewards don’t have the guts to do this in this type of race. Nevertheless, the jockey inquiry was correct, and the stewards decision was correct. The decision was an easy call even though it took 18 or 19 minutes. The horse was spooked and veered out impeding two horses. Nothing the jockey could have done differently. The best horse may not have won, but we will never know.
So does that jockey now become a pariah?
I heard this morning it was actually two jockeys (and two horses were impeded so you can figure out which ones). I don't recall but I don't think the eventual winner was one of the impeded horses.

The owner of Maximum Security announced that the horse will not run in the Preakness or Belmont. Their supposed reason is "we wanted the Triple Crown and now it's not an option". Truthfully, the owner and jockey probably want to be as far away as possible from microphones (and 20-minute pre-race packaged "human interest" stories that would have to be made), and I can't really blame them. I honestly don't think the jockey made that illegal move intentionally, I think the horse was reacting to the unstable, sloppy conditions and couldn't make the turn (sorta like driving your car through a turn too fast and not being able to stay in your lane), so it has to make them sick that they had the title taken away and it would be even worse to have to talk about it nonstop leading up to the next race. It almost would be like if the Saints had had to play in a consolation game this past year right before the Super Bowl - would Lewis (or Payton or Brees or any Saint) have enjoyed media week?

User avatar
TUPF
Emerald Circle
Posts: 20242
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 11:36 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA & Berlin, MD

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by TUPF »

Country House, the winner after protest, has also withdrawn.

If you are the Preakness folks, the bloom is off the rose.
Tulane Class of 1978 | NROTC Tulane - Submariner | From everywhere and nowhere

tjtlja
President's Circle
Posts: 4221
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:07 am

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by tjtlja »

Pete, I agree that they don’t want to relive this over and over. However, the track conditions had nothing to do with it at all. In fact, at Churchhiil on Saturday, the track conditions were not that bad. It had not rained enough. And Maximum Security had the lead the entire race, therefore there was zero mud being kicked in his face. The crowd noise entering the stretch spooked the horse. It was as simple as that. He got momentarily frightened and drifted. The two horses impeded were the 1 horse and the #18 horse. Like I said earlier, no one will ever know if either could have won, but the #1 horse was certainly given a legitimate chance pre-race.

From a monetary standpoint, I don’t understand why Maximum Security is not running in the Preakness or the Belmont. His stud fees will be substantial, but if he won those two races they would approach Justify and American Pharaoh.

User avatar
doncecco
President's Circle
Posts: 3647
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 6:37 pm
Location: North Haven, CT

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by doncecco »

tjtlja wrote:
From a monetary standpoint, I don’t understand why Maximum Security is not running in the Preakness or the Belmont. His stud fees will be substantial, but if he won those two races they would approach Justify and American Pharaoh.
Agree, several horses have lost the Derby and come back to win the last 2, and done pretty darn well for themselves. See Risen Star.
Bring home da Wave!

User avatar
Roller
Cornerstone
Posts: 32759
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 7:30 pm
Location: 30°37'40.6"N 81°27'02.4"W

Re: The NFL vs horseracing

Post by Roller »

tjtlja wrote:...The stewards don’t have the guts to do this in this type of race...
That didn't protect Native Dancer, who crossed the line first in 1968 (I believe?) but was disqualified for having been administered Butazolidin (which I think is now legal?)

Post Reply