Kentucky Derby : Do you agree with the stewards decision?

[tcw]

I would suggest people listen to two former jockeys, Rich Migliore and Tony Black, during the latter part of this recording (you can click the slider bar to the 01:16:00 mark, about 3/4s of the way to go straight there) :

https://stevebyk.com/broadcast/part-2-j ... -migliore/

[Tessablue]

The majority of the people I see upset about this are people who just handicap and don't actually care about the horses.

Telling.

I don't agree with this. If anything, any serious bettor that I've spoken to agrees with it. Not that I know many. But I do know enough who care more about handicapping than horses and they agree with the decision. A bettor wants his investment protected after all.

A challenge to the status quo is never going to be an easy pill for most to swallow.

Yean, I can't quite figure out where the dividing line is, and it's been hard to predict who falls where. I think most people have accepted it by this point, especially after the new angle was released, but the fervent few who believe it was among the biggest travesties in the sport's history (for reasons that are never quite articulated) really baffle me. I suppose I'm just really depressed by the idea that we should let the mistakes of the past constrain our progress.

Honestly, once a certain somebody stopped posting on here, this place has been a bastion of sanity. Even the people who disagree or are upset have been measured about it, and these poll results are far more favorable towards the decision than any other site I've looked at. Good work everyone!

[firehorse]

I would suggest people listen to two former jockeys, Rich Migliore and Tony Black, during the latter part of this recording (you can click the slider bar to the 01:16:00 mark, about 3/4s of the way to go straight there) :

https://stevebyk.com/broadcast/part-2-j ... -migliore/

That was a good listen, thanks.

[Treve]

I thought only millennials were entitled.

But, but, but Avocados!

[middleground]

I would suggest people listen to two former jockeys, Rich Migliore and Tony Black, during the latter part of this recording (you can click the slider bar to the 01:16:00 mark, about 3/4s of the way to go straight there) :

https://stevebyk.com/broadcast/part-2-j ... -migliore/

That was a good listen, thanks.

Agree, very worthwhile.

[peeptoad]

I think most people have accepted it by this point, especially after the new angle was released, but the fervent few who believe it was among the biggest travesties in the sport's history (for reasons that are never quite articulated) really baffle me

It's not as black and white as this imho. I don't agree with the call (for many reasons) nor do I think it among the sport's biggest travesties. We are in a period of change and change takes time because people need time to process. If the sport survives it will likely be better for it if this incident can prompt some gradual, positive changes. As it stands, in real time as an isolated incident, I don't agree with the DQ. I suppose I accept it but I don't agree.
And, I also love the horses.
Peace.

[luvsgeldings]

I heard Richard Migliore on the Belmont racing show the day after the Derby. a voice of reason. agreed with everything he said. he made some excellent points. unlike a lot of others, he wasn't overreacting to the Derby.

tons of comments and opinions out there - a lot of them are being overly dramatic. its like the majority of people have not watched how other Derby's have been run.

there should be objections in this race almost every year - the stewards should put up that inquiry sign almost every year - but obviously they had been allowing the race to be run a certain way. and now they want to start getting it right. they opened the door now, so lets see what happens in the years ahead with this race.

I think the thing that bothers me the most, is that they gave the Derby win to a horse who was least bothered, and who had every chance to get past the winner down the stretch. but he never could.

if Mott had been the trainer of MS and Servis had been the trainer of CH, I wonder if some people would still think the DQ was okay.

[stark]

I'm just really glad it was Mott and not Baffert that ran 2nd and was promoted to the victory circle.

Had that happened I'm certain it would've been more than some could handle.

Can you even imagine the past 2 1/2 days being even worse!

[Kennedy]

As a fan I think I find myself caught between two minds. From a race enjoyment perspective that race was not really about "the veer". It felt like a minor sub plot during the running that was barely noticed. Certainly it was there and it happened but it felt like an aside to the race as a whole.

I think the race was enjoyable to watch so from an emotional standpoint I really wanted Maximum Security to be recognized as the winner because I thought he ran the best race.

But at the same time the foul shouldn't be ignored. It was there, he did it and he should come down for it. I find myself not liking the decision at all but I think I'm sad that it happened rather than disagreeing with it.

It's too bad that race had that moment in it because I thought it was a good one.

[TapitsGal]

would the same people complaining about the DQ also be complaining if Maximum Security had brought down other horses, caused a fatal accident and not been DQd? Why does the derby have so many different standards than say a Wednesday evening claiming race at a track like Presque Isle?

[firehorse]

would the same people complaining about the DQ also be complaining if Maximum Security had brought down other horses, caused a fatal accident and not been DQd? Why does the derby have so many different standards than say a Wednesday evening claiming race at a track like Presque Isle?

Does Presque Isle run 20 horses in their Wednesday night claimer for 3 yr olds in the mud with a crowd of 150,000 + people with tents everywhere and people in the infield?

[luvsgeldings]

I guess you would have to ask the stewards why the Derby has so many different standards. you know, like for every other year during the running of this race, we just look the other way when questionable stuff is happening out there on the track.... except for the 2019 running.

talk about different standards.

I think all of the connections better ask before next years Derby, what 'standards' the stewards are going to follow for the big race this year. because it could just revert back to what they have been doing every other year (well, except for 2019).

[ElPrado2]

Maybe, just maybe, if you did not focus so much on the negative, you could find some enjoyment in watching races. Every post you make is anti racing.
Ok, you love geldings. You just hate horses.

[luvsgeldings]

what are you talking about? you know nothing about me or what I love. or do not love.

[luvsgeldings]

I do know one thing... I never get on this forum and disrespect another member - never. I have my opinions and I voice them. but I never insult or disrespect another forum member for their opinion.

and I will never apologize for being passionate about a topic.

I have loved this game since the '70's. and I adore the horses. geldings or not.

[starrydreamer]

I guess you would have to ask the stewards why the Derby has so many different standards. you know, like for every other year during the running of this race, we just look the other way when questionable stuff is happening out there on the track.... except for the 2019 running.

talk about different standards.

I think all of the connections better ask before next years Derby, what 'standards' the stewards are going to follow for the big race this year. because it could just revert back to what they have been doing every other year (well, except for 2019).

Yes, the inconsistencies in standards need to be addressed, but does that mean we should just allow any sort of contact in races if it doesn't cause anyone to fall? To me, that's like saying "some people break the speed limit when they drive so we should just do away with speed limits."

Hopefully this means that there will be more consistency going forward.

[peeptoad]

To me, that's like saying "some people break the speed limit when they drive so we should just do away with speed limits."

Hopefully this means that there will be more consistency going forward.

In many areas (and esp where I live, ugh) the speed limit is routinely and informally disregarded. One can routinely drive around 25 mph over the limit on the highway without getting a ticket. If that informal understanding between the cops and the drivers were to change and tickets given out more to the law/limit, then that's a pretty big and sudden slap in the face.

[starrydreamer]

To me, that's like saying "some people break the speed limit when they drive so we should just do away with speed limits."

Hopefully this means that there will be more consistency going forward.

In many areas (and esp where I live, ugh) the speed limit is routinely and informally disregarded. One can routinely drive around 25 mph over the limit on the highway without getting a ticket. If that informal understanding between the cops and the drivers were to change and tickets given out more to the law/limit, then that's a pretty big and sudden slap in the face.

Do you happen to live in NY... specifically Long Island? Because I HATED driving out there for that reason. In the midwest, it's a bit better monitored. That's not to say that people don't speed, because they do (I mean, i go routinely 5-10 mph over the limit, but almost never more than that), but it gets enforced enough that it's not a friggin free-for-all like Long Island seems to be.

We still shouldn't do away with speed limits, though.

[BaroqueAgain1]

I can say that Max was the best horse in the race and, of the horses he impeded, that Country House was the least impacted by him.
I also agree with the stewards decision because IMHO, the first two points are kind of irrelevant.
Max fouled more than one runner, probably changed the outcome of the race and, most important, veered out into WoW...so close that his rear leg and WoW's front legs were interlaced. How the race managed to end with no one in a heap in the mud is a miracle.

[Happy Endings]

I agree with the stewards' decision. There could have been a very gruesome pile up as a result of that foul. I don't think it matters that Country House was the least bothered by the foul. I have seen races before where the winner committed a foul and was DQd and placed behind the horse that was fouled and another horse that finished second inherited the win. That's what happened in this case. The fouler gets placed behind the foulee. Everybody else moves up one place.

I also think Country House isn't getting the credit he deserves for running so well from such a wide gate. The Trackus numbers show that he ran 51 feet (6 1/2 lengths) farther than MS did (6714 compared to MS's 6663), so I think Country House is a deserving winner and was actually the better horse of the two. http://tnetwork.trakus.com/tnet/t_Churchill.aspx