Turf

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

I don\'t profess to be the greatest trip handicapper. Last year I was sure that Tapit was gawking in the Wood until more knowledgeable trip watchers convinced me he was bearing in for other reasons. But I have to say that I think the winner of the Turf \"Better Talk Now\" should have come down. He definitely finished with the best energy, but I\'m just as convinced he came in on Magestretti, forcing him to check, and then banged into Kitten\'s Joy at a time when Kitten\'s momentum was building. I\'ve watched alot of races and seen horses come down when they probably shouldn\'t but this horse interfered with two horses in the drive by bearing in sharply. That is reason enough in my opinion to rule out another Breeders Cup in Texas.

[BitPlayer]

Chuckles -

Welcome back.  People have been asking for you.

I disagree with your position on the Turf.  I had no betting interest in the race, but I thought Dominguez gave a clinic on aggressive race riding (of a kind Bailey and Prado display and get away with on a regular basis).

He took BTN down to the rail to keep KJ pinned down there, and beat him to the spot.  If Dominguez rather than Albarado had been on Stellar Jayne in the Distaff, Storm Flag Flying would never have gotten off the rail to split horses, and Silver Charm would have cashed his exacta.

The interference with Magistretti is a closer question, but in the big games you\'ve got to let them play a little.  Magistretti was not going anywhere, and (according to Prado) both KJ and BTN were responsible for shutting him off.

[jimbo66]

It really didn\'t look like a \"clear cut\" call either way.  

I was with two people who had BTN and they both thought they were coming down.  All the people around me were calling it a \"no brainer\".

I thought it was a 60/40 call, with a 60 percent chance he was coming down.  The only thing that bothers me is consistency.  It seems to me that the stewards must have factored in the fact that BTN was going to win the race and the interference didn\'t stop either horse from improving position.  I am OK with that logic, but it was not applied when Powerscourt won the Arlington Million.

[HP]

I totally agree with BitPlayer.  It looked like the winner was passing Kitten\'s Joy just when KJoy was trying to come out to try to get around Powerscourt and the winner kind of sealed him in.  It looked to me like KJoy turned his head to come out and the winner was right there on his flank.  Looked like \"race riding\" by Dominguez all the way, and he\'s not obligated to let KJoy get out!  Magestretti was behind both and the idea that he would have made up a whole lot of ground by the finish line seems like wishful thinking, with all due respect to Prado.  HP

[jbelfior]

Speaking of the TURF....is Aidan O\'Brien so arrogant that he would prefer to use clueless and overmatched Jamie Spencer instead of an American rider?

That kid should have been long off of POWERSCOURT after getting him DQ\'d in Arlington. He obviously has no clue regarding American pace and needs to stop falling asleep in the gate.


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[Thehoarsehorseplayer]

Saturday was the first time i used NJ\'s new internet betting system.  And not being familiar with the betting system which requires opening different windows for making different types of bets I manged to get closed out on the exacta box I was going to make on the turf race.
So, of course you know which two horses I was trying to put in.  And then, of course, you might know why I was kind of hoping the winner would come down.
Which means I have a bit of a jaundiced few.
But, I thought BTN\'s take down foul was against Magestretti not Kittens Joy.
Kittens Joy I thought was race riding but from my perspective BTN definetely knocked Magestretti off stride.
Now the stewards decided that Magestretti wasn\'t going to win the race anyway, but Prado was claiming (and he said this on TV) that he thought the incident cost him third.
Talk about inconsistency from the stewards.  There are some states where costing another horse purse position is, by regulation, automatic grounds for disqualification, and obviously there are some where it isn\'t.



Post Edited (11-01-04 09:59)

[JimP]

Who were the stewards for the BC races?

[Michael D.]

dominguez bumped the 6 horse pretty hard, but BTN was flying right by the 6. that is where the infraction took place, and the stewards did the right thing because there is no way that the 6 was going to beat BTN. as for KJ, velazquez was stuck in behind powerscourt and tried to pull KJ out for running room. unfortunately, dominguez had just got to that spot. they bumped, but they were both responsible. no way you take BTN down for that. as for the final bumping between BTN and powerscourt, it was also even handed. no way they could take BTN down. the judges did the right thing by leaving the result stand, because the only big loser was the 6 who was already tiring and had no chance.

[miff]

KUDOS to the LS stewards for letting the result stand. They finished exactlY the way they were going to, with or without contact.I\'ll bet the inconsistent three blind mice in New York would have taken the winner down.

[Thehoarsehorseplayer]

BC Stewards Set A Bad Precedent.

by Ray Kerrison

   The Breeder\'s Cup panel of three stewards sent an alarming message to jockeys and future Cups Saturday when it declined to penalize Better Talk Now or his jockey for interfering with two horses in the stretch run of the $2 million Turf.
   Better Talk now, under the furious riding of jockey Ramon Dominguez caused favorite Kitten\'s Joy to be steadied sharply but even more blatantly crowded Magistretti so severely it is a wonder the horse did not go down.  Both jockeys, John Velazquez on Kitten\'s Joy and Edgar Prado on Magistretti, claimed foul.
   \"The winner hit me pretty hard,\" Velazquez said.  \"It put me in a bad spot and cost me the race.  It completely stopped our momentum.\"
   Prado claimed against the winner and Kitten\'s Joy.
   \"It was mainly intimidation--one was coming out and one was coming in--but I didn\'t think they would take anybody down.  But it cost us third.\"
   There\'s the rub.  Nobody looking at the race could not conclude that Magistretti, if not Kitten\'s Joy, was robbed at least of a better placing at the finish.
  The Texas rules of racing are explicit.  They say, \"A horse may not interfere with or cause another horse to lose stride, lose ground or lose positiion in a part of the race where the horse interfered with loses the opportunity to place where the horse might be reasonably expected to finish.\"
   Magestretti suffered under every stricture.  He lost stride, he lost ground, and he lost position in the crucial stage of the race.  Thus, Better Talk Now, by Texas\' own book, should have been taken down (even though, in candor, I had a few bucks on him.)
   The stewards declined to disqualify him on the grounds he was the best horse.  He was, indeed. No, dispute. And stewards should not quickly strip the winnder of a $2 million race.  It would have been hard luck for the connections to lose.
   The problem is the message it sends.  Jockeys and trainers studying this race, might reasonably conclude that in big million-dollar races the stewards will determine who is \"the best horse\" and interference in the running will be of little consequence.  If this approach holds, look for some rough riding in the future Breeder\'s Cups.  Jockeys have nothing to lose.  The precedent has been set.



Post Edited (11-01-04 11:45)

[miff]

DUHHHH, the horse(Magistretti)DID infact finish exactly where he was going to. What\'s the problem?? To take down winners on marginal infractions which have no real effect on the outcome of a race is the worst possible beat in the game,IMO.

[jbelfior]

I agree with MIFF. What\'s all the fuss here?

The outcome as they crossed the line was exactly what it would have been without all of the banging.



Good Luck,
Joe B.

[twoshoes]

Fouls a foul. The winner sloughed Magistretti tiring or not - first or last race of the day he comes down but not for 2 Mil. I\'m all right with that but don\'t pretend there wasn\'t interference and don\'t get into whether it\'s where they would have finished anyway. You\'re right but by the rulebook that\'s irrelevant.

[jbelfior]

Two shoes---

Never ref a middle school hoops game...the game would last 3 hours with that kind of thinking.




Good Luck,
Joe B.

[twoshoes]

Right again and I\'m not arguing. But they don\'t often play them for 2 Mil. and it ain\'t really the same thing. I didn\'t have this one nor did it cost me. I was rooting for them to let it stand - Motion and Dominguez seem good guys and BTN was best on this course this day - but it was a foul, and I don\'t want the Stewards doing their imitation of the Amazing Creskin the next time they are trying to decide where my horse would have finished after he was fouled. They are better off ruling if there was interference and in this case there was - clearly. Magistretti was beaten about 2 lengths for third. Probably didn\'t make a difference but it might have. Powerscourt was clear and in full flight while Magistretti was being taken up. If you don\'t think that accounts for two lengths you may be right but we\'ll never know for sure. That\'s the point.