lt1
Moderator
Posts: 824
|
Post by lt1 on Jul 22, 2014 17:48:18 GMT -5
Alan all I'm saying is that after the attempt to reshoe failed,and the vet at the gate felt she could run then the fans should have been allowed to bet on her if they wanted to. Maybe it's time for the Racing Commission to revisit it's rules. And why is it bashing to question events at a race track. Was not Churchill taken over the coals for their handling of the Ron Turcotte situation on Derby Day as well as the hike in takeout. Didn't see you crying bashing then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 18:09:09 GMT -5
You haven't read all of my posts. I was extremely critical of Churchill Downs for both the Turcotte incident and the takeout increase. And I've also been critical of NYRA when warranted. In neither case was the criticism unwarranted "bashing". This rule in question has been on the books for decades, why all the bitching now? But this artificial issue has become one only because it's NYRA, or New York, and people don't like either for some reason. Anyone ever hear or see any complaining about horses running for purse money only two or more years ago, before this group of NYRA directors replaced the corrupt and criminal band that was in place back then?
The point is that since there coincidentally were two similar situations over the weekend at Saratoga, all of a sudden the rules in place for decades in New York are bad and "BS". I don't remember the last time it happened, maybe a year or two ago?
If the shoe situation existed at the time that betting opened, yes, the fans should have been able to bet on the horses in question, knowing IN ADVANCE that the horses would be wearing only two or three shoes. But in both cases the shoe problems occurred 20+ minutes after betting opened. Those that had already bet did so assuming (rightfully) that the horses they bet on would wear four shoes in the race. And as already noted, the first one occurred just minutes before the horses were about to enter the starting gate. If they delayed the race to allow that horse to get a new shoe. That would have prompted the SAME chorus of people to bitch and moan "they delayed the race by more than 20 minutes, handicapping the other horses who were already warmed up and ready to race". If they scratched the horse people would have moaned that it wasn't fair to the connections to not allow their horse to run since it was healthy.
Again, the rule has been on the books for decades, and also exists in other states, too. The main reason this has become an issue around here is that there's a small cadre of people who despise NYRA and take any opportunity to complain about NYRA, even though NYRA had NOTHING to do with the scratch of the two horses, it was the decision of the non-aligned stewards.
You know what, if people don't like stuff like this, just bet on other tracks - tracks that have $900 DD pools, $1500 WPS pools, etc., $5000 claimers with crooked trainers, jockeys pulling their horses, etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 18:46:08 GMT -5
5,000 claimers with crooked trainers? you mean like Jacobson and rodriguez?
just because something has been on the books for decades doesn't make it right. its a bad rule that needs to be changed. and for the moaners and sympathisers of the owners? whose responsibility is it to make sure the horse has shoes on when it leaves the stables to walk over to the paddock? if that shoe comes off it is the owners and trainers responsibility. if the horse isn't equipped correctly to run, then in essence he/she isn't healthy. like I said, maybe it took 2 occurrances in 3 days to remind people of the rule. but even if that is so, now that they have, it is time to do something about it. they screwed me over like 5 months ago in this same very way and it is bs. if she was healthy enough to run, then shes healthy enough to bet on, and vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 19:25:20 GMT -5
I agree the horse should have been scratched. Is there a rule the stewars have to follow? Would they have had to cancel bets if it was scratched because it was such a small field?
C'mon George - losing a few benches is nothing like the BIG SCREW-UP on Belmont Day - and then the "suits" disappeared for days! It's hard to believe a few tv's and a sloppy paint job are all it take to satisfy some.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 19:39:45 GMT -5
You just proved my point. I should have asked wiz to set the ML on the possibility that the Belmont Stakes would come up in a discussion about Saratoga. 1-9 would have been too generous.
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 19:47:24 GMT -5
And why shouldn't it? It is NY's Biggest Racing Day and the powers that be BLEW IT! RG's already said when we go to the Spa, she's putting a roll of tp in her bag!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 20:01:25 GMT -5
And we're talking about stewards' rulings regarding horses running for purse only.
Maybe you folks should put it in your signatures so you don't have to type it each time?
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 20:10:32 GMT -5
HUH?? I believe you went off topic also - so what? Facts are facts! As to the signature line - no thanks. Maybe you should try it since you come up with ridiculous defenses for a lousy organization.
Just because people disagree with you is no reason to go after them personally................just sayin.............. Newsflash - you are the only person here (and that I've spoken to - people who were at the Belmont)that defends them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 20:13:12 GMT -5
I agree the horse should have been scratched. Is there a rule the stewars have to follow? Would they have had to cancel bets if it was scratched because it was such a small field? C'mon George - losing a few benches is nothing like the BIG SCREW-UP on Belmont Day - and then the "suits" disappeared for days! It's hard to believe a few tv's and a sloppy paint job are all it take to satisfy some. not all bets but some, and that's what the rule comes down to. lets make it as difficult as possible to do the right thing in order to make as much money as we can taxing the dollars wagered on this horse. but to your second point.......... yes those things do make a big difference. not the paint job, but the tvs and the actual tote board with pool information not be there is ridiculous. absolutely not allowed!! that is a gigantic part of some players way of betting and even handicapping. there is no excuse for that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 20:15:14 GMT -5
tell RG to lay off the prunes for a few days before she goes just in case.
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 20:17:10 GMT -5
tell RG to lay off the prunes for a few days before she goes just in case. LOL I'm going to call her to log on!
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 22:49:02 GMT -5
Note: The rest of this thread has been moved. Totally off topic
|
|
|
Post by Evelyn on Jul 22, 2014 23:04:41 GMT -5
Again - the crap was moved to WTF - 2.
|
|
|
Post by racinggal on Jul 23, 2014 20:50:15 GMT -5
My Dear Wiz, That was not gentlemanly! I do not like prunes, I do not eat prunes, I do not need prunes (well, not yet!) It is true I carry a fairly large bag to the races. I get teased a lot but usually can pull out what someone needs! As you have been a bit of a meanie lately, this is for you: (I will be happy to have some prunes delivered to you too!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2014 21:22:22 GMT -5
meanie? me? not I said the little red hen.
|
|
|
Post by racinggal on Jul 23, 2014 22:01:42 GMT -5
I think more like the Big Red Rooster!
|
|