Horse Racing questions and answers

[Snowball]

Did you folks see Michael Buffer at the Preakness? IMO, about 2 sentences of him is awesome. But several minutes seemed painful.
I don’t know you guys. I’m really worried about Md. racing as we move forward. I will get to discuss this with a new friend I made who is the chairman of the racing commission fairly soon.
A very knowledgeable man who has been in racing for a long time. I’m hopeful for success but have to admit I am nervous about the future. I do know he will do everything he can to keep it viable.

Im not from the area, but I was disappointed to hear that they will be consolidating Laurel and Pimlico into the new Pimlico only.
I don't think the problem has anything to do with horse racing per se. It has to do with lack of "affordable housing", and the real estate values of where these tracks around the country are located, especially those in residential areas. The astronomical real estate values make it very tempting to cash out rather than commit land for tracks. Plus, there's the older (still only a couple decades) problem of casinos taking over where both horse and dog tracks used to be.

The way things are today, it is more possible than ever to bet online and use all the information and video feed which an OTB provides. Of course, it's not the same as being there, but for the vast number of casuals, unless the wife or buddies want to go, you're (our) desires as active handicappers can feel like solo endeavors. Anyway, it is good to see some younger interest in the sport, and I expect this to stay good, but the physical imprint of tracks probably isn't going to grow, maybe ever. I'm thankful that Fanduel supports the industry and I hope that doesn't change. I have come to rely on their channel (formerly TVG) for live races (better than watching a computer screen), and also FS2 has been contributing, but they have more commercial interruptions.

[JBEX]

so if we go by about 1.5 secs or 7 lengths then you would add 11 points to his 98 beyer giving him a very respectable 109 ..if you factor in cruising to the wire way in front that might lower it to 106-107 ..he ran a 108 in the santa anita derby so that falls in line nicely with this adjusted effort .. these are very solid figures for a 3yo at this stage

think this is too generous .. 4 +/- more like it to me

[JBEX]

army mule saturday



churchill 1 @ 12:45
#6 shewontbudge (7-2)


churchill 7 @ 3:50
#1 wisconsin gal (15-1)





.

[str]

army mule saturday



churchill 1 @ 12:45
#6 shewontbudge (7-2)


churchill 7 @ 3:50
#1 wisconsin gal (15-1)





.

Shewontbudge looks like she fits in that race. I can't say I really like her but you know she will be trying.

And poor Wisconsin Gal.
You know she will give her all. Now if her trainer only had something to give when it comes to choosing races, things would be just fine. And if it is the owner choosing the races, , shame on that trainer for tolerating it.
I guess another blood and guts 5th for her today?

[JBEX]

Shewontbudge looks like she fits in that race. I can't say I really like her but you know she will be trying.

And poor Wisconsin Gal.
You know she will give her all. Now if her trainer only had something to give when it comes to choosing races, things would be just fine. And if it is the owner choosing the races, , shame on that trainer for tolerating it.
I guess another blood and guts 5th for her today?

agree with you on both horses str ..if WG could get 2nd or 3rd would be very impressed with the quality of this field

[JBEX]

agree with you on both horses str ..if WG could get 2nd or 3rd would be very impressed with the quality of this field

or maybe should be viewed in a different way ..we like AM to exceed pp expectations,did win at this track as a 2yo and finished 2nd at this level at kee 2 back .. not the most ridiculous thing by any means .. would feel better about it if she was rested instead of going to ny and returning in 2 weeks

[str]

So my last thoughts on the Preakness are as follows.

Should there have been a DQ in the race ? My opinion is No.
Should any riders have been asked to review the films with the Stewards. In my opinion , Yes. The winning rider should have been asked to explain what happened. Unless he told me something I have not considered, I would have given him days for that incident.
Reason being, this time next year when the riders show up to ride in the Preakness, they will show up with the mindset that what took place in that race is Ok. It is Not ! But what else are they supposed to think if there was no problem with what happened?
Riders are like little kids when it comes to this stuff. Behind closed doors most would admit that.

It is not impossible to fix this however and Adam , the chief steward knows exactly how to deal with this. I would bet a nice chunk that he goes to the jocks room before the races start next Preakness day and warn all the riders that what happened last year will not be tolerated moving forward. Adam actually did that a few years ago after an incident in the Derby and it worked. I would love to have a bet on if he does it next year. If he drops by the reunion next year in April, like he did this year, I’ll ask him.
He is a sharp guy and he does get it.

That’s my take.

[str]

In a discussion about the Preakness and the no change or penalty in the finish or to any riders I had this back and forth with someone. I thought I would share it for you all to see.




Him: Yes, the people who bet on him should get screwed, but it wasn't unnecessarily. It should be because the horse/rider broke the rules.

You shouldn't adjust the outcome based on the bettors. Why have rules?

So you can cheat?


ME: If the penalty was to be issued, why involve the betting public when the horse to be put up was clearly beaten?

It wasn't like those others involved were going to catch the eventual 2nd place horse. So DQ' ing the horse does exactly what? Obviously the horse was the best horse in the race.

Give the rider days but don't DQ a horse that was clearly best and put others up that clearly were not.

Don't screw the public. Give the rider days . That's my take.



Him: Its a little thing called consistency. Either you have rules or you don't.


Me. Being consistently wrong is ridiculous. Rules can be seen and judged with different interpretations and penalties. There is no reason to DQ the horse .
He was the winner and no other horse was going to win that race on its own effort ,bump or no bump.

Penalize the guilty party, in this case, the rider.
Just because a rule has been judged a certain way for years doesn’t mean it was judged as well as it could have been. That’s how I see it.



Me following up :

I thought I would add something to this:

For many a decade before I was born and the number of decades I have lived, horse racing rarely took into consideration the people that make all this work. The customer.

Many a rule was made to police and regulate the game but do any of those rules recognize and consider the fans, who without them there would be no revenue to allow the game to function? The answer is very close to, if not , No.

Consistency is needed in all sports for understanding the rules but horse racing better recognize those that support it in a hurry.

I spent my entire career stabled in Md. I ran out of town sometimes but not too often. I left the game for reasons not pertinent to this story but since leaving I have been able to clearly see where racing had and in certain circumstances still does fail the customer. Maybe being a little inconsistent and changing the narrative somewhat is what is required to help recognize that you don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Just my opinion.



Question for everyone:

Wouldn't you guys be all for this? Please let me know if you think I am missing something.

Thanks

[Madison]

Str, you are incredibly well spoken for a person who spent a large portion of their life in a barn. Where were you educated?

Also, the volume of your typing. Personally, I failed typing despite being top of my class and circa mensa. How can you pen so much thought?

Wishing you and yours a great holiday weekend.

Gotta go now and see if I can dredge up a winner. LOL.

[Madison]

Str, or others, would appreciate thoughts on Tip Top Thomas today. BEL R3 #4.

Seems to me I've seen him more than 3 times. Last was his first since 10/24/24.

You might notice a few familiar names in his prior starts as well.

Kind of how I handicap (by sight) but watch his first start 8/24/24. Watch the run from the horse that ran 4th. You may remember him. I added him to my stable that day as one to watch as he matured and the races got longer. Watch the head down drive in the last eighth or so.

[str]

I’m sorry Madison, I am unable to look at your inquiry today.
I thank you for the kind words and will respond soon

[str]

It is with a heavy heart that I tell everyone that Christophe Clement has passed away at the age of 59.
I am stunned. I only met him once about 11 years ago but that was all it took to realize what a talented and special human being he was.
Wow. What terrible news.
Some people we meet just have “ it”. He was one of those few.
My deepest condolences to his family and friends.

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/trainer-christophe-clement-passes-at-59/

[Madison]

59. Oh my, hopefully a typo. Feeling older and older.

Seems like he lived a wonderful life, unfortunately way to short.

[JBEX]

he certainly did a great job with deterministic along with countless others .. one of the best in his profession in my opinion and passed way too young .. will be missed

[JBEX]

army mule ..monday



mth 3 @ 1:54
#6 mission first (15-1)



churchill 5 @ 2:45
#8 hope restored (4-1)



baq 5 @ 3:06
#6 ferris muler (15-1)




lone star 11 @ 7:37
#4 us army (20-1)

[JBEX]

army mule ..monday



mth 3 @ 1:54
#6 mission first (15-1)



churchill 5 @ 2:45
#8 hope restored (4-1)



baq 5 @ 3:06
#6 ferris muler (15-1)




lone star 11 @ 7:37
#4 us army (20-1)

I like "mission first" (factoring value) the best of the 4 ..in the baq race can't see that one at all but I think #1 stormy birthday (15-1) is interesting at a price

[str]

Str, you are incredibly well spoken for a person who spent a large portion of their life in a barn. Where were you educated?

Also, the volume of your typing. Personally, I failed typing despite being top of my class and circa mensa. How can you pen so much thought?

Wishing you and yours a great holiday weekend.

Gotta go now and see if I can dredge up a winner. LOL.

With the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968, the D.C. public school system was a train wreck with overreaction and mistakes made within. Politics suggested that busing the African American kids from NE or SE to NW Wash DC which was predominantly white was a way of showing everyone there was no prejudice in Wash. DC. Of course there was a ton of prejudice there but that's a story for another day that I can share if someone wants to know about it.

It was a political stunt to try and quell the riots that were taking place in Wash. DC. Only 13-14 at the time, I had no clue what was up. But because of this, and my father being born and raised in Mississippi, and was inherently prejudice through what he was told and taught.( All that is code for poorly educated and from deep poverty.), he allowed me to transfer to a private school.
(His father died when he was 5 years old from the Spanish Flu in 1919 so I do cut my dad plenty of slack for his upbringing.)

All that said, my dad got pissed about what was going on and I had friends that were planning on going as freshmen to a private school 2 blocks from the US Capital. So, I asked if I could and my parents said yes. That high school was an all boys school named Gonzaga College High School. Renowned as one of the top schools in the Washington area, that is where I went. I guess I owe the priests, brothers, and laymen that taught there a big thank you for 4 years of putting up with my " got to be on the spectrum somewhere" butt.

By that I mean, I was all in on anything I decided I wanted to do. ALL IN. First was baseball. Then came horse racing . When I left that game, I became a home builder. Main reason for it helping me in the building business was that I could not and still cannot drive a nail without hitting the board more than I hit the nail. Lol.
But what I did do, was apply what I did know about business, people, employees, and of course math. Good ole math, the tool that's never wrong .
So even though I fell out with my varsity baseball coach after playing for him in my freshman year as a starting pitcher and walked away from the game and left two college offers behind at the age of 15, I found horse racing, went all in as I do, and the rest is history Madison.

Fast forward 10,years and I was lucky enough to become the first horse trainer not named Dutrow, Delp or Leatherbury to win a leading training title in the last 10 years at Bowie Race Course at the ripe old age of 25 years old. Pretty sure that is the youngest age to ever win a training title in Md.

Long story long, if I really liked something, I poured everything into it. Guess that's why this thread is still going after 14 years.

All the best Madison. And...Top of the class !! WOW, I mean...All the best SIR.

[Madison]

Thank you Str. Lifes winding road is surely fascinating.

[Madison]

Str, or others, would appreciate thoughts on Tip Top Thomas today. BEL R3 #4.

Seems to me I've seen him more than 3 times. Last was his first since 10/24/24.

You might notice a few familiar names in his prior starts as well.

Kind of how I handicap (by sight) but watch his first start 8/24/24. Watch the run from the horse that ran 4th. You may remember him. I added him to my stable that day as one to watch as he matured and the races got longer. Watch the head down drive in the last eighth or so.

Guy won like it was a morning breeze. ML 5/2? Off 1-1.

[str]

Guy won like it was a morning breeze. ML 5/2? Off 1-1.

Quality horses usually do not “ need” a race to be fit enough to win. Especially if they have shown an ability to win with time off previously or win as a first time starter.
Combine that with the trainers stats off 90+ days and that usually provides the answers.
Good eye Madison.

[JBEX]

In a discussion about the Preakness and the no change or penalty in the finish or to any riders I had this back and forth with someone. I thought I would share it for you all to see.




Him: Yes, the people who bet on him should get screwed, but it wasn't unnecessarily. It should be because the horse/rider broke the rules.

You shouldn't adjust the outcome based on the bettors. Why have rules?

So you can cheat?


ME: If the penalty was to be issued, why involve the betting public when the horse to be put up was clearly beaten?

It wasn't like those others involved were going to catch the eventual 2nd place horse. So DQ' ing the horse does exactly what? Obviously the horse was the best horse in the race.

Give the rider days but don't DQ a horse that was clearly best and put others up that clearly were not.

Don't screw the public. Give the rider days . That's my take.



Him: Its a little thing called consistency. Either you have rules or you don't.


Me. Being consistently wrong is ridiculous. Rules can be seen and judged with different interpretations and penalties. There is no reason to DQ the horse .
He was the winner and no other horse was going to win that race on its own effort ,bump or no bump.

Penalize the guilty party, in this case, the rider.
Just because a rule has been judged a certain way for years doesn’t mean it was judged as well as it could have been. That’s how I see it.



Me following up :

I thought I would add something to this:

For many a decade before I was born and the number of decades I have lived, horse racing rarely took into consideration the people that make all this work. The customer.

Many a rule was made to police and regulate the game but do any of those rules recognize and consider the fans, who without them there would be no revenue to allow the game to function? The answer is very close to, if not , No.

Consistency is needed in all sports for understanding the rules but horse racing better recognize those that support it in a hurry.

I spent my entire career stabled in Md. I ran out of town sometimes but not too often. I left the game for reasons not pertinent to this story but since leaving I have been able to clearly see where racing had and in certain circumstances still does fail the customer. Maybe being a little inconsistent and changing the narrative somewhat is what is required to help recognize that you don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Just my opinion.



Question for everyone:

Wouldn't you guys be all for this? Please let me know if you think I am missing something.

Thanks

realize this is a side point but as many times as I watch the replay I don't understand what rispoli did wrong ..to me his postion was established between the 1 and the 8 .. former bore in , journalism was in tight quarters and the chain reaction affected the 8.. around 4:15 of the NBC sports replay on you tube is the best view of it (head-on) imo

[mrginandtonic]

So my last thoughts on the Preakness are as follows.

Should there have been a DQ in the race ? My opinion is No.
Should any riders have been asked to review the films with the Stewards. In my opinion , Yes. The winning rider should have been asked to explain what happened. Unless he told me something I have not considered, I would have given him days for that incident.
Reason being, this time next year when the riders show up to ride in the Preakness, they will show up with the mindset that what took place in that race is Ok. It is Not ! But what else are they supposed to think if there was no problem with what happened?
Riders are like little kids when it comes to this stuff. Behind closed doors most would admit that.

It is not impossible to fix this however and Adam , the chief steward knows exactly how to deal with this. I would bet a nice chunk that he goes to the jocks room before the races start next Preakness day and warn all the riders that what happened last year will not be tolerated moving forward. Adam actually did that a few years ago after an incident in the Derby and it worked. I would love to have a bet on if he does it next year. If he drops by the reunion next year in April, like he did this year, I’ll ask him.
He is a sharp guy and he does get it.

That’s my take.

Same reason that I don’t think Maximum Security should have been disqualified.

[JBEX]

realize this is a side point but as many times as I watch the replay I don't understand what rispoli did wrong ..to me his postion was established between the 1 and the 8 .. former bore in , journalism was in tight quarters and the chain reaction affected the 8.. around 4:15 of the NBC sports replay on you tube is the best view of it (head-on) imo

if I had to guess what I might be missing it's that journalism took away the space goal oriented needed while switching leads .. that's what caused GO to come in on him .. if I'm right about this , is rispoli at fault for making the move when he did .. was that too soon to be splitting horses str ?

[str]

Here is the overview of the Preakness race.

Let's discuss what we see.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWdZj9wgZSM&pp=ygUXcHJlYWtuZXNzIG92ZXJ2aWV3IDIwMjU%3D

[str]

Here is the overview of the Preakness race.

Let's discuss what we see :



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWdZ...aWV3IDIwMjU%3D

If you watch this race from overhead, there was no actual hole that I see . Rispoli was hopeful for a hole but there was none that was big enough to fit a horse, much less Journalism. There was a crack but no a hole IMO. So from what I see Rispoli was wishing for a hole and hoping for a hole but as he moved up towards the inside horses heels, he had to try and make a hole. THAT, IMO, is the entire problem.

Bottom line IMO, he had no business doing that other then trying to get lucky and hope a hole opened up. And while that is fine to try and do, squeezing through where you do not fit to make a hole is where the problem occurred.

Roles reversed, no way Rispoli would have let Prat or another rider through there IMO. If he did, he would have some serious explaining to do.

That is what I see.

[JBEX]

so bailey sees nothing wrong with what rispoli did with journalism and if anything felt prat was too aggressive ( maybe rough is a better description) with goal oriented

[JBEX]

so bailey sees nothing wrong with what rispoli did with journalism and if anything felt prat was too aggressive ( maybe rough is a better description) with goal oriented

BTW I came in with this comment before I saw yours and about to read it

[JBEX]

If you watch this race from overhead, there was no actual hole that I see . Rispoli was hopeful for a hole but there was none that was big enough to fit a horse, much less Journalism. There was a crack but no a hole IMO. So from what I see Rispoli was wishing for a hole and hoping for a hole but as he moved up towards the inside horses heels, he had to try and make a hole. THAT, IMO, is the entire problem.

Bottom line IMO, he had no business doing that other then trying to get lucky and hope a hole opened up. And while that is fine to try and do, squeezing through where you do not fit to make a hole is where the problem occurred.

Roles reversed, no way Rispoli would have let Prat or another rider through there IMO. If he did, he would have some serious explaining to do.

That is what I see.

I see what you're saying about there not being a clear hole when he started to move aggressively .. think I'm going to just remain middle of the road about this..respect your opinion but not willing to jump all the way over to the other side either

[str]

so bailey sees nothing wrong with what rispoli did with journalism and if anything felt prat was too aggressive ( maybe rough is a better description) with goal oriented

I guess that is what makes it so interesting. CJ an I see it the same way. I was told Daryll McHargue sees it our way as well. Don't know about anyone else.

I wonder if Bailey has softened on that comment at all. That comment was made right after it happened . I never expected the horse to be DQ'ed but there is no contact whatsoever unless Rispoli tries to get through a spot that was smaller than his horse could fit into.

I just do not see where there was ever enough room for Rispoli to get through.

Interesting for sure.

[Snowball]

so bailey sees nothing wrong with what rispoli did with journalism and if anything felt prat was too aggressive ( maybe rough is a better description) with goal oriented

that's how I felt at first, but then I saw the other side and questioned my lean about who was in the wrong.
No doubt, Prat was too aggressive, so now I'm back to him being in the wrong.

[JBEX]

I guess that is what makes it so interesting. CJ an I see it the same way. I was told Daryll McHargue sees it our way as well. Don't know about anyone else.

I wonder if Bailey has softened on that comment at all. That comment was made right after it happened . I never expected the horse to be DQ'ed but there is no contact whatsoever unless Rispoli tries to get through a spot that was smaller than his horse could fit into.

I just do not see where there was ever enough room for Rispoli to get through.

Interesting for sure.

that's how I felt at first, but then I saw the other side and questioned my lean about who was in the wrong.
No doubt, Prat was too aggressive, so now I'm back to him being in the wrong.

have some hall of fame jockeys on both sides of the argument and I certainly defer to you and them on how a jockey maneuvers a horse in a situation like that .. I also understand that jerry bailey had to make a call on it really quick so as you said it's certainly possible he "might" feel differently seeing it again .. I'm ok to leave it at that but worthwhile discussion