MAXIMUM SECURITY owner crying and complaining on TODAY show

[ChiTownJoe]

I’m honestly shocked you think it’s a bad call, Joe. He came out 4-wide. And WOW was loaded and clearly passing, so to assume distance limitations on a horse that was clearly on the move is a big leap.

 

Also any fan of horse racing should be celebrating the fact that Servis got DQ’d. Fuck him. I don’t even care if that’s not the most politically correct way to frame the discussion; fuck Jason Servis and his cheating slimy ways. I hope he never wins another race for the rest of his life, and to have the biggest one snatched away is awesome.

 

IMO, War of Will barely had to steady, at worst he had 1 length of trouble. He was at Maximum Security flank at 1/4 pole with every chance to win if good enough. Same with Code of Honor, and Country House.

 

The best horse in the race was Maximum Security, I was impressed that last 1/4 mile - top of the stretch home when they were basically 4 across the track and had Improbable right behind.

 

Jason Servis is a huge cheater. It is amazing to think that 16K MCL should have won the Kentucky Derby. 

 

I would love to know how Jason Servis is doing it, and the money is showing. Lot of wiseguys were against that horse thinking he benefited from easy pace in Fla Derby.

 

Wish Omaha Beach would have been in the race, he might have softened up Maximum Security and there might have been 5 or 6 within a length at the wire.

 

Game Winner might have been best, but he was looking at the trip from hell with that post/running style. I think he wants to run wide also. HE should be tough in Belmont. 

Game Winner - Maximum Security - Tacitus - Master Fencer  would be my Belmont order of finish right now.

[Balco]

The Stewards didn’t even speak on the decision which makes it already shady. Add the horses owner that got bumped didn’t object. It was only Country Home owner. Conspiracy?

[Balco]

The bump wasn’t even to decide the outcome. MS went wire to wire and deserves the win. Suspend the trainer and fine him, but give the clear winner the right.

[Machiavelli]

How many deep?

[FairWarning]

2009's Winner 50-1 "Won Derby in the Slop" Mine That Bird--Got 2nd in Preakness and 3rd in Belmont (but never won another race after the Derby).

 

Of course, being a gelding, MTB had no stud value.

 

As far as Country House?

 

Retire him as a Derby Winner and see what kind of stud fee they can get.

 

If he finishes back in the pack in Preakness and Belmont, he can only lose value.

 

Probably looking at a Baffert horse at Pimlico. (Especially with no Max).

Agree. They hit the lottery with this horse, now cash in.

[Balco]

Huge black eye for the sport.

[El Chapo2017]

Huge black eye for the sport.

Too bad Max's Jockey couldn't follow the rules.

[ChiTownJoe]

Andy Beyer says no DQ

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/the-kentucky-derby-decision-was-a-bad-one-country-house-never-had-a-chance-of-winning/2019/05/06/59a584b4-701c-11e9-8be0-ca575670e91c_story.html?utm_term=.d207b0595756

 

"But because Maximum Security’s infraction did not affect the outcome, disqualifying the winner was a bit like deciding the NBA Finals on a foul away from the ball."

 

 

[FISHHEAD]

Good insight JOE, thanks for thoughts

[richsox24]

It doesn't matter if the bump decided the outcome.  MS veered out 2 paths, affecting multiple horses.  If the jock and horse on the 1 goes down, causing a multiple horse catastrophe, the inquiry lasts for 2 minutes. 

 

Just because no horses went down doesnt change the infraction.  It was an obvious DQ and i think the stewards looked for every possible way not to DQ the winner (which is why it took so long), but they literally had no choice.  

 

And Andy Beyer is an idiot.  "Yes there was a clear infraction, but lets just ignore it because it was the Kentucky Derby" 

[FISHHEAD]

It doesn't matter if the bump decided the outcome.  MS veered out 2 paths, affecting multiple horses.  If the jock and horse on the 1 goes down, causing a multiple horse catastrophe, the inquiry lasts for 2 minutes. 

 

Just because no horses went down doesnt change the infraction.  It was an obvious DQ and i think the stewards looked for every possible way not to DQ the winner (which is why it took so long), but they literally had no choice.  

 

And Andy Beyer is an idiot.  "Yes there was a clear infraction, but lets just ignore it because it was the Kentucky Derby" 

LOL

[WeinkeToWarrick]

It doesn't matter if the bump decided the outcome. MS veered out 2 paths, affecting multiple horses. If the jock and horse on the 1 goes down, causing a multiple horse catastrophe, the inquiry lasts for 2 minutes.

 

Just because no horses went down doesnt change the infraction. It was an obvious DQ and i think the stewards looked for every possible way not to DQ the winner (which is why it took so long), but they literally had no choice.

 

And Andy Beyer is an idiot. "Yes there was a clear infraction, but lets just ignore it because it was the Kentucky Derby"

Good post from someone that follows the sport

[ChiTownJoe]

If veering out 2 paths was a reason to DQ, 20% of the 6.5F turf sprints down the hill at SA would result in DQ. 

 

The idea of DQ'ing a horse was if it cost another horse a chance at a better placing. There was no horse who would have finished in a better spot (paid positions) if MS didn't float out 2 paths. 

 

I think it took so long for decision is the stewards already decided MS was coming down, that probably took 5-7 min. The other 10 min were spent deciding where to put him, who was effected and where they finished. 

 

I think it is absurd also to say a foul or infraction in any race is the same no matter the race when compared with the derby. The KD is a 20 horse field and is normally a rodeo, it is unlike any race run in the US. Riders are normally aggressive in this race. This isn't a 5 or 6 horse field at SA on a Thursday afternoon. The head steward even talks to the riders before the race and says lets have a good safe race, or something like that. 

 

I've always felt the riders were given more leadway in the derby. I think the DQ has opened up a huge can of worms and can't wait for the objections by riders in the next few yrs. Everyone will be taking a shot.....hey I cutoff entering the far turn by the 2nd place horse making a huge move and I had a ton of horse under me.

 

How come the inquiry sign didn't come up? The stewards weren't going to take that horse down and no way they didn't see what happened live.

 

For the uninitiated, the stewards normally post an inquiry after a race if they want to review a race because a foul/infraction occurred. For this race there had to be a jockey objection to force the stewards to look at it. 

[Screw Andrews]

If veering out 2 paths was a reason to DQ, 20% of the 6.5F turf sprints down the hill at SA would result in DQ. 

 

The idea of DQ'ing a horse was if it cost another horse a chance at a better placing. There was no horse who would have finished in a better spot (paid positions) if MS didn't float out 2 paths. 

 

I think it took so long for decision is the stewards already decided MS was coming down, that probably took 5-7 min. The other 10 min were spent deciding where to put him, who was effected and where they finished. 

 

I think it is absurd also to say a foul or infraction in any race is the same no matter the race when compared with the derby. The KD is a 20 horse field and is normally a rodeo, it is unlike any race run in the US. Riders are normally aggressive in this race. This isn't a 5 or 6 horse field at SA on a Thursday afternoon. The head steward even talks to the riders before the race and says lets have a good safe race, or something like that. 

 

I've always felt the riders were given more leadway in the derby. I think the DQ has opened up a huge can of worms and can't wait for the objections by riders in the next few yrs. Everyone will be taking a shot.....hey I cutoff entering the far turn by the 2nd place horse making a huge move and I had a ton of horse under me.

 

How come the inquiry sign didn't come up? The stewards weren't going to take that horse down and no way they didn't see what happened live.

 

For the uninitiated, the stewards normally post an inquiry after a race if they want to review a race because a foul/infraction occurred. For this race there had to be a jockey objection to force the stewards to look at it. 

Excellent post.....

 

And if anyone thinks Saez wanted to take a chance at being trampled by 19 thoroughbreds running about 40mph they're crazy...lol 

[MonkeyF0cker]

If veering out 2 paths was a reason to DQ, 20% of the 6.5F turf sprints down the hill at SA would result in DQ.

 

The idea of DQ'ing a horse was if it cost another horse a chance at a better placing. There was no horse who would have finished in a better spot (paid positions) if MS didn't float out 2 paths.

 

I think it took so long for decision is the stewards already decided MS was coming down, that probably took 5-7 min. The other 10 min were spent deciding where to put him, who was effected and where they finished.

 

I think it is absurd also to say a foul or infraction in any race is the same no matter the race when compared with the derby. The KD is a 20 horse field and is normally a rodeo, it is unlike any race run in the US. Riders are normally aggressive in this race. This isn't a 5 or 6 horse field at SA on a Thursday afternoon. The head steward even talks to the riders before the race and says lets have a good safe race, or something like that.

 

I've always felt the riders were given more leadway in the derby. I think the DQ has opened up a huge can of worms and can't wait for the objections by riders in the next few yrs. Everyone will be taking a shot.....hey I cutoff entering the far turn by the 2nd place horse making a huge move and I had a ton of horse under me.

 

How come the inquiry sign didn't come up? The stewards weren't going to take that horse down and no way they didn't see what happened live.

 

For the uninitiated, the stewards normally post an inquiry after a race if they want to review a race because a foul/infraction occurred. For this race there had to be a jockey objection to force the stewards to look at it.

That horse is coming down 90 times out of 100 if it's not the Derby. He broke the stride of the 1 and the 13. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that one of those horses couldn't have passed him.

 

Just because it's the Derby doesn't mean it wasn't the right call.

[Sol Aristatel]

It doesn't matter if the bump decided the outcome. MS veered out 2 paths, affecting multiple horses. If the jock and horse on the 1 goes down, causing a multiple horse catastrophe, the inquiry lasts for 2 minutes.

 

Just because no horses went down doesnt change the infraction. It was an obvious DQ and i think the stewards looked for every possible way not to DQ the winner (which is why it took so long), but they literally had no choice.

 

And Andy Beyer is an idiot. "Yes there was a clear infraction, but lets just ignore it because it was the Kentucky Derby"

Excellent post.....

[Sol Aristatel]

That horse is coming down 90 times out of 100 if it's not the Derby. He broke the stride of the 1 and the 13. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that one of those horses couldn't have passed him.

 

Just because it's the Derby doesn't mean it wasn't the right call.

Excellent post.....

[MonkeyF0cker]

I think the better precedent is that you can't play pinball off of other horses in the stretch in the Derby or any other race for that matter.

[ChiTownJoe]

That horse is coming down 90 times out of 100 if it's not the Derby. He broke the stride of the 1 and the 13. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that one of those horses couldn't have passed him.

 

Just because it's the Derby doesn't mean it wasn't the right call.

 

Think you mean the 18 --- 13 wasn't effected at all and had a dream drip inside like the 1 until he came out looking to go wide on the turn. Hindsight 1 is better off staying on rail, but someone said that part of track wasn't sealed and would have probably been deeper. 

 

Pletcher was pissed that the track was sealed and then harrowed letting all the water back in about 45 min to post.

 

No other race in the US has 20 horses than the Derby. Mig's twitter feed states the obvious

 

Richard Migliore‏ @RichardMigliore May 4

More

Obviously Maximum Security came out. Did it change the outcome? There has been more rough riding in the derby than any other race in history. The 86 derby Shoe on Ferdinand took Rampages path in the stretch and it was lauded as great race riding. The culture has changed.

[richsox24]

And just to reiterate what an idiot Andy Beyer is,  He states the following in the article...

 

He says the 1 finished 8th.  

He says the 1 was clearly impeded by the 7

He says in his opinion without the interference, the 1 would have finished 5th (hence a much higher purse distribution)

 

Then he claims it didn't affect the order of finish.

 

Throughout that entire article, he gives multiple reasons why the 7 SHOULD HAVE been DQ'd, then says results should have stood.  

 

Sure, makes sense.  

[MonkeyF0cker]

The problem I have with that Tweet is that the interference had nothing to do with traffic and the fact that there were 20 horses in the race. He came over at least 2 paths to make contact with the 1 all on his own.

[MonkeyF0cker]

...to take out several horses that possibly could have made a run in the stretch.

[CarolinaKid]

imo 100% they did the right thing, i dont get the owner crying now

[3Musketeers]

…………...imagine if the horse shocks the world in the 2nd leg of the Triple Crown.

 

Would be great

 

What's the ODDS of him winning the Triple Crown?

[MonkeyF0cker]

What's the ODDS of him winning the Triple Crown?

I'll give anyone 5000/1 on it.

 

Considering that he isn't running in the Preakness.