When asked after the race if he had intentionally cut off other horses, Maximum Security said, “Neigh.”
Last edited:
1st time in 145 years! Winning horse disqualified.
- Thread starter dcf4psu
- Start date
more seriously, you should call horse races the same no matter what the race is.
second, it was a bad track and it is understandable a horse might have a problem keeping his line.
Third, taking the second into consideration, after the horse veers right and impedes an approaching horse, he then veers back to the left within the same turn. It appears he does so to, then, block a horse moving up in the vacated rail position; but he is too late getting their so ends up in the second lane.
So, to me, looks like the jockey either lost control of his horse, which is understandable but the other jockey's didn't. Or, but then he takes the horse back to the left after establishing the outside line which appears it was premeditated.
As opposed to killing jockeys and horses.
"Because if he goes down it would have been the biggest disaster in horse racing. And, who knows, he probably wouldn’t be here today. [Jockey] Tyler Gaffalione might not have been here today. And who knows how many others would have gone down after him."
So how much did you and RU31 bet on the race?
more seriously, you should call horse races the same no matter what the race is.
This will never happen.
Well known trainers bring the best horses and are given preferential treatment. They have ways to punish tracks so the Stewards are very cautious when an objection is filed, I've seen it with my own two eyes. Yes, I've heard trainers say "Well, maybe I should race my horses at another track". Poor Jason Servis on the other hand is expendable, you see this may have been his only shot at a Kentucky Derby.
Don't disagree...but they shouldn't whine when that "preferential treatment" doesn't come through. If the jockey did it on purpose, he did it at his own peril...and that backfired. I am not sure I'd have called it or not, but cannot blame the stewards for throwing the flag.
https://www.pennlive.com/sports/201...y-here-are-two-better-opinions-than-mine.html
SIAP: article is written by dave jones but he’s not expressing his opinion. He is linking and also providing the opinions of 2 guys with years of horse racing coverage and experience, Dick Jerardi and Nick Horvath. Both disagree with the decision.
I really don’t care either way but they both talk about the one aspect that bothered me about the decision... the horse that originally finished 2nd and was eventually declared the winner was not impacted by MS’s violation.
SIAP: article is written by dave jones but he’s not expressing his opinion. He is linking and also providing the opinions of 2 guys with years of horse racing coverage and experience, Dick Jerardi and Nick Horvath. Both disagree with the decision.
I really don’t care either way but they both talk about the one aspect that bothered me about the decision... the horse that originally finished 2nd and was eventually declared the winner was not impacted by MS’s violation.
Apparently this is not going to be a problem since Maximum Security is not going to run at the Preakness...gonna take his ball and go home.
Victor, please don't take this the wrong way, but you look somewhat familiar. Were you in that race?
I was an AE when they took it off the weeds. Finished last but I had a hell of a good time.
Which tells you just how serious an infraction they thought it was. If it was questionable that wouldn’t have made the call. It was obvious and they felt that had no option but to disqualify him.
Jason Servis has Maximum Security currently stabled at Monmouth Park. Just a hunch but I think he’s going to run him at the Haskell, Travers and Breeders Cup Classic. Should be an interesting horse racing season.
That would make sense.
For the record, I have spoken to a few horse industry people in the last couple of days. Everyone of them have supported the decision at the derby.
Maximum Security owners sue:
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, challenges the evidence and process used to disqualify Maximum Security. The suit claims the disqualification violated the plaintiff's right to due process because they could not appeal. The stewards "abused their discretion," the lawsuit says.
Gary and Mary West, who own the 3-year-old colt, are seeking the reinstatement of the original order of finish.
"The insubstantiality of the evidence relied on by the Stewards to disqualify Maximum Security, and the bizarre and unconstitutional process to which Plaintiffs were subjected before and after the disqualification, are the subjects of this action," the lawsuit said
Maximum Security's owners and jockey Luis Saez "were denied any part of the $1,860,000 share of the Derby purse as well as a professional accomplishment that any horseman would cherish for life, plus the very substantial value that a Kentucky Derby winner has as a stallion," the lawsuit said.
Gary and Mary West, who own the 3-year-old colt, are seeking the reinstatement of the original order of finish.
"The insubstantiality of the evidence relied on by the Stewards to disqualify Maximum Security, and the bizarre and unconstitutional process to which Plaintiffs were subjected before and after the disqualification, are the subjects of this action," the lawsuit said
Maximum Security's owners and jockey Luis Saez "were denied any part of the $1,860,000 share of the Derby purse as well as a professional accomplishment that any horseman would cherish for life, plus the very substantial value that a Kentucky Derby winner has as a stallion," the lawsuit said.
This entire situation is turning into a mess. Bill Mott and Country House disappeared probably in a Federal Witness Protection Program. In anticipation to Gary West filing a lawsuit the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission suspends Luis Saez for 15 days, which will exclude him from riding Maximum Security in the Belmont Stakes. Let me tell you how this works. This suspension is a way to pressure Gary West to drop the lawsuit and in return reduce the suspension to 10 day allowing Saez to ride in the Belmont. I have a feeling that Gary West has a real chance to win this in court because the new video shows a bit if a different scenario. Maximum Security also sustained cuts in his rear legs. I would love to see Gary pursue the lawsuit and ask Calvin Borel to ride MS in the Belmont. Whatever happens I will be there watching.
Ah, the little know Constitutional right to have a horse race judged to your liking. I believe this is set forth at Article 18, Section 72, right after the Constitutional right to talk trash on the internet.
may end up going the way of boxing, who so screwed up the sport it is a major afterthought. Formula 1, Formula 5000 and Indy Cars come to mind as well.
I have no idea but I think that lawsuit has no merit whatsoever. The rules on the field are different lest every hockey player be met at the door being arrested for assault. The Sharks got gifted an very important game three against the Blues last night. The refs missed a clear handpass in front of the net that distracted the goalie and led to the game winning OT goal. Of course, the Blues were really pissed but that is the game. PSU has had our share of bad/missed calls.
Similar threads
