• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kentucky Derby: Who will win?

IIRC he didn't 'bump' anyone.. He did drift from lane 2 to lane 4 and cut others behind him off. But with that many horses on that kind of track that's not unusual.

That said all 3 officials ruled to DQ MS, so that's the ruling.. If it was 2-1 I'd have a better argument, but 3-0? That's pretty conclusive.

Even after seeing the clip five or six times, I didn't recognize the foul, of course. But the way it was explained to me basically boils down to this. "Stay in your lane." Max Sec failed to do so.
 
Sort of fitting that Trump objected to the ruling, as National Security’s move resembled Trump’s business tactics. Remember Trump pushing other heads of state out of the way to get in front of the group picture?

Naturally, Trump misspells Kentucky.

On the other hand, this could be liberals attempt to overthrow another victory. Fitting that the pinkos would trash a nag named National Security. Were any of the race officials named Mueller?

Everyone in the world has spell check. I guess the moron in the WH either does't know how to use it or thinks he's so great he can make up his own language.
 
Even after seeing the clip five or six times, I didn't recognize the foul, of course. But the way it was explained to me basically boils down to this. "Stay in your lane." Max Sec failed to do so.

Yep// I agree he drifted.. But as I said here before given the amount of horses and the track I wouldn't have DQ'ed him. But the 3 officials know more than I do, so..........................
 
IIRC he didn't 'bump' anyone.. He did drift from lane 2 to lane 4 and cut others behind him off. But with that many horses on that kind of track that's not unusual.

That said all 3 officials ruled to DQ MS, so that's the ruling.. If it was 2-1 I'd have a better argument, but 3-0? That's pretty conclusive.

Another interesting point is that immediately after the race when they went up to talk to the jockey is something he said. He quickly pointed out how the crowd's noise spooked his horse and he had to straighten him out.

So I think he very well knew he or the horse drifted into the other lanes causes those horses to go outward. That may have been his way of putting the blame on the crowd's noise.

But once again am not horse racing expert unlike that master horseman Trump.
 
I’ve looked at this a dozen times, just that clip the race stewards replayed as we all watched, and I ended up having to ask a friend that knows far more about Horse Racing than I do.

The way it was explained to me is it boiled down to position against the rail coming off the last turn. Being on the inside and drifting outward actually caused a collision. Maximum Security drifted out fast enough to hit War of Will, who then bumped out and hit both Long Range Toddy and Country House. The position of Country House after the exchange, finishing second, was impacted enough where the race stewards concluded Maximum Security cost Country House the race. Turns out multiple riders ended up logging the complaint even though most are focused on Country House.

Now if all of this had happened going the other direction, outward on the track and coming in towards the rail, it might have been overlooked as unintentional simply because it is often that a front running horse is overtaken on the outside and if moves in it becomes debatable on it being interference. But in this case, a first for the Kentucky Derby, it was determined that the slow down impacted at least 4 horses by coming off the rail, and that was enough to rule that it was interference.

All three race stewards voted in favor of the disqualification.

Don’t get me wrong, this will be debated for a very long time and in the world of Horse Racing we have seen better examples of interference overlooked. But it seemed substantial enough to this group of three race stewards and we have a first.

It is terrible that it happened but now that it was explained to me this way I kinda get it.
 
Everyone in the world has spell check. I guess the moron in the WH either does't know how to use it or thinks he's so great he can make up his own language.

To be fair, believe it was a tweet. Don’t twit myself, so don’t know if it has spell check.
 
The orange haired horse that came in second was declared the winner: The Kentucky Derby ended just like 2016 election.

:doh
 
To be fair, believe it was a tweet. Don’t twit myself, so don’t know if it has spell check.

I don't use Twitter either. But every single thing I use in Chrome that requires typing Chrome spell checks for me. So I don't see why Twitter would be any different.
 
Maximum Security owner weighs options after disqualification

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- Maximum Security co-owner Gary West criticized race stewards' disqualification of his horse's Kentucky Derby victory as "egregious" and said he was pondering his next step, including a possible appeal.

"I think this is the most egregious disqualification in the history of horse racing, and not just because it's our horse," West told The Associated Press by phone Saturday night.

Several hours earlier, Maximum Security appeared to back up his undefeated record with a 1¾-length victory in the slop over Country House in the Kentucky Derby. The victory was overturned 22 minutes later with a stunning decision by the stewards to disqualify the 9-2 second choice because of interference .

President Donald Trump weighed in on Sunday, tweeting that the decision was "not a good one." He wrote: "Only in these days of political correctness could such an overturn occur. The best horse did NOT win the Kentucky Derby — not even close!"

Runner-up Country House, a 65-1 long shot, was elevated to the winner's circle Saturday to the astonishment of Maximum Security's team, which insisted the horse did not cut off his competitors.

West said his team is exploring options to appeal, starting with the stewards. The owner said stewards told him he can see a replay of the incident on Thursday.

Kentucky Horse Racing Commission chief steward Barbara Borden said the riders of Long Range Toddy and Country House lodged objections against Maximum Security for interference.

"We had a lengthy review of the race," Borden said. "We interviewed affected riders. We determined that (Maximum Security) drifted out and impacted the progress of War of Will, in turn interfering with the 18 and 21. Those horses were all affected by the interference."

Maximum Security was dropped to 17th of 19 horses, placed behind all the horses it was determined that he bothered.

Borden did not take questions and exited the news briefing to shouts from reporters about a lack of transparency. West said there wasn't much jockey Luis Saez could do to control Maximum Security on a sloppy track.

"When you're leg weary, you're not going to run straight all the time," he said. "Horses don't either."

Said Saez, "I never put anybody in danger."

Trainer Jason Servis agreed with the jockey in the immediate aftermath and added, "He straightened him up right away and I didn't think it affects the outcome of the race."

The stewards disagreed, culminating in the first Derby winner being disqualified because of interference. The last objection in the Derby was filed in 2001 by jockey John Velasquez, who claimed interference by winner Monarchos and jockey Jorge Chavez. Stewards did not sustain the objection.

This time, they did.

The controversial finish capped an eventful weekend at Churchill Downs in two of the sport's marquee races.

Friday's Kentucky Oaks for fillies began with a scary spill at the start by Positive Spirit that dumped rider Manny Franco. Neither the horse nor rider was injured, and both walked off the track. Serengeti Empress won the race in her first start since pulling up early in March at Fair Grounds with external bleeding.

The incidents come soon after the industry enacted a raft of medication and safety rules changes following the deaths of 23 horses over three months at California's Santa Anita.

For Maximum Security, the disappointing reversal spoiled what appeared to be his statement performance after 4-0 start.

The son of New Year's Day and Lil Indy by Anasheed was coming off a 3½-length victory in the Grade 1 Florida Derby on March 30 that established him as the Derby's only unbeaten horse.

For a brief moment, Maximum Security and his team appeared to bask in victory before the long wait and the disqualification, which might not be the final step.

"If we can't appeal to the stewards," West said, "our other options are the state racing commission. If those don't work, we might go to legal options. ... But we have not seen what they saw."

Maximum Security owner weighs options after disqualification
 
What a mess it would be if all of this ended up in the courts.
 
What a mess it would be if all of this ended up in the courts.

Yep, but from what I am reading this morning more and more it looks like it might end up in the courts.

We should know more on Thursday..

West said, via text message, “The stewards refused to let us see their video until Thursday and they will not talk to us or answer questions to the press—complete lack of transparency.” It is unclear why the stewards would not share video or an explanation with West, except that they are not back at work at Churchill until then, and because they are not obligated to meet with disqualified owners. But their reticence clearly angered West, and pushed him toward appealing the decision. “Ninety-nine percent of people interested in racing feel there was a complete lack of transparency on the part of the stewards.”

Kentucky Derby: Maximum Security'''s DQ prompts questions, confusion | SI.com
 
What a mess it would be if all of this ended up in the courts.

I don't think MS has a chance of winning in court.

The ruling was not a knee jerk reaction by the three stewards. They spent almost 25 minutes reviewing that finish and clearly did not want to have this Derby marked with a disqualification.
But that is their job to make certain the race is ran according to rules and regulations. I would have hated to be in their positions.

This has nothing to do with Political Correctness as Trump tweeted.
 
Yep, but from what I am reading this morning more and more it looks like it might end up in the courts.

We should know more on Thursday..

Kentucky Derby: Maximum Security'''s DQ prompts questions, confusion | SI.com

It is just a guess, I am probably off base here, but odds are the videos the race stewards used are probably being reviewed ad nauseam by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission. They had to have known all of this was coming and it would have been foolish to throw the vids out there outlining how the race stewards came to their decision before knowing how the next step might handle this.

Saying in advance that Maximum Security will not run in the Preakness in a way makes matters worse, not just from a timing perspective but also the potential that Gary West may bypass all of this and start filing lawsuits.

The Triple Crown may never be the same after this, but the other reality is this does put a spotlight on how "interference" is determined. You would think reading the rules would make it clear but not really and that opens the door to what is likely to happen over the coming days and weeks.
 
I don't think MS has a chance of winning in court.

The ruling was not a knee jerk reaction by the three stewards. They spent almost 25 minutes reviewing that finish and clearly did not want to have this Derby marked with a disqualification.
But that is their job to make certain the race is ran according to rules and regulations. I would have hated to be in their positions.

This has nothing to do with Political Correctness as Trump tweeted.

Me too, I would have hated being in that position. There was a risk that regardless of how the race stewards called that someone would have made it a matter for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, and we cannot forget there are really 4 horses and their respective riders that were reviewed off this incident. Any one of those owners could have appealed depending on the decision.

As for Trump... just another example of why we should be ignoring him.
 
Me too, I would have hated being in that position. There was a risk that regardless of how the race stewards called that someone would have made it a matter for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, and we cannot forget there are really 4 horses and their respective riders that were reviewed off this incident. Any one of those owners could have appealed depending on the decision.

As for Trump... just another example of why we should be ignoring him.

I love front runners & when I witnessed M Security demolishing the field wire to wire in the Florida Derby I knew than was
my horse for the triple crown races. Got him at 9 to 1 bet $40 to win $360 at an online book. If MS hypothetically would have
raced 10 times against the eventual winner he'd win all 10 times. The only other time a horse I bet on was taken down was
the 1967 or 68 Jersey Derby when the freakish speed demon greatest front runner of them all Dr. Fager interfered as did Max Sec yesterday.
Dr. Fager won by 6 1/2 lengths before he didn't win. This race maybe not the racehorse bought back memories of that day.

If anyone enjoys a battle of champions 1967 Horse of the year Damascus, 1968 Horse of the yea Dr, Fager & 1966 Horse of the year
Buckpasser. The only time 3 Horses of the Year ever matched up was the 68 Woodword stakes in NY.

Check Out You Tube:
'Dr. Fager vs. Damascus - Meeting Of Champions'
 
Back
Top Bottom