At the Derby party I go to every year we have a win pool that is paid off based on how many people bet on each horse.

There was just one bet on Maximum Security so took that, and then I took every horse that didn't have a bet on it which was 3 horses.

Somehow that didn't include Country House because some old lady liked how Country House was described.

Yeah a double bad beat.

with those two 100+ Beyer numbers vs. the rest of the field, Maximum Security reminded me of Big Brown for the Derby. not saying I bet him to win, but...

Imagine 150 years of this race being run and all of the bumping, impeding and contact that has gone on between horses with these massive fields...and then a clown jockey (Flavin Prat is a clown) on a clearly inferior 2nd place horse claims foul (and the "impeded" horse jockey did not claim foul) and gets promoted to the win for the first time in the history of the race.

total joke IMO. The Triple Crown should be really exciting going forward (

bizarre - can see a foul possibly, but don't see how they can determine the "true" winner as whoever got second - 1 and 18 were the ones directly affected and could have won too. 1 looked like he had a good push going.

They aren’t determining who would’ve won if Max Sec hadnt made a right turn and slammed the door on two horses, throwing them completely off-stride and destroying any momentum/flow they had (and oh yeah almost causing what could’ve been a catastrophic spill); they are saying the move was bad enough to warrant a DQ.

From there (and as already explained at least twice in this thread), all you can do is take them how they finished. If people don’t like it they need to come up with a better solution which they couldn’t if they had a year to do it. No one likes the outcome but it’s the best (least horrible) way to discourage it ever happening again.

As the commenter jockey said on the telecast (and before the decision), if this is a weekday claiming race it’s no question instant DQ.

the main logical problem is that CH had a clean race on the outside, MS may have even lost a little bit of time due to the drifting, but CH still didn't beat him.

It doesn't matter if CH didn't beat MS because MS is DQ'd. The question is would CH have beaten the horses who were interfered with? Impossible to know.

If that's correct then the decision was right. Why should the Kentucky Derby be any different? The spectacle of it and money involved certainly doesn't warrant laxing the rules.

The spectacle of it (100k+ fans cheering) may have spooked the horse.
19 horses in the slop with a huge crowd isn't your everyday race.

It's sorta like calling off. holding on the last play of SB and then running down the clock to zero. Sure, it's legit by the book, but it's not something you expect to see.

Watching the replay of the racing thru the far turn it's fairly obvious Maximum Security's jockey was not close to keeping his lane, and interfered (or tried to interfere) 3 times. It really is no question he should go down, the trouble I have is why the stewards did not pick up on this when the worst foul occurred and initiate an inquiry.

The 1 horse had the worst of it, not sure if he could have won but it definitely cost him a placing.

The foul may have affected which horse won. It certainly affected which horses placed and showed. Seems like the correct decision to me.

I can't believe what happened!

Believe it!

I'm glad I'm not one of the angry mob who lost monies!

The more I saw replays of how tangled the legs were and what would have happened the more I think it was the right call. Still surprised they made it but that is because of the race. No one would care on a weekday claiming race about the same call.

This is the logic I've been promoting the past 24 hours as well. The rules are in place to protect the integrity of the race.....what bigger race to protect the integrity of than the Kentucky Freakin Derby? This wasn't simply jostling and bumping.....the horse clearly impeded the drive of two horses who both had to check back to avoid collision. The stewards made the correct ruling IMO.

mos def

...how the hell long was that race?

It does not matter who complained. If it was a clear violation at any other venue, then it should be called.

Backing off because it might spoil future horse watching, is, well, absurd.

If you are saying I said the stewards should base a ruling off of "future horse watching"...where did I say that?

I'm saying imo the Triple Crown is going to be dull going forward. If others are still excited to watch, good for them. Omaha Beach is out indefinitely...and Maximum Security is not going to run in the Preakness now. The rest of the 3 YOs are not impressive at all.

You said the call was a "total joke imo", so it seemed you were implying that they should have allowed Max's win to stand because he was the strongest horse with the strongest chance at the triple crown.

War of Will adds something to the Preakness. w/o the 3x interference he probably gets a 1-2 length lead top of stretch and likely holds on for the win. If he shows the same ability and wins Preakness AND goes on to win the Belmont he will be remembered as the "what-if" triple crown winner.

There have been plenty of really good horses who did not win KD for whatever reasons and would go on to HOF careers.

The horse has run in front of 30k plus people. I doubt the increase in crowd size spooked the horse. Seems like the jockey screwed the pooch.

30k is not close to 100k, but it doesn't seem that noise spooked him, rather something in the infield or the reflection of the lights in a pool of water on the track. Apparently one of the other horses reacted to the same thing as well. Why do you think the jockey deserves blame, other than over-correcting afterwards?

If they really want to make safety top priority, then they should limit the field to 14.