Main Menu

Declared to Win

Started by Raven, August 06, 2018, 05:02:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

Raven

August 06, 2018, 05:02:13 PM
In the 20's [Exterminator was held back in order for his stalemate to win] a owner/trainer could declare one of his entries to win and the rider of the other could hold the other one back

I didn't know that they still doing that.  But after watching the 4th race @Saratoga when Javier had the race won when he took a look at the screen, and who is behind him? his stablemate, and he did his best to let them pass him.

Sour grapes on my part?
call no man happy till he dies. ~SOLON~

Senator L

#1
August 06, 2018, 05:09:32 PM
A friend was complaining about this race too. I thought the horse was going into the rail and he had
to straighten her out. Her stablemate blew by her imo and , well he made sure she got 2nd :celebrate: :celebrate:

curtis

#2
August 07, 2018, 11:10:58 AM
The formal declaration isn't done anymore—the obvious reason being that horses aren't coupled—but the act is still done. One of the more famous, yet forgotten instances of declaring was the 1940 Santa Anita Handicap. Seabiscuit had been declared by the Howard's as their preferred winner over Kayak. Laura Hilkenbrand knew this when she wrote her book, and included it in her original draft, but it was nixed by the publisher because it didn't play well with the "real life" Hollywood ending. Instead, Hillenbrand referred to Joe Hernandez's loosely fictitious call when describing the race. Hernandez's call has become legend and as the saying goes, when the legend becomes fact, print the legend.

stark

#3
August 07, 2018, 03:19:27 PM
Our very own Mr. Google.

Thanks yet once again!

Raven

#4
August 07, 2018, 03:45:18 PM
There still coupled entries in NY,almost every day
call no man happy till he dies. ~SOLON~

curtis

#5
August 07, 2018, 04:08:22 PM
Quote from: Raven on August 07, 2018, 03:45:18 PM
There still coupled entries in NY,almost every day
I know they can be there, but what is the criteria?  In the 2016 Belmont, for example, I thought it was a crime that Creator and Gettysburg weren't coupled.

Dusty

#6
August 07, 2018, 06:40:41 PM
Quote from: curtis on August 07, 2018, 04:08:22 PM
I know they can be there, but what is the criteria?  In the 2016 Belmont, for example, I thought it was a crime that Creator and Gettysburg weren't coupled.

Good question - I HATE coupled entries
May they run with the wind

curtis

#7
August 07, 2018, 07:08:15 PM
Quote from: Dusty on August 07, 2018, 06:40:41 PM
Good question - I HATE coupled entries
Why?  I think in the long run, they can protect the bettor.

stark

#8
August 07, 2018, 08:29:28 PM
Quote from: curtis on August 07, 2018, 07:08:15 PM
Why?  I think in the long run, they can protect the bettor.

Not if you make a decent living betting the other Baffert!

Dusty

#9
August 07, 2018, 11:45:09 PM
Quote from: curtis on August 07, 2018, 07:08:15 PM
Why?  I think in the long run, they can protect the bettor.

HOW? you are really just betting the favorite of the two and is the other wins - you lose or do not get the$$ you should
May they run with the wind

curtis

#10
August 08, 2018, 08:39:34 AM
Quote from: Dusty on August 07, 2018, 11:45:09 PM
HOW? you are really just betting the favorite of the two and is the other wins - you lose or do not get the$$ you should
Go look up the chart of the 2016 Belmont and report back as to why Gettysburg was in. I get the other Baffert—once upon a time it was the other Mandella, the other Frankel, the other Whittingham—but too much is made out of that and always has been. If it's such a fail proof method, then why is there such a discrepancy in the odds?  Call me a softy for specially wired types but I threw $2 on the other Baffert in the Derby. I'd have been better off if he was coupled with that red horse with all the chrome—I forget his name, only made a handful of starts.😉

stark

#11
August 08, 2018, 09:13:30 AM
Probably more people concerned with why Exaggerator was bet down to 7/5.
http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=BEL&raceDate=06/11/2016&cy=USA&rn=11

Raven

#12
August 08, 2018, 11:52:46 AM
Quote from: curtis on August 07, 2018, 04:08:22 PM
I know they can be there, but what is the criteria?  In the 2016 Belmont, for example, I thought it was a crime that Creator and Gettysburg weren't coupled.
Before July 2015  horses with common ownership  had to be coupled  in stakes races with purse of 1.000.000
With the new rules the  purse prize is lowered to stakes races of 50.000 or more when 2 or more horses with common ownership  or 25% commonality among non-managing owners

Horse trained by the same trainer but separate owners are not coupled
call no man happy till he dies. ~SOLON~

curtis

#13
August 08, 2018, 01:39:56 PM
Quote from: Raven on August 08, 2018, 11:52:46 AM
Before July 2015  horses with common ownership  had to be coupled  in stakes races with purse of 1.000.000
With the new rules the  purse prize is lowered to stakes races of 50.000 or more when 2 or more horses with common ownership  or 25% commonality among non-managing owners

Horse trained by the same trainer but separate owners are not coupled
Thanks, Raven, I notice a lot of entries in NY but didn't know the exact criteria. I'm guessing the 2016 Belmont was a TC exception since Creator and Gettysburg shared ownership?  I suppose this year too as it seems Sol Kumin owns a piece of every horse.

stark

#14
August 10, 2018, 10:39:49 AM
Speaking of coupled entries in NY.......

How about IradOrtiz-1 and JoseOrtiz-1A.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions