Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I am wondering WHY no one is asking why Maximum Security veered out from his lane. Could it be because the horse behind him ran right up his ass, hitting him in the groin and the back of his legs? Max had abrasions on the back of his legs after the race. If you were rear ended would you make a violent reaction to get out of the way too? The real offending horse did not have enough move to slide through and should have been the one to be disqualified?
Why didn't the stewards make an inquiry FIRST? Were they blind?
Why did the stewards wait for two other jockeys to file a complaint?
Why did the stewards refuse to talk to the press and explain their decision to the press after the two last races were run?
It seems to me that the stewards must have looked at some YouTube videos? What video did they really watch?
On Thursday, May 9, Max's owners turned over some video showing in HD detail what really happened!
Why haven't we heard about the results from that meeting?
The stewards are afraid of overturning their original decision because of the lawsuits the KY Racing Commission would get???
Max and the so called winner of the Derby will not meet in the Preakness and rightfully so, but hopefully the Belmont will show the world that Max was the true champion!!!
My only guess to your valid questions is that at time you just have to go with the ref's(or whatever he is in racing) decision. I watched the whole NCAA basketball championship and there were a lot of bad or missed calls. Like one when Virginia's Ty Jerome lost the ball and double dribbled... but no one mentioned that the guy guarding him had been fouling all over the place.
Just times you just move on.
I am fully prepared to move on, but not in the middle of dispute. It needs to be carried out to it's natural conclusion. If the KY Racing Commission doesn't answer some of these queries, then the courts should make them.
Understood. I guess mu point/idea is the owner/jockey needed to move on. I cant imagine that they will declare a different winner weeks later. THat would be like going back and saying Auburn beat Virginia because of the missed foul.
That's backwards (and I'm an AU grad). What actually HAPPENED in the Derby IS what is analogous to your scenario. Max actually crossed the finish line first, just as Virginia won on the scoreboard. They DID take away the win from the horse, but not from Virginia. It's not that hard for AU to move on because we weren't the winner on the board and a win was not reversed. It's just a missed foul that would have made a difference. The horse won the race at the line and they called a "foul" and gave it to another horse. THAT is the same as your scenario, not giving the win back to Max. If AU had beat Virginia on the board and had it reversed on a questionable foul, we would find it much harder to move on, just as y'all would if they did it to Virginia now.