Here's the story

https://sports.nbcsports.com/2019/05/04/kentucky-derby-country-house-wins-after-maximum-security-disqualified/

I agree with the Stewards.

The only way Country House was affected by the bobble (on an incredibly sloppy track) was that his jockey got a chance to move up. The two horses that were not in the running and were directly affected actually made it possible for him to finish 2nd instead of fourth. So the so called win is a gift but the real winner was still Maximum Security.

I don't follow it or know much about it, but I did look at the story via sushipup's link. I don't really understand what happened or what the rules are.

Recent West Coast news about horse racing has involved the epidemic of deaths at Santa Anita track in SoCal this year and the closing of the track for a period of time. I'm not sure where that stands right now but I remember seeing some articles with concerns about doping and other "standard practices" involving things not in the best interests of the health of the animals and perhaps contributing to all the injuries.

Two major tracks have closed in the state in the past decade or so - Hollywood Park in Inglewood and Bay Meadows on the SF peninsula, and I think that only leaves a few that are still open. That suggests a declining popularity, at least here. I wonder if it's the same elsewhere.

Anglo, I would like to have watched the race. And did, sort of. It began just as we needed to leave for an anniversary dinner...and I thought 5 minutes late would be acceptable. Just as the gates opened, my SIL called on her way out of urgent care to tell me the virus she's had all week was just that - a virus. So it wasn't at all a concentrated viewing of the race, I was just glad no accidents or injuries on that awful track and we left. I've only now read of the disqualification, had not seen anything close enough to have noticed interference earlier. (I'd much rather see a good clean race on a dry track!)

I believe that there is a lot going on behind the scenes that we are not aware of in horse racing.

Such an odd race, with a large field of horses, the favorite being scratched this week, and its jockey moving to another horse, then the rain (becoming the norm at the Derby, it seems!) and finally the objection! Oh, and Bob Baffert not winning!

I was pulling for Gray Magician in honor of my hair, so I was disappointed. I do like watching a rainy Derby, though, and seeing the lead horse and rider emerge like a Tide commercial, with all the others spattered in mud.

Years ago, one of my good friends invited me to go to this charity event for an organization that her well to do parents were involved with. She called it "Derby Days" and then explained we would be wearing fancy hats and having a catered meal with an open bar so I said "sure, why not?"

So was my introduction to the Kentucky Derby and horse racing.

I continued to go with her, several years in a row to this event. I always had a good time but I never "followed" horse racing.

I saw Eight Belle's catastrophic ending, I cheered when Mine That Bird (the random horse name I had chosen out of the lineup) won.

Since then, I've watched a few Derby races, only when someone reminded me the race was happening and I wasn't otherwise busy that day.

Today was one of those days. I ended up tuning in and watching it with my kids.

What an interesting turn of events!!

I agree with the stewards, but the end result still doesn't seem fair.

The horses that were actually affected by the block had their chance completely stripped.

There isn't a conceivable way to redo that.

Did Justify run this year? I think he was the one who won all 3 races last year. Apparently his jockey was riding on another horse this year according to what I heard on the radio.

Was it my imagination or was the crowd booing when they presented the trophy to the owner?

I agree, the right thing was done, according to the rules. That being said, it still seems such a shame it had to happen the way it did.

I don’t know a thing about horse racing or the rules, except what was being explained post-race yesterday by the announcers as they replayed the end of the race over and over. It’s similar I believe to rules enforced in running or cycling (motor and non-motor) with attempting to maneuver. You cannot maneuver and cut off someone behind you who is attempting to pass.

I did enjoy some of the pre-race show, especially the piece with Bob Baffert and his young son.

We watch the Derby every year, my husband grew up in Louisville and lived for much of that time within earshot of Churchill downs. He was a constant presence at the track, shadowing the riders, the grooms, and others who swarm the grounds of the track all year long. He's been to thousands of races.

When we were watching it live, he shouted, "Wait! That should be contested!" He was meaning what he saw as the malicious intent of the jockey. As many times as I saw the replay, I couldn't see it, but it was glaringly clear to him and others very experienced in the sport. He feels very strongly that justice prevailed.

He explained to me that it was like football, a game where there is a lot of banging, pushing and tackling in a normal game, but certain actions are absolutely not allowed. All sports are like that.

I feel like many others do....that others could have been severely harmed by the premeditated actions of this jockey. Even the trainer didn't like what he saw in the replays. My husband was disgusted that the jockey repeatedly blamed his young horse for the problem.

What a difficult call for the stewards but they made a very brave and honest decision. I don't think we have heard the last of it though.

Jasdip, the Kentucky Derby is open only to 20 three year olds, each of whom has had to accumulate points by competing in a long series of races in the year preceding the Derby. It's a tough year

Justify would not have been qualified to run again. No horse can run twice.

I’m sticking with Maximum Security as the winner. My husband and I both rode competitively in our youth and even before there was an inquiry we both commented how the jockey on Maximum Security was having to work to keep his horse, that was apparently spooked at that point, to stay on track so to speak. The only thing the jostle caused was Country House made it into 2nd and in the ribbons, not in 4th or 5th.

Thanks Rhizo!!!

Betting has ruined more than one 'sport'. Even the seemingly benign AKC has opportunistic cheats vying for status. There's money to be made, even absent any gambling.

The horse breeding and racing industry attracts strange bedfellows. Once in a while some of the nasty underbelly comes to light. Remember the widow Helen Brach's 'mysterious' death when she ran afoul of the Jayne brothers in Illinois (one of whom murdered the other)? How many animals are created, then 'eliminated' when they fail to 'qualify'.

...was meaning what he saw as the malicious intent of the jockey.

I don't consider a horse being spooked by the crowd as malicious intent by the jockey. The jockey worked to straightened out rather quickly. But I don't necessarily disagree with the stewards' decision.

My cousin was the owner of two Derby winners, 'I'll Have Another' and 'Nyquist.' I have very mixed feelings about the sport, but I do know that my cousin has always loved horses. I recall he and the trainer decided to pull 'I'll Have Another' from the Belmont race, when the trainer noticed a bit of swelling around one of the horse's forelegs. They worried the horse might suffer a catastrophic break, if given drugs for the pain and made to run the race, so passed up on a shot at the Triple Crown. I missed this year's race, but am just happy that no injuries occurred.

amicus, your cousin is one of the "good buys" in the horse industry. They will never risk the longterm well-being of a horse for a race. Look at the owner/trainer who pulled Derby favorite "Omaha Beach" from the Derby. There are "good guys" and "bad guys" in all sports. But just because there are "bad guys" doesn't mean we should ban the sport.

anglo, take a look at the background of this owner you praise - he's basically a loan shark operating just on the sunny side of the legal line with a history of legal problems. The trainer of his horses has had repeated suspensions for violation of horse racing doping rules.

These are the good guys?

There will always be controversy over doping and political ploys in any sport.
If you are a horse racing fan who spends time in the paddock area instead of the stands or sipping cocktails in the Turf Club you will hear all sorts of rumors and commentary about this or that trainer etc. Same in most sports human or animal and the higher the levels the worse it gets.

The bottom line I believe is that "politics" played a role in the stewards decision. Actually my belief is if given the exact same circumstances Maximum Security was a Bob Baffert horse instead of being trained by Jason Servis the objection would never have been filed.

"There will always be controversy over doping and political ploys in any sport."

I don't agree. Rule bending is cheating and many have strong feelings about that.

This race is going to be debated long after it was over. It's too bad that it can't be done over, but that is not in the running is it. Maybe they should do the race in 3 heats with the best 2 out of three declared the winner. That surely would change the strategy if all three races were ran in the same day.

I don't think that's feasible. I'm sure race horses like humans who do athletic endeavors require rest and recuperation before repeating the exertion.

Elmer is right. The race is such an all-out effort the horses are usually not up to 100% even two weeks later when the run the Belmont which is why winning the Triple Crown is such a feat, the Derby winner is usually racing against horses that didn't race in the Derby, and have had 3 or 4 weeks of rest.

from the site: http://www.hfshctra.com/faq.html

How often do Thoroughbreds run?
Thoroughbred
racing is hard on a horse, so a racehorse will only run once, then rest
for around one to four weeks. The really good, well-taken-care of
racers get a month off usually in the US and Canada (and I believe the
UK), but the horses racing at poor tracks who need to make money may
have to race more often. SIM's should get as much rest as they can, our
rules require AT LEAST six full days, but if you race a horse two
Saturdays (for example) in a row, you should really give them a couple
weeks rest after, or longer. They can still be in training (light
galloping or SHORT sprints) during these rest periods, but no
racing...going all-out for a mile or so is much harder than you may
think.