The Bloom is Off the Roses in Kentucky

Now that the dust (or more appropriately, the mud) has settled on the event, I would like to render a layman’s opinion on the controversy surrounding the 2019 Kentucky Derby.  The decision by the stewards to take down the race winner Maximum Security on a disqualification has stirred up a lot of emotion in a sport that was already dealing with some serious issues.  Raceway attendance is down and racehorse health/maintenance has forced the sport of kings to grapple with some complex questions.  After reading about and watching videos of the race, I am of the opinion that the stewards’ decision was incorrect.  I will make my case in this blog.  For a better and more professional perspective, I will offer both sides of the argument from more knowledgeable sources…..

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/horses/kentucky-derby/2019/05/04/kentucky-derby-stewards-did-their-duty-country-house/3611939002/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/dan-wolken/2019/05/04/kentucky-derby-2019-maximum-security-robbed-racing-takes-another-hit/1105796001/

First off, let’s get the facts straight.

The Rule: If a leading horse or any other horse in a race swerves or is ridden to either side so as to interfere with, intimidate, or impede any other horse or jockey, or to cause the same result, this action shall be deemed a foul.  If, in the opinion of the stewards, a foul alters the finish of a race, an offending horse may be disqualified by the stewards.

There are three stewards who consider the objections that are filed by riders.  A majority opinion of two or three stewards constitutes the final verdict.  In this instance, the stewards’ decision was unanimous.  Following the race, the stewards took approximately 22 minutes to reach their decision.  After another two hours, Churchill Downs  presented the Chief Steward to the public and media where she read the following statement and then left, entertaining no discussion or questions.

The Stewards’ Statement:  We had a lengthy review of the race, we interviewed affected riders and we determined the 7 horse (Maximum Security) drifted out and impacted the progress of No. 1 (War of Will), in turn interfering with the 18 (Long Range Toddy) and 21 (Bodexpress).  Those horses were all affected, we thought, by the interference, and therefore we unanimously determined to disqualify No. 7 and place him behind No. 18.

Who Filed the Objections: Long Range Toddy/18 and Country House/20

Final Results: DQ/Maximum Security (7), Win/Country House (20), Place/Code of Honor (13), Show/Tacitus (8).

Was There a Foul? Unquestionably, the rule’s definition of a foul occurred when Maximum Security drifted in front of War of Will and, in turn, Long Range Toddy.  Both of the aggrieved horses had to be pulled up.  In the case of War of Will, who was severely impeded, he continued to finish eighth.  Given the high level of interference he experienced, common sense tells us that he certainly may have finished higher than eighth if the foul had never occurred.  Would he have gotten up to second or third?  That is difficult, and impossible, to determine with any degree of certainty.  The lesser degree of interference to Long Range Toddy and Bodexpress led them to finish 17^th and 14^th respectively.  Given that they experienced minor interference and that it occurred at the head of the stretch, it is extremely unlikely that either horse could have finished in the money (second or third).  Therefore, when we consider the part of the rule that states the foul must alter the finish of the race; the only conceivable avenue for this to occur would have been the slight possibility that War to Will might have finished second or third without being fouled.  It is noteworthy that no objection was filed by the rider of War to Will.  The objections were filed by the riders of Long Range Toddy who finished 17^th and Country House…who finished second, experienced no interference, and was eventually declared the race winner due to Maximum Security’s disqualification.

I have yet to hear any post-race comment from those inside or outside of the horse racing industry that questions the fact that Maximum Security was the best horse in the race.  It is pretty clear that every horse, with the possible exception of Will to War, had the entire stretch to run him down and failed to do so.  His failure to file an objection would also seem to indicate that the rider of Will to War did not believe that he had sufficient horse to finish in the money.

Why was the ruling incorrect?  The stewards’ statement makes no mention whatsoever of any interference that occurred leading to the possible alteration of the actual finishing order.  They present a very specific account of a clear foul that occurred; but choose to simply take a pass on the second part of the rule.  I submit that given all the facts in this episode, it is reasonable to reach a conclusion that the actual finish of the race, win/place/show, was not altered by this foul.  The stewards correctly determined a foul.  They then chose to ignore the terms “if” and “may be” in the final sentence of the rule to make their ruling.

Don’t miss the next post!

 Follow on Twitter @centerlineright.

The Kentucky Derby is the premier horse event in the world.  Owners and trainers consider it quite an accomplishment simply to compete in the classic.  To compete and win is an extraordinary achievement and has been experienced by a relatively few players in the sport.  To take down the winning number of Maximum Security when he was clearly the best horse on the track for this race is a travesty.  To take that action based on the slight chance that the 8^th place horse might have finished 2^nd or 3^rd is doubling down on poor judgment; especially when the jockey on War to Will did not file an objection.

While following the letter of the law to determine there was a foul; the stewards failed to exercise their authority and discretion to acknowledge that the foul did not likely alter the finish of the race and therefore the interfering horse (Maximum Security) should not be disqualified.  It’s not so much that the stewards made the wrong decision; they just got lost in the weeds and lost sight of the bigger picture.

In today’s world where everything is far too complex and dramatized; it’s a shame that the stewards chose to dump the 2019 Kentucky Derby right into the pot with all the other subjects of hyperventilation.  The bloom indeed fell from the roses at Churchill Downs on Saturday and it will exist as a stain on history for posterity.