Guillot files ... claims buzzer used on WTC in Travers

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by bks

To me, the blown-up video of Saez doesn't look great for him. At :39, the smallest two or three fingers on his right hand are clearly appear to be clutching something - only his pointer and thumb seem to be outstretched to retake the whip. It's not crystal clear, but his while hand is never completely open that I can see.

I have the HD broadcast of the Travers show on my DVR and i watched Saez with eagle eyes (there were a lot of amazingly close and clear shots of him galloping out) and while i didnt actually see a machine, i didnt either see how it was possible he had one. If he had something in his hand, or under his saddle pad or somewhere else, it was a houdini like job of concealing. His hands make some "odd" movements, but at no time did it really appear he would have been able to hold the whip, reigns and do all the movements he did while holding a device.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

Donna isn't an outrider. She's a reporter on horseback.

No kidding...The guy with the red vest on the OTHER side of the race horse.
If you want to be a smart guy, find someone else.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Sorry Cabber, didnt mean to come down hard on you, i apologize if i came across as harsh, that wasnt my intention.

I agree with you that Guillot isnt exactly the most well liked person on the backstretches of america, he does have a reputation, i'm not arguing with that.

His reputation could theoretically come into play if the judges decided to NOT investigate Saez under the grounds that the guy making the accusation is a blowhard. But, in my opinion, once they started investigating, i believe that the investigation can stand or fall strictly on the evidence and that Guillot being a blowhard isnt a factor once the judges start digging into the case. That's all i was saying.

No hard feelings? Can we still be pals?

Notwithstanding Guillot's reputation, the accusation should be given it's due diligence.
If Guillot is wrong, he should be punished in the same manner as a jockey would for lodging a 'frivolous' claim of foul.
I Googled the subject and came up with an article about a famous frivolous foul claim by Manny Ycaza in the 1962 Preakness.
He got 10 days. Then another 20 from the Md Racing Commission for other misdeeds.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=4906,4595584
Here is a CHRB rule...
http://www.chrb.ca.gov/query_rules_a..._argument=1702
I think ALL license holders should have a schedule of disciplinary penalties against them for issues such as this claim by Guillot.

[cordep17]

Originally Posted by McSchell_Racing

Whoa Chad..Arent you a self proclaimed "Fine outstanding former trainer"..I resent the fact that now you are being a accessory to the fact of knowing and telling your brother to cheat!!..Not much different then using spurs...Bullsh.t..This is abuse of the animal.

Not speaking for Chad..

That is such bull.

[cordep17]

Originally Posted by thespaah

Notwithstanding Guillot's reputation, the accusation should be given it's due diligence.
If Guillot is wrong, he should be punished in the same manner as a jockey would for lodging a 'frivolous' claim of foul.

Based off of the opinions in this thread, we are far from unanimous in what might have happened.

Jocks claim fouls all the time. Stewards don't always change the ruling, and they don't always punish a jock.

Just because someone's lawsuit fails doesn't make it's frivolous.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by cordep17

Based off of the opinions in this thread, we are far from unanimous in what might have happened.

Jocks claim fouls all the time. Stewards don't always change the ruling, and they don't always punish a jock.

Just because someone's lawsuit fails doesn't make it's frivolous.

I posted the CHRB rules regarding this.
The criteria for a claim to be frivolous is "knowingly"...
Of course the stewards or gaming board officials could make a subjective determination of whether or not Guillot's claim is in fact frivolous.

[Longshot6977]

Originally Posted by thespaah

I posted the CHRB rules regarding this.
The criteria for a claim to be frivolous is "knowingly"...
Of course the stewards or gaming board officials could make a subjective determination of whether or not Guillot's claim is in fact frivolous.

Not sure how it can be considered frivolous when even many here don't agree on what we see in the video. To some people, it appears he was holding something which would make the claim not frivolous. And of course the opposite is true.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by McSchell_Racing

Whoa Chad..Arent you a self proclaimed "Fine outstanding former trainer"..I resent the fact that now you are being a accessory to the fact of knowing and telling your brother to cheat!!..Not much different then using spurs...Bullsh.t..This is abuse of the animal.

Oh cmon, he's not telling anyone to cheat.

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by chadk66

they for sure are. my brother has a horse that gallops great and does everything right. but when they try to breeze him it's like he's stuck in third gear and won't give you the other gear. we had a long discussion about it and I told him sometimes that's life, they just weren't born with the upper gear. but sometimes they have the gear but won't give it to you for numerous reasons. so before you quit on him get with your trainer and see if he can arrange for someone to give him a little help in the morning just to see if he has it or not. he was a little puzzled but asked the trainer. and trainer said sure we can arrange that. you just have to accept the fact it's there and it's used. and if used in the morning and used properly it's no big deal. hell they shock cattle, hogs, etc. every single day to get them to do what they want. it's really not much different than using spurs when riding a reining horse. inflicts about the same discomfort. it's not as big a deal as people assume it is. however, using it in a race is another story.

Seriously?

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by thespaah

I'm not seeing anything but Saez untying the knot in the reins.
When he was interviewed by Donna Barton on the return to the winner's circle, the video shows Saez fidgeting and the out rider looking directly at Saez's hand motions. If anything untoward been going on, the outrider would be required to to report what he saw.

Apologies. I read it as you saying Barton was the outrider, but I see differently now.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

Seriously?

Is that bettor or worse than shock wave therapy? A shock is a shock, right?

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Is that bettor or worse than shock wave therapy? A shock is a shock, right?

Please say this is an attempt at humor

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by Cannon shell

Please say this is an attempt at humor

Sadly, it is doubtful.

[Zydeco]

Ok..have a question.....jock has a buzzer....on the gallop out he switches something from right hand to left hand....left hand looks like he tucks something under the saddle....trots back to winners circle to get pic taken......he pulls the saddle and tack off the horse to go get weighed......does the item fall on the ground or does he do another sleight of hand to slip it in his pocket? Or does the saddle have a pocket where he could have stashed it on the gallop out? Just wondering.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Is that bettor or worse than shock wave therapy? A shock is a shock, right?

Actually shock wave therapy is worse, not due to the shock, but if it is used to numb the horse from feeling pain.