Tinky@Tinky47flat
‡
Were Bettors Fleeced by the Baeza Gate Incident?
More than a few readers are likely to recall the damning lack of action by the KY Stewards immediately after the running of the 2024 KY. Derby. Sierra Leone, a horse with a history of lugging in in his races, did so throughout the stretch drive, and repeatedly bumped Forever Young in the process, forcing that rival in from roughly the eight path at the head of the stretch, to the three path at the wire. At least twice Forever Young was knocked off-stride by Sierra Leone, losing his hind-end action as a result.
If that weren't bad enough, Sierra Leone's jockey, Tyler Gaffalione, appeared to reach out and touch/push Forever Young nearing the wire, which is an infraction according to the Kentucky Administrative Regulations (810 KAR 4:040.12.3) governing the race. The two horses were separated by only a nose at the wire.
Not only did the Stewards fail to DQ Sierra Leone, but they didn't even post on Inquiry. Calling their lack of action that day merely damning would, in my view, be too kind.
Fast-forward to the Alysheba Stakes, contested on the Oaks undercard. Baeza, the high-profile 9/5 favorite, broke well behind the rest of the field, and rallied late to finish 3/4 of a length behind the winner, and 1/2 length short of the runner-up. On close inspection, after the dust settled, the following salient facts have become clear.
The assistant starter continued to hold Baeza until after the gates had opened. I have attached four images, captured in chronological order (hat tip to NBC for the high-quality video). The first three demonstrate indisputably that the horse was being held until after the gates had opened. The fourth, almost equally important image, shows Baeza's reaction just an instant after his head had been released. What I believe can be seen is that his legs are akilter, and his left hind (right side looking at the image) is off the ground. He appears to have been leaning backwards, rather than forward.
I would argue that it is consistent with a natural reaction to push forward when the gate opened, then back when his head was stymied by the assistant starter. It also helps to explain why there was a distinct gap between when the starter let go of the horse, and when Baeza left the gate.
Baeza's jockey, Junior Alvarado was heated when speaking with the Stewards by phone, and, using spicy language, seemed to assert that his warnings that his mount wasn't set properly were ignored before the gate was sprung.
Ultimately, the Stewards looked at the video, and took no action.
***
According to the KHRC rules, under Section 10. Horses Left at Post, subsection 2 :
"If the stewards determine that the horse was precluded from obtaining a fair start, the stewards shall rule the horse a nonstarter and shall order money wagered on the horse deducted from the pari-mutuel pool and refunded to holders of pari-mutuel tickets on the horse, unless the horse ruled a nonstarter is part of a pari-mutuel entry and another horse inthe entry is not left at the post, in which case there shall not be a pari-mutuel refund."
Given the clear evidence presented above, and illustrated in the attached photos, it seems that the only possible excuse for the Stewards' inaction is that somehow, somehow they determined that Baeza was not "precluded from obtaining a fair start".
If, in the Stewards judgement, he had been, then the above rule would mandate that he should have automatically been declared a non-starter, triggering refunds on all wagers that featured him.
Speaking of wagering, I don't have precise numbers, but these gross numbers will help to make the point.
$2,866,911 – WPS
$1,445,256 – exacta
$821, 571 – trifecta
$1,674,000 – pk 3/4/5
$511,000 – DD/superfecta
That's a rough total of $7.3m bet on pools in which Baeza was included. I don't know what percentage his share would represent, but as he was the 9/5 favorite, it surely isn't chump change.
***
I would argue, based on the above evidence, that there there are only two basic possibilities, both of which would shine a damning light on the KY Stewards. Either they failed to discern that the assistant starter continued to hold Baeza until after the gates had opened, and that he was "precluded from obtaining a fair start" as a result, or they did note it, yet somehow arrived at the conclusion that he was not disadvantaged by the incident. Both, at least to my mind, are unfathomable.
Unless someone can produce another possible, and compelling explanation, the answer to the question posed in the title of the post appears, sadly, to be a resounding YES.
