Maximum Security out of Preakness; Derby DQ to be appealed | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World Sports

Maximum Security out of Preakness; Derby DQ to be appealed

Associated Press
1120024_web1_1120024-7b6c2b6a71cd406a84340e64df22185c
AP
Luis Saez reacts after Maximum Security was disqualified from the 145th running of the Kentucky Derby horse race at Churchill Downs Saturday, May 4, 2019, in Louisville, Ky.
1120024_web1_1120024-793084eefbc84b09b8d037d6f9cdc125
AP
Luis Saez rides Maximum Security across the finish line first followed by Flavien Prat on Country House during the 145th running of the Kentucky Derby horse race at Churchill Downs Saturday, May 4, 2019, in Louisville, Ky. Country House was declared the winner after Maximum Security was disqualified following a review by race stewards.
1120024_web1_1120024-468f6576e6c34347a0f359e1ac78dacc
AP
Luis Saez rides Maximum Security to the finish line first against Flavien Prat on Country House during the 145th running of the Kentucky Derby horse race at Churchill Downs Saturday, May 4, 2019, in Louisville, Ky. Country House was declared the winner after Maximum Security was disqualified following a review by race stewards.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Maximum Security’s owner said Monday he will not run the horse in the Preakness and will appeal the disqualification as the Kentucky Derby winner.

Gary West told The Associated Press by phone there is “really no need, not having an opportunity to run for the Triple Crown to run a horse back in two weeks.”

The 1⅛-mile Preakness is May 18 at Baltimore’s Pimlico Race Course. Though shorter than the Kentucky Derby, it requires a quick turnaround that West didn’t want to place on his colt with the Triple Crown off the table.

“The horse will be better off long term with the rest,” West said. “He ran a really good and a really hard race on Saturday.

“Really, there are a lot of other Grade 1 races the rest of the year for 3-year-olds. So we’ll let him gather himself and point to one of the other races. I don’t know which one that will be, but it will definitely not be the Preakness.”

Maximum Security, the first to finish the muddy race Saturday, became the first Derby winner to be disqualified for interference. After an objection by two riders, stewards ruled the colt swerved out and impeded the path of several horses between the far and final turns. Country House, a 65-1 shot, was elevated to first.

The only other Derby disqualification was in 1968 and long after the race. First-place finisher Dancer’s Image tested positive for a prohibited medication, and Kentucky racing officials ordered the purse money to be redistributed. Forward Pass got the winner’s share. A subsequent court challenge upheld the stewards’ decision.

West has said he realizes the appeals process will take “months, if not years.” The owner adds that the earliest he could see the stewards’ video evidence would be Thursday.

Maximum Security was placed 17th of 19 horses after starting as the 9-2 second betting choice, ending his four-race winning streak.

Stewards cited the rule that calls for disqualification 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.”

Chief steward Barbara Borden said in a news conference she and two other stewards interviewed riders and studied video replays during a 22-minute review after the finish. The stewards did not take questions from reporters.

Categories: Sports | US-World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.