https://racingthinktank.com/reports/tif ... ging-rules
This especially blasted me right in the face:
Here is the 'Category 1' in question, which applies to all major racing jurisdictions outside of the US and Canada. Japan switched to it in 2013 and in five years has had fewer reviews than in just their last year of the old method.Among the primary flaws with the Category 2 philosophy, clear-cut winners can be demoted for interference which had minimal impact on the race – penalizing the jockey, owners, trainers, bettors, and in some cases, even the racetrack itself.
Now imagine the application of Category 2 rules in a Kentucky Derby or Breeders’ Cup Classic. A winner that rolls clear only to lose the race in the stewards’ room. The outcry would be deafening.
I don't know much about TIF, but the concept of the organization is exactly the sort of thing racing needs. I wonder if this incident could be a trigger point for a change in methods -- if nothing else, to help protect racetracks and stewards from angry horsemen and bettors.If, in the opinion of the Staging Authority’s relevant judicial body, a horse or its rider causes interference and finishes in front of the horse interfered with but irrespective of the incident(s) the sufferer would not have finished ahead of the horse causing the interference, the judge’s placings will remain unaltered."