How Former Steward Jon White Saw This Year’s Preakness

The 2025 Preakness Stakes (G1) was a thriller. It provided us with a controversial three-horse brawl in upper stretch and a furious charge by Journalism in deep stretch to win the race in a sensational performance.

Halfway down the stretch, Gosger had a commanding lead of about five lengths. He looked home free. But Journalism amazingly stormed home to prevail by a half-length.

On ESPN’s Pardon the Interruption, while a replay of the final part of the Preakness was being shown, Michael Wilbon said that “when Journalism runs this horse (Gosger) down and turns into Secretariat for about eight seconds, I thought it was one of the most thrilling things I have ever seen in sports.”

I must say that I consider Wilbon’s comment that Journalism turned into Secretariat for about the final eight seconds of the race to be spot on.

As to whether or not there should have been a disqualification in the Preakness, opinions vary. Some say yes. Others say no. Some say Goal Oriented’s number should have come down. Others say Journalism is the one who should have been disqualified.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Actually, a difference of opinion is extremely important when it comes to horse racing. That’s because it’s a sport in which people do constantly express their opinions via pari-mutuel wagering.

The following is my opinion on the matter of whether or not a DQ was warranted in the Preakness. This is coming from someone whose considerable experience during a five-decade career in horse racing includes having been a Steward at tracks in California, Washington and Idaho.

In my opinion, Goal Oriented should have been disqualified and placed last for instigating a chain reaction. It is my view that Goal Oriented came in and caused interference to Journalism. And when Goal Oriented came in, he pushed Journalism into Clever Again, which resulted in Clever Again being severely impeded. 

At the time of the incident, Journalism, in my opinion, had rightfully established his position between Goal Oriented and Clever Again. Journalism, without bothering anyone, had gotten up into a narrow hole between Clever Again and Goal Oriented. Once Journalism did that, he had a right to that path on the track. From the video replays I have seen, Goal Oriented then came in and was responsible for both Journalism and Clever Again being fouled.

Some say Journalism bulled his way between Goal Oriented and Clever Again. I disagree. If you stop the videotape at the top of the stretch, Journalism had rightfully established himself between Goal Oriented and Clever Again, with the three horses being almost on even terms. Goal Oriented then came over into Journalism. That’s what gives the impression to some that Journalism had bulled his way between his two rivals, which in my view he had not done.

At the time of the incident it appears to me that Clever Again was fourth. It also appears to me that Clever Again was retreating at the time. But in my opinion, even though Clever Again was retreating when he was severely impeded, he was denied THE OPPORTUNITY for a better placing. Therefore, it is my conclusion that Goal Oriented should have been disqualified and placed last, behind Clever Again. 

What if Clever Again had been able to come home well enough to possibly finish sixth? I don’t think it categorically can be said that was impossible. Granted, by finishing sixth Clever Again would not get a part of the purse. But what if one of the first five finishers then was disqualified for a bad test? That would move Clever Again up to fifth and he would earn $60,000. 

Here is another way to look at it. What if Journalism and/or Clever Again had gone down? Once again, under the circumstances, I’d say that was not impossible. Would the Stewards have then disqualified Goal Oriented for being the culprit? I think that’s likely. Thus, I believe it’s fair to say that, quite possibly, the main reason Goal Oriented was fortunate enough not to be disqualified was neither Journalism nor Clever Again fell.

As for how much responsibility Flavien Prat on Goal Oriented bears for the incident, it is my opinion that Prat probably was not entirely to blame and possibly not to blame at all. I think an inexperienced Goal Oriented does, at the very least, bear some responsibility, if not all the responsibility.

It’s my view that at first Prat was just doing what is commonly called race-riding by giving no quarter to Journalism. But then the lightly raced Goal Oriented, when racing greenly, came over and triggered the chain reaction. How quickly Prat acted to correct Goal Oriented is, I believe, open for debate. Consequently, in terms of a possible sanction for Prat, I would approach it with an open mind and welcome the thoughts of my two fellow Stewards, especially if one or both of my fellow Stewards had been a jockey.

As for Umberto Rispoli’s ride on Journalism, I think he made a tactical mistake on the far turn when he opted to go to the inside rather than to the outside. And I am not being a Monday morning quarterback. During the race, when the horses were on the far turn, I said to my wife, “Rispoli is making a big mistake by going to the inside.”

My feeling is if Rispoli was riding a horse whose odds were 10-1 or higher it would have been worth the risk of potential traffic trouble by going to the inside. But Rispoli was riding an even-money favorite. I believe that when someone is riding a favorite like that, it’s prudent for them to avoid potential traffic problems if at all possible.

Some have said Rispoli didn’t have a chance to go to the outside on the far turn. I strongly disagree with that assertion.

Based on the video replays I have seen, particularly the overhead replay. Rispoli did have the opportunity to go around horses on the far turn. It appears to me that, for a brief moment, Rispoli even did start to go around horses. But in an instant he seemed to change his mind and instead dove down to the inside, putting himself in jeopardy of encountering traffic trouble.

I concede that Rispoli did not seem to be getting the response from Journalism that he wanted when the rider appeared to be pushing Journalism on the backstretch and early on the far turn. But considering Rispoli was riding a horse who was perceived to be so much the best that he was bet down to even-money favoritism, I believe the right move by Rispoli on the far turn would have been to go around horses in order to avoid the possibility of getting involved in a traffic jam, which was exactly what happened.