Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: jbelfior on May 05, 2008, 07:25:48 AM
-
TGJB said that \"she is coming off four huge efforts, all of which will eventually take its toll.\" How prophetic!!
If anyone wants to go after anyone in this matter, how about starting and ending with whomever made the decision to run a filly 9 times in 8 months without as much as a 30 day break in between.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
-
jbelfior Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TGJB said that \"she is coming off four huge
> efforts, all of which will eventually take its
> toll.\" How prophetic!!
>
> If anyone wants to go after anyone in this matter,
> how about starting and ending with whomever made
> the decision to run a filly 9 times in 8 months
> without as much as a 30 day break in between.
>
>
> Good Luck,
> Joe B.
Horses are individuals, Joe. While others were running up at Saratoga last summer or at Churchill last spring, she\'d yet to start. Was it harder for her to be running in maidens and allowances late last year than it was for those who were running in stakes and the Breeders\' Cup?
Be careful about wanting horses to take long breaks. How much of an eye do you keep on research? A horse who has more than a 2-month break are at 10 times more likely to suffer a catastrophic breakdown upon their return than those who stay in training. With each passing week and short breeze, that figure drops to 6 times then 4 times then 2 times more likely to suffer breakdown until they\'re finally back where they\'re at no greater risk than the horse who remaining in training. Their bones need the stress to remodel and strengthen.
It doesn\'t take a genius, however, to know that you have to expect the unexpected with an Unbridled\'s Song. One day they\'re fine, and the next day they snap -- unless they\'re so weak all along that they have problems all along. But what is a trainer supposed to do if a horse, even an UBS, hasn\'t had the first thing wrong? Don\'t train, just because? UBSs have problems because they\'re big and they\'re fast, and they\'re soft-boned. You take your time, watch for problems, react to problems, and just do the best you can.
Don\'t be blaming the trainer. Trainers just do the best they can with the horses they\'re given. Racing needs to take a look at breeding, track surfaces, and better injury detection methods.
-
\"How much of an eye do you keep on research? A horse who has more than a 2-month break are at 10 times more likely to suffer a catastrophic breakdown upon their return than those who stay in training. With each passing week and short breeze, that figure drops to 6 times then 4 times then 2 times more likely to suffer breakdown until they\'re finally back where they\'re at no greater risk than the horse who remaining in training. Their bones need the stress to remodel and strengthen.\"
I think this argument may be confusing cause and effect here.
Horses that are coming off long layoffs are more likely to break down because, in most cases, the horses are getting the long layoff because they are unsound in the first place.
I think the idea if we give the sound horses time off, they are better off in the long run. The stats you quote are misleading
-
I think you are both correct.
I\'ve also read reports about horses\' bones needing stress to remodel and strengthen, but I think it was mostly related to young growing horses. On the flip side, you are almost certainly correct that looking at a sample of layoffs is probably biased towards horses that have problems to begin with.
-
\"Eight Belles\"-- You don\'t want to go there. I\'m dead serious about that.
Read my post \"Several Things\" from yesterday, and my entire seminar comments about the filly. And drop it.
-
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> \"Eight Belles\"-- You don\'t want to go there. I\'m
> dead serious about that.
>
> Read my post \"Several Things\" from yesterday, and
> my entire seminar comments about the filly. And
> drop it.
Excuse me? No thanks, I won\'t drop it. And if you have something to say, then say it, this hinting around is terribly classless on your part.
-
Sometimes knowing a little bit is worse than knowing nothing at all.
You are quite right about bone remodeling, but this filly was way beyond that phase of her life.
The only remodeling going on with her was a flattening of the bottom of the condylar bone. As was pointed out she was likely a soft boned horse and sooner or later the repeated pounding wore through the soft tissue at the bottom of the bone, exposing bone to bone and an ultimate fracture under the stress.
A layoff would have made a great deal of positive difference in her life, as the rest would have allowed her bone to harden down there and preserved the soft tissue before it was destroyed. Again, I quote the story of Tale of the Cat, whose connections did the right thing and ended up with a major winner as a result.
-
Yeah, classless. Go read the \"Several Things\" post, second paragraph. This was not only predictable, it was predicted, back in March. And I tried to head it off, back then.
-
Here are a couple of articles on stress and bone development. As I said, they generally refer to very young horses.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Horse-Racing-2248/Negative-Positive-aspects-starting.htm
http://www.ctba.com/00magazine/oct00/news2.htm
-
I\'ve been in the game for quite awhile.
All you need to do is look at the \"tightness\" of the efforts. She was consistently faster than any other YOUNG three year old filly........ever, AND she was raced more than any other. Nuf said.
pat
-
http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?videoId=3382208&categoryId=2378529
-
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, classless. Go read the \"Several Things\"
> post, second paragraph. This was not only
> predictable, it was predicted, back in March. And
> I tried to head it off, back then.
Yeah? So, what did Larry Jones have to say in response to your advice? It\'s really not difficult to predict a horse getting injured since most all of them do. It\'s about as difficult as predicting the sun will rise tomorrow.
How long have you been training, Jerry? Must be a good 40 or so years of training many champions, given you know so much more than Jones or Jolley.
-
He\'s right about everything!
-
missing the point, horses grow 30-40 percent between 3 and 4. they need time to recoup. ask d-wayne the leader in breakdowns.3 to 4 races a year till he stops growing.
-
I can see the whip going away. That would be the first attempt to silence the critics.
The drugs are gonna be a part of the game one way or another.
I could see some type of age restriction measure put in place in the next year or so.
Artificial is here to stay.
One more high profile, untimely breakdown in a major race on television and changes will be demanded. Eventually some people are gonna cave in.
The problem with PETA and all those other zealot groups is, once they get started they never quit. First the whip, then the drugs, then all artificial surfaces, then no horse can run more recently than 30 days. It\'ll just go on and on and on.
-
1-- It wasn\'t Jones.
2-- I can\'t bring the third party into this, but I said what I said both then (trying to head problems off), and in my Derby comments. Given what followed, the point of your comments about me not being a trainer is... what?
Also made similar comments before Go For Wand\'s last race, and said the Derby effort and short rest were going to stress Barbaro significantly. I would say that the times I have said things like that have been relatively few, but maybe you can find a bunch of times I\'ve said that and they went on to race ten more times.
3-- I\'ve dealt with several hundred horses and I don\'t know how many trainers in my career.
4-- I made the mistake once myself, with a filly called License Fee. I didn\'t pay enough attention to the number of starts and spacing-- until after she broke down on the track. Having said that, a) she was older and therefore theoretically sturdier, b) we didn\'t run her as often as they ran this filly, and c) she didn\'t lug in or give any indication trouble was coming, like this one did. Watch the head-on of the Fantasy.
I\'m not taking a shot at the connections-- you brought them into this, and I tried to keep it from going there. I\'m saying there were valid reasons to take the position I took (even before the Fantasy), and you didn\'t have to be a trainer.
-
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1-- It wasn\'t Jones.
>
> 2-- I can\'t bring the third party into this, but I
> said what I said both then (trying to head
> problems off), and in my Derby comments. Given
> what followed, the point of your comments about me
> not being a trainer is... what?
>
> Also made similar comments before Go For Wand\'s
> last race, and said the Derby effort and short
> rest were going to stress Barbaro significantly. I
> would say that the times I have said things like
> that have been relatively few, but maybe you can
> find a bunch of times I\'ve said that and they went
> on to race ten more times.
>
> 3-- I\'ve dealt with several hundred horses and I
> don\'t know how many trainers in my career.
>
> 4-- I made the mistake once myself, with a filly
> called License Fee. I didn\'t pay enough attention
> to the number of starts and spacing-- until after
> she broke down on the track. Having said that, a)
> she was older and therefore theoretically
> sturdier, b) we didn\'t run her as often as they
> ran this filly, and c) she didn\'t lug in or give
> any indication trouble was coming, like this one
> did. Watch the head-on of the Fantasy.
>
> I\'m not taking a shot at the connections-- you
> brought them into this, and I tried to keep it
> from going there. I\'m saying there were valid
> reasons to take the position I took (even before
> the Fantasy), and you didn\'t have to be a trainer.
No, I didn\'t bring the trainer into this. In this thread, jbelfior did, and before that, you\'ve made several \"hints\" that you knew something \"damning\" regarding Eight Belles.
And how did you put it when I made a very reasonable reply to jbelfior, defending the trainer? I think you put it, \"You don\'t want to go there. I\'m dead serious about that. Read my post \"Several Things\" from yesterday, and my entire seminar comments about the filly. And drop it.\"
If you\'re not taking a shot at the connections, you sure could\'ve fooled me. And you really don\'t want to go there.
-
I don\'t think I\'m missing the point. I think the poster Eight Belles was referring to legitimate studies when he was talking about stress and bone development. However, those studies were mostly related to 2YO and younger horses so they may not be applicable in this case. In addition, any study of layoffs and breakdowns would have to be adjusted for bias because many horses that are laid off for a lengthy period of time have problems to begin with.
I have no idea what the correct number of races per year is.
Based on my observation of PPs alone (I have no expertise on horse flesh at all), I would say it\'s an entirely individual thing. Some horses seem to be tougher than others. I spent the better part of last summer saying that Hard Spun probably needed a rest. But IMO he kept getting better all year long. So I guess he thrived on the hard work. If Jones had spaced all his races and given him a much lighter schedule all he would have accomplished would have been to leave millions and perhaps a Grade 1 win on the table. I think that happens a REAL LOT in the modern game.
I think another factor is what the trainer is doing with the horses between races. Since I\'m not a trainer, I don\'t know what\'s best. But I have observed many trainers that seem to work their horses very hard between starts. Their horses seem to have shorter and more brilliant campaigns before going bad. They also seem to lose more young promising horses. That goes back to before all these soundness and race spacing issues were even discussed much.
I don\'t know how to do it, but I think a trainer has to know his horse, have him checked out, care for him properly, and only do what the individual horse can safely handle.
-
I didn\'t hint, I said directly that the filly going wrong was predictable and that I had tried to do something about it back in March (only time I have ever tried to do that with a horse I\'m not involved with). I told you not to go there because going down that road WOULD bring the connections into it, since you had made clear months ago that you have some relationship with Porter. I didn\'t respond to jbelfior and I\'m STILL trying to leave them out of it-- you won\'t leave it alone.
-
Thought the interview was interesting.
I hope Moss takes some serious heat for what he said but I hope he sticks to his guns and stands by his words. This goes with the territory.
I do have one question while everyone is now proclaiming Synthetics to be the savior. What Sales Ring do most of the more expensive horses get Sold through (See Browns comments in WSJ) and who is behind the push for Synthetic?
Answer: Keeneland.
Now read John T. Wards quotes. Is Synthetic a solution for keeping horses sounder longer or an opportunity to sell and race more unsound horses sold by whom?
Now think about what I just said and what Moss said. This can go either way. And the recent trend in America as he said is to hatch and race more medication required horses year after year.
A more forgiving surface will only abort that briefly..........
-
I don\'t think Moss\'s view about synthetics was one of strong approval. I think he was suggesting that the move to synthetics at least demonstrates that the industry is taking the safety of the horses seriously.
I also think it\'s a poor solution. It reminds me a real lot of what politicans do when faced with tough choices. They avoid dealing with the core problems by pushing them out into the future.
I had a brief conversation with one highly respected handicapper/author about the CD surface that day. I was trying to find out if there was any moisture in the track during the Derby even though it was rated fast (looking for horses that may have run subpar because of the misclassification of the track condition...Colonel John???). He said the track had been squeezed down to a thin layer of slightly moist cushion like a hard country dirt road. I don\'t know if that had any impact on the filly, but he did make another point. Dealing with moisture in dirt tracks can lead them to becoming rock hard. A well maintained sythetic surface does not need major adjustments. The water flows right through. (of course we have since found out it\'s not always as easy as that)
-
They did water the track right before the Derby.
-
http://www.drf.com/news/article/94302.html
-
Eight Belles,
I\'m in your corner on this one. Uncle Buck posted an ESPN opinion by Randy Moss and I thought he hit part of it on the head.
All race day medications need banned, if a horse hurts too much without them, that horse is too ouchy to race. If a horse feels pain he\'ll shut himself down. We can\'t have race day medications pushing ouchy horses forward. Right now these medications cover the horses inherent weaknesses and they go off to stud and genetically pass on their afflictions. First and foremost we need to improve the breed and to do that we have to ban race day medications. Zero tolerance for everything. In doing so handicappers won\'t have to factor drug move ups. That would be very positive.
Regarding Eight Belles her two year old form was nice but not enough to say she was doing too much. She came together nicely as a 3YO and but for an outstanding performance would be Derby Champion.
I finally saw the replay. She went bad in her right fore and reached awkwardly with her left as she tried to break her fall. It may be that she was genetically flawed in both ankles, but I think they ought to look most closely at the right.
This horse with her series of races didn\'t fit the Sheet Gurus theory on how to win a big race. I don\'t buy their theory. She, along with Big Brown, pretty much blew \"too much, too soon\" out of the water.
My personal opinion is that the Sheet Gurus ought to stick to betting and private sale buying. The reason I say that is their \"technique\" is to race lightly, space and run Huge. That technique with the modern medicated Ouchiness of the breed contributes to breakdowns, rather than prevents them.
They don\'t seem to understand this yet.
She was special. Man that filly could run.
Eight Belles Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jbelfior Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > TGJB said that \"she is coming off four huge
> > efforts, all of which will eventually take its
> > toll.\" How prophetic!!
> >
> > If anyone wants to go after anyone in this
> matter,
> > how about starting and ending with whomever
> made
> > the decision to run a filly 9 times in 8 months
> > without as much as a 30 day break in between.
> >
> >
> > Good Luck,
> > Joe B.
>
> Horses are individuals, Joe. While others were
> running up at Saratoga last summer or at Churchill
> last spring, she\'d yet to start. Was it harder
> for her to be running in maidens and allowances
> late last year than it was for those who were
> running in stakes and the Breeders\' Cup?
>
> Be careful about wanting horses to take long
> breaks. How much of an eye do you keep on
> research? A horse who has more than a 2-month
> break are at 10 times more likely to suffer a
> catastrophic breakdown upon their return than
> those who stay in training. With each passing
> week and short breeze, that figure drops to 6
> times then 4 times then 2 times more likely to
> suffer breakdown until they\'re finally back where
> they\'re at no greater risk than the horse who
> remaining in training. Their bones need the
> stress to remodel and strengthen.
>
> It doesn\'t take a genius, however, to know that
> you have to expect the unexpected with an
> Unbridled\'s Song. One day they\'re fine, and the
> next day they snap -- unless they\'re so weak all
> along that they have problems all along. But what
> is a trainer supposed to do if a horse, even an
> UBS, hasn\'t had the first thing wrong? Don\'t
> train, just because? UBSs have problems because
> they\'re big and they\'re fast, and they\'re
> soft-boned. You take your time, watch for
> problems, react to problems, and just do the best
> you can.
>
> Don\'t be blaming the trainer. Trainers just do
> the best they can with the horses they\'re given.
> Racing needs to take a look at breeding, track
> surfaces, and better injury detection methods.
-
So, it\'s the spacing that\'s to blame, eh, Chalk? Should have run her back in the Lexington on a week\'s rest to toughen her up some for the big dance, is that it?
You never know when to shut up, we all know that. We also know that horses are either your dearest loves or your mortal enemies and there is something sick and pathological in that. I was going to lay off the obvious replies when I saw that post you wrote where you said (paraphrasing) you could finally understand why all your drivel about Barbaro becoming \"unglued\" actually bothered people, because it seemed that you really loved Belles and I had sympathy for you.
But, obviously, you are through mourning now, and it\'s back to all about CTMAC. Because you don\'t give a crap about Belles except how she reflects upon you. So, let us turn reality upside down. Let us avoid any sense of rational thought. Instead, let us ignore the fact that a super-fast 3yo filly with a slowish 2yo foundation runs four extremely fast ones going into the Kentucky Derby and it is the spacing that killed her. You really just can\'t stand the fact that she met the same end as your mortal enemy Barbaro. That doesn\'t reflect well on the glory of CTMAC, that guy who is so great picking the Derby winner and who - oh yeah - is a sick puppy with a borderline personality.
-
All kinds of theories on why Eight Belles broke down. I don\'t know that the autopsy will shed any light on what happened, but probably not.
However, if you look at the theories as to why she broke down, such as:
1. over medication of today\'s horses
2. breeding changing the species to be more speed oriented, than stamina
3. dirt surfaces being unsafe or at least less safe than synthetic
4. fillies shouln\'t run against the colts
5. The lack of spacing of her races off of fast efforts
Sheet purists on this board, the host included, may not like it, but #5 is probably the LEAST LIKELY reason to be accepted by the mainstream public and thus by the racing bureaucracy. As you can tell by the comments about Denis of Cork with regards to them making a \"poor decision\" based on \"sheets logic\", people don\'t get and/or don\'t believe in some of the theories of sheets players. And how/why can/should the casual fan believe it? The horses of yesteryear raced more frequently and with less spacing and there weren\'t these problems. Try telling the casual fan that her two year old top was slow, so she overdeveloped at 3, and that combined with the relatively short spacing of her 3 year old races all made Saturday\'s tragedy foreseeable and preventable. It doesn\'t make sense to most people. And it won\'t be accepted.
Jerry, I buy the product and believe in the figures, but predicting breakdowns comes across a bit as \"over the top\". I remember Barbaro\'s sheet and it looked fine coming into the Derby. He had nicely spaced races and solid improvement. Of course, off the big Derby he had to come back in 2 weeks and repeat that performance, which made him vulnerable, but that is the case with all DERBY horses that run in the Preakness and that has been happening for 100 years. Why was Barbaro\'s breakdown so much more foreseeable than anybody else potentially breaking down? Big Brown\'s running lines are going to look MUCH MORE dangerous than Barbaro\'s, if his number comes in where most think it will. ARe we now to say that Big Brown shouldn\'t run in the Preakness because he is likely to break down? Should we move the Preakness out a few weeks and then the Belmont 5 weeks from that date so we can \"space\" the races out better and have the horses safer? Who is gonig to go for that?
It would seem to me that the more likely reasons for the breakdowns are a combination of the overmedication of today\'s horses and the breeding emphasis on speed combining to make the breed as a whole more fragile, and thus some elements, like short rest, make this risk exacerbated.
-
I am over it now.
If you want to obsess with it, that\'s your prerogative.
If you want to support the status quo, that is your prerogative too.
If you don\'t understand the inherent weakness in their argument, I hope others understand that it\'s time to change the game. It\'s time to improve the breed, to race often and race long, and remove drugs of any kind.
It\'s time to go back, to get better.
I won on both breakdowns though don\'t consider them analogous. Barbaro was the Prototype for the Gurus, Eight Belles Anathema to them. I am simply the best Derby Handicapper there has ever been. There\'s a reason for that, even if I didn\'t cash that Super at 30-1.
BB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, it\'s the spacing that\'s to blame, eh, Chalk?
> Should have run her back in the Lexington on a
> week\'s rest to toughen her up some for the big
> dance, is that it?
>
> You never know when to shut up, we all know that.
> We also know that horses are either your dearest
> loves or your mortal enemies and there is
> something sick and pathological in that. I was
> going to lay off the obvious replies when I saw
> that post you wrote where you said (paraphrasing)
> you could finally understand why all your drivel
> about Barbaro becoming \"unglued\" actually bothered
> people, because it seemed that you really loved
> Belles and I had sympathy for you.
>
> But, obviously, you are through mourning now, and
> it\'s back to all about CTMAC. Because you don\'t
> give a crap about Belles except how she reflects
> upon you. So, let us turn reality upside down. Let
> us avoid any sense of rational thought. Instead,
> let us ignore the fact that a super-fast 3yo filly
> with a slowish 2yo foundation runs four extremely
> fast ones going into the Kentucky Derby and it is
> the spacing that killed her. You really just can\'t
> stand the fact that she met the same end as your
> mortal enemy Barbaro. That doesn\'t reflect well on
> the glory of CTMAC, that guy who is so great
> picking the Derby winner and who - oh yeah - is a
> sick puppy with a borderline personality.
-
Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am simply the best Derby Handicapper there has ever been.
What a pathetic, desperate cry for attention -- hopefully, grounds for being banned from the forum. (I can hope, can\'t I?)
-
NYT Editorial
I\'m not sure what his point is except to fan the fire-or does he mean to say that horses should not be raced until they are mature adults? Or that breeding practices need to change? Even if he has a point, it sounds ugly!! It would be better to have an op-ed piece by someone who knows what they are talking about-TGJB please do one!!
NEW YORK TIMES
Another Horse-Racing Horror
Published: May 6, 2008
There is no reason why a race of one-and-a-quarter miles should be a death sentence for a horse, as it was on Saturday for the 3-year-old filly, Eight Belles. She was euthanized after breaking both front ankles immediately after coming in second in the Kentucky Derby.
The racing industry has claimed, as it always does after such a horrifying incident, that racing young thoroughbreds isn’t all that dangerous to their well-being. But the nature of racing and breeding has changed over the years. Good horses, whose careers often begin and end before their bones are fully mature, are racing less often than they used to, which means they only need enough endurance to last a few races. That makes it all the easier to breed for the lightness of build — and the fragility — that Eight Belles showed.
There are, of course, owners and trainers who love thoroughbreds for themselves and for their ability to perform on the racetrack, which is a reasonable test of sound breeding. But the real race increasingly seems to be to capitalize on a horse’s success — to move a horse through its career as quickly as possible. The sums involved are immense, so much so that the horses seem more like financial vehicles than animals with an existence of their own. The life of the money comes to seem just as important as the life of the horse.
How beautiful a galloping thoroughbred can be — everyone who watched the Derby can attest. But we also got to witness just how narrow the margin is between beauty and tragedy. It is exactly as narrow — and only as sure — as the bones in a horse’s legs. The first rule of racing must be the welfare of these horses. Nothing else is acceptable.
-
\"It\'s time to improve the breed, to race often and race long, and remove drugs of any kind.\"
I don\'t disagree with any of that. But, where does that tie in with \"spacing kills\"? That\'s like taking 1,000 people with brain tumors, finding out they all had MRIs, then claiming it was the MRI that killed \'em when they keel over.
If you want to make racing safer tomorrow, eliminate race day medication and add a mile to every race. Then you can get back to improving the breed.
-
It\'s really amazing how people want to assign blame in this. There is plenty to go around. Some would argue you can start by blaming all the people who go to the track and bet. I read Jerry\'s comments as simply meaning the horse could tail off. Every time a horse runs there is risk. A horse off a layoff may be at just as much of a risk of breaking down as one that has run on a regular schedule. It all depends on the horse, and it\'s far from an exact science.
-
Jimbo;
Did not mean to suggest that spacing was \"THE\" reason for what happened to Eight Belles. I only have issues with illogical reasoning and dishonest presentation. More than likely, you and me and CTMC are in closer agreement on all of this than we might reasonably expect.
On a separate note, the board has been a great place to be for these last few months. As a faithful reader and an infrequent poster, I want to send my thanks and best wishes to all. In all of the words that have been posted here, I think Miff\'s analysis of the \"Tricky\" factor actually turned out to be the best analysis of the race. But I\'m taking a break for a while. Good luck to all!
Bob
-
Last night I reviewed her last 5 races. She had a clear general tendency to come in towards the rail through the stretch. I have no idea what that means, but it didn\'t look like she was having a problem of any kind. In the Fantasy, she was outside a horse and the jock was whipping her left handed to keep her straight. She was doing fine until the last few strides when she started to come in and the jock kind of jerked her straight because he had the race won anyway.
-
It seems that the posters on this thread collectively have it correct. There are a number of factors which include Jerry\'s take on the unsound history of Unbridled Songs and Eight Belles many trips to the post by todays standards.My own take is that she would have broken down if she was spending her guts running figs 5,5,5,5 instead of the faster figs she ran.All hard trying runners are on the edge of their physical capabilities regardless of how fast they go when all out.
Check out the posting by Sighthound to DRF\'s article by Dr.Bramlage,it speaks volumes and comes from an up close expert.
Mike
-
It\'s pretty arrogant, but he has been pretty sharp the past few years I\'ve been watching this forum.
-
What a joke.
-
Let\'s just have a little contest then.
How bout JB pick 12 random races next Saturday, design a 12 race program and all us cappers put up $ 500.00 to download the PP\'s and winner take 50% and TG keeps 50%?
I\'m game enough to find out, are you Chuckles?
JB can limit it to 20 participants or 50 participants or he can set the rules, the only rule is he can\'t participate since he would pick the races.
They also can\'t be races which are discussed in the forum, may the best capper win.
They can be 2 sprints, 2 routes, 2 turfs, 2 artificial, 2 poly, 1 maiden claimer and 1 maiden special weight race.
When the contest ends, JB can post the results of every entrant and we\'ll see if Chuckles IS THE BEST CAPPER.
You think you\'re the only guy in the room that can handicap? I see plenty of others in here that I would hold in high regard as competitors.
-
With the suggestion that banning all race-day medications (running on hay, oats and water) would prevent sore/hurt horses from running, etc.--does anyone know if the percentage of injuries/breakdowns is lower at places, such as Dubai or parts of Europe where race day medications are banned (or mostly banned) than here in the U.S.?
-
Good question!
-
To make racing safer, you have to remove some of the speed. Period.
You breed horses with more bone - that equals more mass, equals less speed.
Safer track surfaces are slower.
-
smalltimer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let\'s just have a little contest then.
> How bout JB pick 12 random races next Saturday,
> design a 12 race program and all us cappers put up
> $ 500.00 to download the PP\'s and winner take 50%
> and TG keeps 50%?
> I\'m game enough to find out, are you Chuckles?
> JB can limit it to 20 participants or 50
> participants or he can set the rules, the only
> rule is he can\'t participate since he would pick
> the races.
> They also can\'t be races which are discussed in
> the forum, may the best capper win.
> They can be 2 sprints, 2 routes, 2 turfs, 2
> artificial, 2 poly, 1 maiden claimer and 1 maiden
> special weight race.
> When the contest ends, JB can post the results of
> every entrant and we\'ll see if Chuckles IS THE
> BEST CAPPER.
> You think you\'re the only guy in the room that can
> handicap? I see plenty of others in here that I
> would hold in high regard as competitors.
Sounds like fun...Let\'s do this!!
-
I am 100% for this. The only catch is this: Chuckles MUST participate.
-
What number did you project that she would run in the Derby? Methinks you got that wrong.
EdD
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I didn\'t hint, I said directly that the filly
> going wrong was predictable and that I had tried
> to do something about it back in March (only time
> I have ever tried to do that with a horse I\'m not
> involved with). I told you not to go there because
> going down that road WOULD bring the connections
> into it, since you had made clear months ago that
> you have some relationship with Porter. I didn\'t
> respond to jbelfior and I\'m STILL trying to leave
> them out of it-- you won\'t leave it alone.
-
He suggested her as a potential \"key\" if you wanted to key one horse instead of spreading it over 6, so I am not sure he got that wrong.
-
Yes, you are right.
MonmouthGuy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He suggested her as a potential \"key\" if you
> wanted to key one horse instead of spreading it
> over 6, so I am not sure he got that wrong.
-
Jimbo-- yes, Barbaro looked fine coming INTO the Derby. He had had his races spaced, but for the Preakness was coming back on two weeks rest. He was also coming back following a 4 point jump, again on two weeks. I can\'t remember other Derby winners that looked like that,and I haven\'t made the kind of comments (impending danger comments) about too many horses.
And by the way, I\'m not going to say in a seminar or anywhere publicly that a horse is GOING TO BREAK DOWN. If he doesn\'t I look like a jerk and the connections hate me, and if he does the conections really hate me, and they get accused of being incompetent, or worse.
It\'s unlikely that the decision to give DOC extra rest will be given any credit, but it did exactly what it was supposed to do. He was going to bounce under any circumstances-- this was he did run well in the Derby, and (again, as I said in the seminar) it probably kept him sounder than he otherwise would have been.
A couple of years ago someone posted a study on this board correlating number of races plus workouts, per month, with breakdowns. The results were extreme. I wonder if anyone can find it.
-
I remember the study, I printed a copy and will try to find it. Last year, I had a friend who had a horse that ran really, really big in her debut. I won\'t go into who (trainer or horse\'s name) but it was trained by a top, nationally known trainer. Anyway, I warned them to give the horse some time after its debut but instead they ran it back two weeks later in a stakes. Before the race, I made the mistake of telling them -- \"your horse will win but it will probably break down and never race again.\" You can guess what happened.
-
\"In this study, using information on 64 horses euthanized during a nine-month period in 1991, the researchers attempted to match each horse with a catastrophic racing fracture to a control horse selected from horses that were less severely injured during the same time period at the same track. Horses were evaluated for a number of factors, including age at first race, average lifetime racing frequency, percentage of time laid up, time since last layup, and the total and rate of work accumulated within one month and six months of the injury.
Overall statistical analysis found that only high total and high average daily rates of exercise within a two-month period were associated with an increased risk of catastrophic racing fracture. Horses that had accumulated a total of 35 furlongs of high-speed activity in races or timed workouts within the two months had a 3.9 times greater chance of catastrophic racing fracture compared with matched horses that had accumulated 25 furlongs of similar work during the same period.\"
-
i recall the study\'s , i believe sighthound posted them on a rear breakdown thread in may of 2006 and there was a section on high-speed exercise history and catastrophic racing fracture in thoroughbreds -
Re: Rear breakdowns (383 Views)
Posted by: sighthound (IP Logged)
Date: May 22, 2006 03:32PM
Caveat - not a practicing equine vet. Horses carry more weight on the forehand than rear. Brief lit search found a couple of interesting things, apologize in advance TGJB if too long or inappropriate to board content or current discussion:
Characterisation of the type and location of fractures of the third metacarpal/metatarsal condyles in 135 horses in central Kentucky (1986- 1994).
Equine Vet J 31[4]:304-8 1999 Jul - Zekas LJ, Bramlage LR, Embertson RM, Hance SR Rood and Riddle Equine Hospital, Lexington, Kentucky 40580-2070, USA.
The objective of this retrospective study was to provide a detailed description of the characteristics of condylar fractures represented in a population of 135 horses who sustained 145 fractures. Records and radiographic studies were examined. Fifty-nine percent of the horses were male and the majority Thoroughbreds. The distribution of fractures was 37% incomplete-nondisplaced, 30% complete-nondisplaced and 32% complete-displaced. *** The right front was more likely to sustain a complete-displaced fracture, whereas the left front was more likely to sustain an incomplete-nondisplaced fracture. Forelimbs (81%) and lateral condyles (85%) were more likely to be involved. Contrary to previous studies, the right forelimb was slightly more often involved than the left. Fractures tended to involve the middle portion of the condyle (59%). The mean length of all fractures was 75+/-3.8 mm. Axial fractures and medial condyle fractures tended to be longer. Fifteen percent of the fractures had definitive articular comminution. Ninety- five percent of fractures with articular comminution were associated with complete fractures. When fractures entered the middle area of the condyle, 23% had articular comminution. Eight of the fractures spiralled, all involved forelimbs. Concurrent lesions included proximal phalanx chip fractures, sesamoid fractures, sesamoiditis, proximal phalanx fractures, \'splint\' bone periostitis and ligamentous injuries. The complete description of the fractures in this group of horses allows us better to define the condylar fracture, compare these fractures to previous studies and establish new data for use in defining prognosis.
High-speed exercise history and catastrophic racing fracture in thoroughbreds.
Am J Vet Res 57[11]:1549-55 1996 Nov Estberg L ; Stover SM ; Gardner IA ; Drake CM ; Johnson B ; Ardans A OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relation between several racing speed history characteristics and risk of fatal skeletal injury (FSI) in racing Thoroughbreds. ANIMALS: 64 Thoroughbreds euthanatized during a 9-month period in 1991 at a California racemeet because of a catastrophic fracture incurred while racing (cases), identified retrospectively. For each race in which an FSI occurred, 1 control horse was randomly selected from the noncatastrophically injured participants. PROCEDURE: Racing and officially timed workout histories were obtained for each horse. Several history characteristics were calculated to summarize racing career patterns and high-speed exercise schedules prior to date of injury and included age at first race, proportion of career spent laid up, average duration of laid up periods, average lifetime racing frequency, time from last lay up to date of injury, and total and rate of distance accumulated 1 to 6 months prior to date of injury. History characteristics associated with FSI were screened by paired t-test and studied in detail, using conditional logistic regression. *** RESULTS: High total and high average daily rates of exercise distance accumulation within a 2-month period were associated with higher risks for FSI during racing, yet career patterns, such as age at first race or total proportion of career spent laid up, were not found to be associated with risk for FSI. A horse that had accumulated a total of 35 furlongs of race and timed-work distance in 2 months, compared with a horse with 25 furlongs accumulated, had an estimated 3.9-fold increase in risk for racing-related FSI (95% confidence interval = 2.1, 7.1). A horse that had accumulated race and timed-work furlongs at an average rate of 0.6 furlong/d within a 2-month period, compared with a horse with an average of 0.5 furlong/d, had an estimated 1.8-fold increase in risk for racing-related FSI (95% confidence interval = 1.4, 2.6). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Thoroughbred racehorses that either accumulate large total high-speed distances or rapidly accumulate high-speed distances within a 2-month period may be at increased risk for FSI during racing.
Horseshoe characteristics as possible risk factors for fatal musculoskeletal injury of thoroughbred racehorses. Am J Vet Res 57[8]:1147-52 1996 Aug Kane AJ ; Stover SM ; Gardner IA ; Case JT ; Johnson BJ ; Read DH ; Ardans AA OBJECTIVE: To evaluate selected shoe characteristics as risk factors for fatal musculoskeletal injury (FMI) and specifically for suspensory apparatus failure (SAF) and cannon bone condylar fracture (CDY) of Thoroughbred racehorses in California. DESIGN: Case-control study. ANIMALS: Thoroughbred racehorses (n = 201) that died of were euthanatized at California racetracks between August 1992 and July 1994. PROCEDURE: Shoe characteristics were compared between case horses affected by FMI (155), SAF (79), and CDY (41) and control horses that died for reasons unrelated to the appendicular musculoskeletal system (non-FMI; 46). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios for FMI, SAF, and CDY. RESULTS: Toe grabs were identified as possible risk factors for FMI, SAF, and CDY. The odds of FMI, SAF, and CDY were 1.8, 6.5, and 7.0, respectively, times greater for horses shod with low toe grabs than for horses shod without toe grabs on front shoes. Horses shod with regular toe grabs on front shoes had odds 3.5, 15.6, and 17.1 times greater (P < 0.05) for FMI, SAF, and CDY, respectively, compared with horses shod without toe grabs. The odds of horses shod with rim shoes were a third (P < 0.05) of those shod without rim shoes for either FMI or SAF. The apparent association between toe grab type and CDY may, in part, be attributable to concurrent SAF and CDY injuries in many horses. *** CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Avoiding the use of toe grabs should decrease the incidence of FMI, especially SAF, in Thoroughbred racehorses. The use of rim shoes that are more consistent with natural hoof shape may decrease injury risk.
-
Jerry,
I hear you, but my point is what do you want to do about it? Did you want Barbaro held out of the Preakness? The connections got criticized at that time for running on 5 weeks rest before the derby, something which no horse had been able to win previously with (tradition said 3 or 4 weeks rest was the maximum). So, the connections did the right thing before the Derby, the horse ran his race in the Derby and won. The Preakness is 2 weeks later. You don\'t really think that the industry is going to become so conscious of spacing that Derby winners are going to skip the Preakness and point to the Belmont?
Moving forward to today\'s situation, what would you do with Big Brown. Let\'s assume he is running these figures non-aided with one of the trainers that you work with. Are you advising the trainer and owner to skip the Preakness? Retire the horse? Point to the Belmont? Or are you running in the Preakness and just hoping he doesn\'t get hurt?
-
The following is regarded as a very important study.
----------------------
Gait and speed as exercise components of risk factors associated with onset of fatigue injury of the third metacarpal bone in 2-year-old Thoroughbred racehorses.
Boston RC, Nunamaker DM.
Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, New Bolton Center, University of Pennsylvania, Kennett Square 19348, USA.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the degree to which components of the training program of 2-year-old Thoroughbred racehorses influence their susceptibility to fatigue injury of the third metacarpal bone (bucked shins).
ANIMALS: 226 two-year-old Thoroughbred racehorses.
PROCEDURE: Daily training information and health reports on 2-year-old Thoroughbreds were compiled from records provided from 5 commercial stables. For each horse, data (exercise variables) were collected that comprised distance jogged (approx speed of 5 m/s), galloped (approx 11 m/s), and breezed (approx 15 to 16 m/s) until a single instance of bucked shins was reported. Data were coded for analysis using cross-tabulation, graphic, and survival techniques.
RESULTS: Of 226 horses, 56 had bucked shins, 9 completed the observation period without bucked shins, and 161 were lost to follow-up.
Distinct training strategies were used at stables resulting in significantly different survival profiles among stables.
Mean (+/- SD) allocation of exercise to breezing was 0.15 +/- 0.13 miles/wk (maximum, 0.64 miles/wk), to galloping was 4.47 +/- 1.52 miles/wk (maximum, 9.56 miles/wk), and to jogging was 2.34 +/- 1.70 miles/wk (maximum, 8.53 miles/wk).
Survival (ie, lack of bucked shins during 1 year of monitoring) was found to be significantly reduced by exercise allocation to breezing, significantly increased by exercise allocation to galloping, and uninfluenced by exercise allocation to jogging.
The log of the hazard ratio was reduced by 4.2 +/- 1.5/mile breezed and increased by 0.3 +/- 0.1/mile galloped.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Relationships between different gaits and speeds in the training regimen influence the incidence of bucked shins. To reduce the incidence of bucked shins, trainers should consider allocating more training effort to regular short-distance breezing and less to long-distance galloping.
-
Here\'s the abstract from a Texas A&M study that reaches the opposite conclusion for a larger group of horses in Kentucky. There\'s also a finding that horses with higher Beyer speed figures were more likely to get hurt.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between high-speed exercise and risk of injury while racing among Thoroughbreds in Kentucky. DESIGN: Matched case-control study. ANIMALS: 206 Thoroughbreds that sustained a musculoskeletal injury while racing and 412 Thoroughbreds that were not injured during the same races. PROCEDURE: Data regarding official timed workouts and races and the Beyer\'s numbers for the 3 races before the race during which injury occurred were extracted from past performance charts and compared between injured horses and control horses. RESULTS: For injured horses, cumulative distance of high-speed exercise during the 1- and 2-month periods prior to the race in which injury occurred was significantly less than that of control horses; for either period, a difference of 10 furlongs was associated with approximately 2-fold greater risk of injury. Beyer\'s numbers were significantly higher for injured horses than for control horses. These effects remained significant after adjusting for age and results of prerace physical inspection. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In Kentucky, injured horses had significantly less cumulative high-speed exercise than did control horses during the 1- and 2-month periods prior to the race in which injury occurred. These results differ from those observed in California. The association of injury with cumulative high-speed exercise appears to vary among regions in the United States.
PMID: 10767969 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
-
\"Are you advising the trainer and owner to skip the Preakness? Retire the horse? Point to the Belmont? Or are you running in the Preakness and just hoping he doesn\'t get hurt\"
Jim,
...easy, sell for the $50 -60 Milion being offered or get greedy, win the TC,then sell for $150 million.
Mike
-
This raises a good point -- if you take all the criticism leveled at the EBelles team -- you could easily criticize Dutrow for taking a horse with bad feet to the Preakness on two weeks rest off that monster effort. No matter what anyone says, he does NOT have to run. The temptation is to run is huge, but if anything goes wrong, Team Dutow and horse racing as a whole is set up for a HUGE media bust... (sorry if this is redundant, I did not read this whole thread).
-
IMO, a horse like Big Brown has a higher probability of breaking down or pulling up for reasons totally unrelated to his figures or spacing than the typical horse because he\'s had a history of hoof and ankle (I believe) problems to begin with. I don\'t think it\'s a longshot to predict that he\'s not going to make it to the end of the season before being retired.
IMO, a trainer should probably be more careful with a horse like that before pushing him. However, some other horses seem to thrive on harder work. If you sit them on the bench, all you are doing is leaving large purses, graded races, and millions of dollars on the table.
I\'ve seen two studies on fast/sharp horses and days between starts (one based on the top performance figure in a race and one based on horses running a sharp race as defined by finish). Both suggested that if a horse ran a big effort last out the probability of him winning his next start INCREASED if he came back QUICKER.
IMO, what that suggests is that if the trainer is running him back so fast, he must think the horse has sufficiently recovered and wants to capitalize on the good form. The trainer is usually right. It could very well be that the horses that are given more time are given more time because they didn\'t come out of their fast race very well.
I\'m not a trainer, but to me this is more of a trainer competence and thoroughness issue than it is a figure pattern and spacing issue.
I don\'t want to debate Denis of Cork because I don\'t know if the extra spacing helped him or not, but IMO he didn\'t \"performance\" bounce in the Ill Derby. He just had a very different set of conditions in each of his races this year. IMO his Ill Derby was an obvious toss. He had no shot given the race development.
-
My recollection was that Gato Del Sol skipped the Preakness after winning the Derby. Whatever pressure there was, it sure didn\'t bother the connections. I think they said the horse could only get the longer distances and they felt he would not do well in the Preakness. Also, Spend a Buck obviously skipped the Preakness, but that was thanks to Brennan increasing the bonus for the New Jersey Derby. There is definitely precedent for healthy Derby winners to skip the Preakness much less unhealthy ones.
I do seem to recall that Sunny\'s Halo was iffy for the Preakness. HE had some bad rash and they were not sure whether or not to run him. They ran him and he ran miserably and they blamed the rash. If I recall correctly.
-
Given Eight Belles breakdown in the Derby, I think the Preakness offers a couple of ways of looking at things.
As some have suggested, it is not imperative Big Brown run in the Preakness on the short rest. Cleary, its not that unusual. Add the fact of his reported bad ankles, etc, its easy to skip the race if the connections choose to.
If he doesn\'t win then the Triple Crown is off the table and the connections can make a decision in the best interest of the horse. Coming into the Belmont with 5 weeks makes Brown fresh and dangerous to win, even though the appeal of a TC winner is no more.
However, if Brown does run in the Preakness and wins, the pressure to run back in the Belmont becomes tremendous. That\'s where the industry and public pressure becomes greatest, because if he has 2 legs won, its gonna be awful tempting to run him that mile and a half and hope nothing happens.
The idea of a horse with 2 wins under his belt skipping the Belmont would be unusual.
It\'ll be interesting to see how things play out. I just hope we\'ve seen the last of high profile horses going down for a long time. Wishful thinking on my part, I know.
-
My opinions:
1)Right now Racing needs a colt eligible to win the Triple Crown, and I would
say that Racing after 30 years could use a Triple Crown winner. This is
especially true for NY Racing, which is really in a bad way now.
2)\"1\" above might seem really insensitive to the well being of the Derby winner,
but looking at the Preakness entries, Big Jerry Brown could walk or jog between
the Derby and the Preakness, maybe breeze one easy half mile, and win the
Preakness pretty handily.
3) Then in the Belmont you would be looking at a colt who has been very lightly
raced running his fourth race in 10 weeks against a field which has been
lying in wait for him, which might make the Belmont the most fascinating of the
3 TC races so far.
-
Miff,
Yuck. Look at what you are suggesting. So, from now on, instead of the usual disappointment that racing fans get when the best 3 year olds retire right AFTER the Triple Crown or at a minimum at the end of their 3 year old season, let\'s target the Derby, win it, then retire.
That is pretty jaded. Or just the fast ones should do that? If you win with a pair up or run a mediocre race, then you can move on to the Preakness, but if you run fast, retire immediately.
Racing is bad enough without that kind of behavior. What you and others on this board don\'t seem to realize is that the triple crown is not about us, \"us\" being the regular horse players. Hell, some of \"us\" look at the Triple Crown as just another betting opportunity. Most of us would still bet horses if the Triple Crown didn\'t exist. However, the Triple Crown is one of the only times that racing gets a chance to be broadcasted to the greater masses and thus generate interest.
Having a horse win the Derby with such conviction like Big Brown did, then decide to retire, would suck. Period.
-
I personally think the everyday players are the ones who get jobbed with the way racing conducts itself.
Almost every good one retires at the end of their 3 year old season, hell, we rarely get the pleasure of watching them destroy fields in their 4 year old season. Obviously, if Curlin weren\'t the subject of much litigation, he\'d have been retired last October after the BC win. The only reason we have him as the dominant 4 year old now is strictly financial, there is zero regard for the players, fans or industry.
As far as the casual fan, they don\'t know which end eats and which end kicks, for them its just one of the half a dozen days a year they go to the track.
If we had Street Sense, Hard Spun and a half dozen of the really top notch horses from last year to handicap as older horses, the interest would be maintained.
I\'ve found myself for years not having much fondness for the really great ones who win a couple races and can\'t get to the breeding shed fast enough.
Sometimes the lack of loyalty to any fan base, and the overall disregard of what really creates interest in the sport means nothing to those who can retire a horse.
It\'s always about the money, and that\'s not necessarily a bad thing.
-
Jim,
You are speaking like a fan, racing is a business. Regarding the TC being nationally broadcast,you may not be following racing\'s overall continuous demise regardless on the very thin coverage of racing overall.ESPN, a cable channel is now the racing station. It covers High School cheer leading for more hours per annum than it does racing.The guy in charge of this decision sees racing as a bottom level sport with little advertising revenue.
Don\'t know if you\'ve owned horses. He who does not take a substantial profit in the racing business, when it\'s present, usually goes broke. I\'ll exclude the Sheik or someone in that league.It\'s a business which requires enormous capital and an equal amount of luck/good fortune.Paul Pompa stands to cash out for $15million on a $180,000 investment over a one year period. If he don\'t take it he\'s risking a life changing financial windfall and is making a poor business/financial decision.
Mike
-
The Breeders Cup going with ESPN2 was a disaster. Racing needs to be on the national networks for the big days - the spring prep races, the TC, the BC.
And NBC has proven they can do it well and get the market share. NBC did a great job, a month ahead, having lots of commercials promoting the show.
Of course, then the casual fans come back to watch, and disaster happens ...
www.bloodhorse.com
Derby Second Most Viewed in 17 Years
Updated: May 7, 2008
NBC Sports\' coverage of the Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (gr. I) May 3 was the most viewed Kentucky Derby in four years (Smarty Jones, 2004) ,and second most viewed in at least 17 years. The race (5:43-6:39 p.m. ET) averaged 14.2 million viewers, up 3% from 2007 (13.8 million).
NBC\'s Kentucky Derby coverage has averaged three million more viewers (13.4-10.5), a 28% increase since 2001 when NBC began exclusive coverage of the Kentucky Derby, over the eight years prior on ABC.
The network’s race coverage notched an 8.8 national rating and a 21 share, even with last year\'s race that was fueled by the mainstream media coverage of the Queen of England\'s first visit to Churchill Downs.
-
Wow
Did you ever think it has to do with how the ression has hit us. Many of the people we spoke to have never bet the race before . However from the past payout they did .
-
Jimbo-- what you do about it is to expand the time between races of the TC. You know when that will happen? The first time a Derby winner skips the Preakness besause the connections say two weeks is not enough time. Which is going to happen at some point, since they dropped the $5 million bonus.
Or the next time a Derby winner breaks down in the Preakness on national television.
As to what I would do if I advised BB\'s connections-- I would say that if they run in the Preakness they will be placing their horse under a tremendous amount of stress, far more than the usual horse making the usual start, and that would be true even if he didn\'t have a history of soundness issues. From a business point of view, I would do what Miff suggested, and these deals are usually written with kickers, so you can have your cake and eat it too if he wins the TC.
If I owned him myself, I would skip the Preakness to try to get the industry to change. Anyone who thinks that\'s BS doesn\'t know me.
-
Mike,
I have not owned horses and what you say makes sense from a business perspective. However, don\'t they have insurance for such things?
You do realize that the kind of behavior you are suggesting will accelerate the already downward moving spiral of this game. Don\'t you? Win the derby, retire, move on.
Fast forward 10-15 years and it will just be the degenerate gamblers left watching and playing this game.
-
TGJB,
I think you are absolutely correct.
The industry will always be reactive rather than proactive. As JB says, a high profile animal will have to breakdown to get the attention of those in power.
The industry invites another black eye until a change is made.
As a country, we\'ve become *asterisk conscious anyway. Hell, does anyone think the numbers produced throughout the 90\'s in baseball are legit?
The days of the grueling TC races may be over because of public perception.
All the professional sports seasons now last months longer than they did even 5-10 years ago. What difference would it make if there were longer spacing between the TC races? The purists are gonna say hell no, the casual fan could care less, and the everyday player says whats best for the game?
Changing the spacing between the TC races at least gives the impression the health of the animal(s) are paramount.
-
Insurance costs are prohibitive. Annual insurance premiums for a horse in training are roughly 5% of the insured value. To ask an owner to put up $3m in premiums (assuming the Derby winner is worth $60m) is probably not realistic.
-
Sorry,
I disagree with Jerry and the rest. It ALREADY HAPPENED with Barbaro. That was only two years ago and it didnT do a thing. What happened with Barbaro had EVEN MORE chance to enact change than a horse simply breaking down and dying after a Derby win. He broke down, then survived for months, keeping the story alive, gave the mainstream media a chance to call for changes, put pressure on the racing industry, etc.etc. Even with this \"captive audience\" for months as Barbaro struggled to survive, there was no major push for change, at least not one that I saw.
How many credible, mainstream stories were there during that time that talked about too much development, too big of a new top, greater spacing needed between races, etc.etc. I remember a couple about the Preakness being pushed back a week or two, but not a lot.
If Barbaro didn\'t do it, then I am not sure what will.
-
Jim,
The cost of insuring a BB is astronomical, there is almost no financial upside after the TC series.Most horses are too brittle today anyway to have long careers so it\'s tough either way. Jim,I\'m playing 40 years since a young teen and saw and followed every great horse esp the east coast ones.The racing game will never be the same as years back. For at least the next 5-10 years racing will mirror the wishes of Sheik Mohammad, at least at the top end of the game.
Mike
-
http://www.cnbc.com/id/24457479
\"Accordingly, the ownership group had the horse insured for $32.5 million at Saturday\'s Kentucky Derby. With the impressive win on Saturday, the horse will head to Pimlico for the Preakness as the most insured active horse at $50 million.\"
-
Jimbo-- you\'re right, Barbaro breaking down didn\'t do it. But you didn\'t hear the outcry then and the rush to look for reasons we have heard in the last couple of days-- the effect is cumulative, this happens when people don\'t see it as an isolated incident. That\'s why I said the NEXT time.
If you don\'t think major changes will take place if something happens next week, think again.The industry is scared s------s of Federal intervention right now, and even the Kentucky morons realize we have a problem. Of course, they think it\'s just a \"problem of perception\".
-
Bravo TGJB, especially on your last point.
pat
-
wow, probably about $2.5m sticks for the premium there. And I thought my car insurance was bad.....
-
If I owned Big Brown, I\'d bop him over to the local veterinary hospital, do a MRI of limbs, and if nothing lit up to show any indication of any physical problem, I\'d run him in the Preakness and not think twice.
-
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
However, the Triple Crown is one of the
> only times that racing gets a chance to be
> broadcasted to the greater masses and thus
> generate interest.
Jimbo,
Seabiscuit, a movie nominated for Best Picture was supposed to get people interested in racing. It didn\'t do it.
Horse racing is a niche sport, and will never be on a par with the major sports in our country. This frustrates those of us who love it, particularly because so many of us also love the major sports. People watch the TC races because they are famous races, and doing so won\'t necessarily make them racing fans.
How did we fall in love with baseball, football, etc..?? Its usually because someone ( a parent usually) took us to a game. Many people find hockey boring, but when they attend a game live its a totally different experience. I was a racing fan as a youth, watched Affirmed and Seattle Slew win the TC. It wasn\'t until a friend took me to the track that I became hooked. Combine the beauty of the sport with the handicapping angle mixed in and I can\'t get enough. \"Casual\" fans won\'t get that by watching a big race on television every so often, nor will watching a race generate sustained interest.
We can talk pageantry all we want, gambling drives this sport. You want to increase interest then teach people how to successfully gamble on racing. Look at those exotic payoffs on Saturday. Big Brown wins and the tri and super paid in the thousands. This with the favorite winning. The gambling aspect is not emphasized enough. People love to gamble. Lottery, poker, casinos, whatever. Gambling has gone on since the beginning of time.
JB,
I agree with moving back the Preakness and Belmont. Enough with tradition. All of the major sports have made changes that have flown in the face of \"tradition\" and have thrived. Baseball has the designated hitter, multiple divisions, Wild Card entrants. Football has made rule changes to help offenses, goal posts moved to the back of the end zone, 2 pt conversions. Hockey has removed the 2 line pass, reduced goalie movement behind the net, uses a shootout in regular season overtime. Basketball has the 3 pt shot. Does anyone really believe the last 20 years of baseball is comparable to the previous 100?? Times change.
Until racing removes its collective head from the sand, it will continue to be a joke. Our major sports have shown how having a strong willed, intelligent commissioner can lead a sport to prosperity. Just ask the NFL how they did with Pete Rozelle at the helm. Racing needs the same, how can we get this done??
-
>> Horse racing is a niche sport, and will never be on a par with the majorsports in our country. This frustrates those of us who love it, particularly because so many of us also love the major sports. People watch the TC races because they are famous races, and doing so won\'t necessarily make them racing fans.
How did we fall in love with baseball, football, etc..?? Its usually because someone ( a parent usually) took us to a game.
-------------
It\'s a visual world.
Horseracing WAS the original national sport. THE major sport. Everybody went - rich and poor, gambler and fan. It was what one did.
It obviously has what it takes to hold a nation\'s attention, because it did for quite a few decades.
Then television came about - and horseracing decided not to participate, thinking having people watching on television would hurt on-track attendance handle.
The fledgling, unknown small niche sport of professional football jumped on that TV bandwagon and the rest is history. Same with that small, niche sport of hockey.
Football is 24-7 in the face of two generations growing up. That made professional football what it was.
NASCAR saw that - and NASCAR placed itself everywhere, on television, in your face, and now, very quickly, NASCAR is a top sport.
Put it in front of their face, this visual, lazy generation, make a story out of it, and they will sit there and watch it. Worked for pro football. Worked for NASCAR.
See the Derby TV stats from this past weekend. The fans would like to be there, if they could find us.
If someone had enough money (we\'re talking Shk. Mo money) to physically purchase 2 hours every Saturday afternoon on NBC on the leadup to the Derby, and had one good team following the horses, the trainers, making them real, showing their personalities, taking about those that are in and those that are out, on a dependable, easy to find basis - you\'d have have the nation once again enthralled by the time the KD was on TV.
Sure, people who are interested could get that on HRTV, TVG, via the internet (Bloodhorse, DRF, etc) - but that\'s not easy - people have to search that out.
If it were on TV every Saturday, just blaring away (as most households TV\'s do) then even the most illiterate fan could hold their own around the water cooler Monday, discussing who\'s hot on the Derby trail.
And horses getting hurt - even critically - wouldn\'t be shocking or odd. It would be put in the proper perspective.
I know nobody in horse racing cares enough to go for this as casual fans are not wanted. Only new potential gamblers are wanted.
So the \"fan\" audience is ignored until PETA gets ahold of them first.
TVG, HRTV are not the same as above - they are video in-home gambling terminals, are a premium add on to dish or cable.
-
This is a discussion I have been having for years, and recently had again with Waldrop and Chamblin of the NTRA.
There are no fans. And if there are, they are irrelevant.
This industry is driven by gambling. Horseplayers are not fans, they are by far the largest group that participates in the industry.
The mistake the industry has made forever (I made this same speech on Post Time in 1993) is to market racing as a sport, and think the goal is to get people to go to the track or watch on TV. Those are means, not ends. When you market a movie, your job is over when they buy a ticket. In racing your job is just beginning when they arrive, either in person or via TV.
There is a lot more to say about this, and I don\'t have the time. But the market we should be aiming for is the one that plays poker (especially online), day trades, and bets sports. There are a lot of lessons to be learned from the success of poker.
-
>> There are no fans. And if there are, they are irrelevant.
Nonsense. I was a non-gambling fan for years and years. Now that I have healthy disposable income, the sport benefits more from my attention. The sport is lucky I stuck around - they sure didn\'t try and keep me.
Unlike the pure gamblers, as a core fan I won\'t leave the sport if a track turns poly, the takeout isn\'t lowered, one of my ADW\'s doesn\'t show a particular track, or a Poker site shoves free signup money at me.
>> This industry is driven by gambling. Horseplayers are not fans, they are by >> far the largest group that participates in the industry.
Absolutely agree.
You, like many, however, make it choice between gambler or fan. I think it\'s both. Vegas acknowledges the same thing.
>> The mistake the industry has made forever (I made this same speech on Post >>Time in 1993) is to market racing as a sport, and think the goal is to get >>people to go to the track or watch on TV. Those are means, not ends. When you
>>market a movie, your job is over when they buy a ticket. In racing your job >>is just beginning when they arrive, either in person or via TV.
Exactly. The ideal is to convert them to gamblers.
But you don\'t want these folks in the door. So how are you going to convert them to gambling? You won\'t. They won\'t be there to convert.
So your only option is to steal your gamblers from other sports.
>> There is a lot more to say about this, and I don\'t have the time. But the >>market we should be aiming for is the one that plays poker (especially >>online), day trades, and bets sports. There are a lot of lessons to be >>learned from the success of poker.
The young and foolish? Gimme a break. Not much financial upside there. I would think the market would prefer somebody a bit more established, who can drop $10K a month on fun, not $100 a week.
When they are young, they are fans. Buy them free juleps, tailgate parties at Keeneland, 10-cent supers and bands that play at Hollywood Friday night after the races.
And then after they\'ve bought the house, and sent the kid to college - they will still be fans, if they have been treated reasonably the past 20 years, and will be quite happy to spend their disposable income on their favorite sport.
-
I think though that we should prepare for more injuries as time goes on as we\'ve diluted the racing stock and made the species more frail. I don\'t think there is anything we can do to turn this biological/physiological aspects of these injuries around any time soon.
Just like in sports, we have instead of making the athletes we have less injury prone, we\'ve managed to make them more frail with ridiculous things like pitch counts in high school for baseball players, so when they come to pitch in colleges where we play 60 9 inning games, over 9 months, plus daily workouts, they all end up needing Tommy John surgery or having stress bone related elbow problems or shoulder labral tears. Junior high and high school is where you need to stress the bones and ligaments/tendon/muscle groups to repetitive motion to increase stamina and strength. In almost EVERY sport now, injury rates are exploding because we \"pansy\" them at the developmental stage of their lives. And the NCAA LIMITS them to only 20 hours of practice/play a week! I\'ve never seen this epidemic of injuries to college age and pro athletes in my 30 plus years as a trainer/medical director!
We\'ve gone from a 4 man rotation in MLB to hoping a pitcher can thrown once a week. Look at how the stupid Yankees are babying Joba Chamberlain, not letting him start and how they all are on pitch counts. You think Whitey Ford or Don Drysdale or Bob Feller had pitch counts? Now the best we can hope for is 6 innings and maybe 220 innings a year. We\'re lucky to have a college pitcher throw one game a week now (7day rotation)
Physiology is physiology, equine and human...when did the equine set start thinking that less is better? Why don\'t we breeze younger horses for longer distances to work up to the classic distances? Secretariat raced 8 times as a 2yo and many of those races were at 8.5f. Affirmed raced NINE times as a 2yo and ran the San Anita Derby at 9F and the Holleywood Derby at 10F in California prior to Churchill Downs. So in years past, a foundation was layed down. Why is the Derby the 1st time they probably race that far. Why can\'t trainers in Jan or Feb start laying down a foundation of distance works to prepare for KD, Preakness? Especially for the 2YO\'s that maybe show classic form (Champagne Stakes winners). And if they say there isn\'t time, then why race without the foundation? Why tell any athlete to do something they\'ve never attempted before in their lives at the highest level of competition? What results can we expect besides injuries? But we do in horse racing. Yes, I understand that the triple crown is the test of champions...but the breed has changed. But we\'re not flexible because of tradition. Of the 12 horses I\'ve been a part owner of, I had two Grade 1 stakes placed horses as 2yo\'s...and I\'d asked my trainers what we were planning on doing to lay the foundation in the off season for their 3 yo season, only to get the \"look\". What do you think happened to each? One death and one with career long injuries. Bad luck? No bad planning and conditioning drills IMO. I agree with the vet Dr Bramledge who At The Races Radio had on todays show, stress them more at an earlier age to reduce injuries...not baby them!
If the breed is in effect weaker and more frail, then what can we do to reduce the injuries and bad press? Continue to ignore this frailty and race them in the same traditional time period of yesteryear KD, Preakness and Belmont? or do we admit the species is frail and we\'re past the point of no return and change the dates to May-June July? or discuss some other possible changes?
__________________
-
sighthound Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
The young and foolish? Gimme a break. Not much
> financial upside there. I would think the market
> would prefer somebody a bit more established, who
> can drop $10K a month on fun, not $100 a week.
Cmon Sight, how many horseplayers drop 10K a month?? And whats wrong with $100 a week?? I work in the poker industry. We have tables of all levels. Couple things...those people playing 3/6 contribute the same as the 20/40 players. There is also a lot more of them. Also, these 3/6 players graduate to 6/12 and 20/40. They have to start somewhere. You think the $10k a month players didn\'t start small??
>
> When they are young, they are fans. Buy them free
> juleps, tailgate parties at Keeneland, 10-cent
> supers and bands that play at Hollywood Friday
> night after the races.
>
> And then after they\'ve bought the house, and sent
> the kid to college - they will still be fans, if
> they have been treated reasonably the past 20
> years, and will be quite happy to spend their
> disposable income on their favorite sport.
Again Sight, do you think all players have to own a house and be able to afford to send kids to college?? When you look at everyday horseplayers, do you see affluent people?? Of course some of them are, but the vast majority are everyday people. Walk into a poker room, you will see the same type of people. You don\'t have to be affluent to play poker or wager on the horses. You need the belief that you are better than the other guy and a few bucks in your pocket. I see many of the same players 5 times a week, they are regulars. They don\'t need free stuff,or anything like that.
Education is the key. Televised poker has educated people on how to play. Now, the level of competence will vary for everybody. But people don\'t walk into a poker room unless they know how to play, why would a racetrack be any different??
-
Stallion Deal Near On Big Brown
The owners of Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (gr. I) winner Big Brown are close to concluding a deal to sell the future breeding rights in the son of Boundary, including an offer from \"one of the most widely recognized stud farms in the world,\" according to IEAH co-president Michael Iavarone.
Big Brown is owned by International Equine Acquisitions Holdings Stables, of which Iavarone and Richard Schiavo are co-presidents and co-CEOs, and Paul Pompa Jr. Other IEAH partners in Big Brown are Andrew Cohen and Gary Tolchin.
“We have some offers we are seriously considering,” Iavarone said May 7 of the bidding for the breeding rights to the undefeated colt who won the May 3 Derby as the favorite. He said a decision would be made soon.
-
As a \"Fan\", you had absolutely no impact on the industry, and if takeout levels are not an issue with you, you may still not. Alan Gutterman once said that 2% of the bettors bet 60% of the money.
All the marketing efforts that have been aimed at \"fans\" have left this industry where it is. All poker\'s efforts to recruit gamblers have resulted in explosive growth.
\"Steal\" was nicely perjorative. I don\'t care whether they are already playing those games or are just the kind of people that would eventually-- the profile of those interested in those games is the same as those we want here.
If you cast a wide net only a small percentage will become gamblers. If you focus on finding, attracting and educating the real potential players, there is a chance to make headway. For that to happen, the entire thinking by those in the industry that those who bet are \"fans\" has to change.
-
As an avid poker player, I can say I think you are going to have a lot more trouble converting people to racing than you are poker. Racing has too many variables, bets, and other intimidating information that will \"scare off\" the lazy average joe.
With poker, you can sit down and play, and maybe get lucky right off that bat and have a good day. Even if you don\'t, once your interest has been captured, it is far easier to grab a couple poker books or online training sites and greatly improve your knowledge and game than it is with racing.
But the parallels between the two are definitely there. They both don\'t care how you do as a player, they just want your action. Over and over again. The more you re-bet that 1k you have, the more takeout they get. The major difference poker has in it\'s favor is the lower takeout. Most places, the max is 5% and is capped so it rarely even approaches that. This keeps the players playing longer with their own money, and more likely to hit a big win that will get them more hooked.
For the intellectual, poker\'s math is finite and defined. You know exactly what you\'re dealing with at all times. The vast majority of educated gamblers are far going to prefer that to the many unknowns in horseracing. Smooth Air is a perfect example, had you just looked at him on paper and not had the inside information of the sickness, he may have looked very betable. I think they are fighting an uphill battle, but enough people still seem to get roped in to keep the industry moving.
-
Check this out,the biggest joke is the political appointments by former Gov.Elliot Spitzer when he wasn\'t banging some hooker. One appointee, politically upstate connected Jack Knowlton(Funny Cide Owner) can\'t spell racing but will have a voice in determining the outcome. BRILLIANT!!
\"The Task Force on Retired Racehorses, a state-appointed committee, has planned a summit in Saratoga Springss, N.Y., July 29 to explore the potential for the installation of synthetic surfaces at the state\'s racetracks.
John Lee, a spokesman for the New York Racing Association, said there are no immediate plans to take such action, but NYRA is “looking carefully at synthetic tracks.”
“Obviously, anybody in racing is studying the use of synthetic tracks around the country, and their success and problems, to a degree,” Lee said May 7. “If we moved in that direction, a logical place to start would be Belmont’s training track.”
In reference to a May 7 Associated Press story that indicated NYRA is considering making a move to synthetic tracks, Lee said: “(AP) got way, way ahead of the story. There is no plan like that now.”
For the cash-constrained NYRA, which is looking to emerge from bankruptcy and get its video lottery terminal operation up and running at Aqueduct, any immediate action to install synthetic surfaces is moot at this point. Lee said he estimates the cost to install a synthetic surface at one of NYRA’s tracks would be “a ballpark figure of $10 million.”
The Task Force on Retired Racehorses held its first meeting in March. Its 13 members were appointed by former Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders.
One of the members is Jack Knowlton, co-owner of 2003 Kentucky Derby (gr. I) winner Funny Cide. A main objective of the task force is to explore the possibilities of second careers for racehorses when they are retired, and to develop ideas to fund the cost of providing for those horses. Spitzer also asked the panel to research synthetic surfaces.
A phone call to Knowlton was not immediately returned\"
-
Jerry, I agree with all you say regarding the importance of gamblers to the sport. They should be treated, especially that 2%, as royalty. Comped and pampered. I\'ll bet many tracks don\'t even know who their best on-site clients are.
Gamblers are your clientele - obviously they are first on your radar screen, and the more the merrier for you. The young poker players, with a product of TG\'s quality, could probably readily make a transition and be successful enough to become hooked.
But I\'m really sick of being told I\'m not worth crap to the sport on days I\'m not gambling.
Treat the gamblers like gamblers, and the fans like fans. It\'s not either-or. Vegas knows and recognizes that. There is room for both, and like me, many even cross ranks.
-
Actually, I think there\'s more of a delicate balance between sport and gambling in horse racing than you acknowledge. Certainly, I like to think of horseplayers as sporting men willing to back sporting opinions; investors rather than gamblers.
The ideal horseplayer, to me, a person who loves puzzles, who loves the handicapping puzzle so much that he learns everything he can about horses so he can solve the puzzle. The educated consumer becomes the best customer, keeping the traditions of the game alive. But that\'s old school, learning how to handicap horses. We live in an age of deconstruction. Now the emphasis seems to be in learning how to handicap betting pools. With the consequence being that horse racing. which as a win, place, show game was a game as exacting as hardball, has morphed into a game of slow-pitch softball. And when we throw in simulcasting maybe one of those games of softball played in a city park where players from two different diamonds share the same outfield.
Now, I have nothing against softball, was a much better softball player than I ever was a baseballer. But, of the two, it\'s only baseball I revere.
Well, there are people that revere horse racing, revere the horses. And there are others who just want the action. And maybe the ones who just want the action are paying the bills these days, but that\'s another pact with the devil. (And I should say here I don\'t think being a heavy hitter and revering horses and the traditions of racing are mutually exclusive. What I\'m saying is that catering to the heavy hitters who don\'t love the traditions or the horses will eventually kill racing.)
And if only for this reason. The moment that horse racing is perceived as only a game for gamblers, the animal rights issues become untenable. You can\'t justify the horrors some of these horses suffer because they provide gambling action for people any more than you can justify dog or cock fights. Racing has always been a bit more sporting than that. And again, I don\'t think in an illusionary way either. I think the love between the bettor and the animal, the connection between the love of the breed and the wager made horse racing a uniquely humanized and honorable pursuit. When it becomes just about the money, it\'s no longer justifiable. When the conversation goes from \"I love that number two races back and how that workout three days ago is going to enhance the speed which the blinkers on today indicate the horse is going to show,\" becomes, \"I\'ll like the 2,6,8 with the 4,3,2 over and under the 1,9, that\'s what the got keno rooms for; you don\'t have to risk animal lives for this type of action. You don\'t have to risk horses lives for under/over bets. You don\'t have to risk horses lives to sustain a game of parimutuel bingo or to enable some guys off-shore to run some impersonal computer program designed to arbitrage distortions in the betting pools. No, the only justification for subjecting horses to what they\'re subjected to is because the race course allows people to fall in love with horses to the point where they want to celebrate them. And bet their bank roll on their opinion of them.
As I said, a delicate balance, indeed, between sport and gambling.
-
Hoarse-- interesting and well written post.
Sight-- I certainly do not think the industry should treat you or anyone like crap, no matter how much or little they bet. And I agree with most of what you say. My point was that strictly from a business point of view (which is what marketing is about), racing needs to completely change its understanding of its own business and customers. Hoarse did a good job describing the mindset of horseplayers with his \"solving the puzzle\" comment (I wrote a screenplay about racing where I used almost those exact words). The people who run this game (which to far too great a degree is the Kentucky breeders, which I said to the WSJ guy, who left it and lots more out) need to wake up.
-
>> My point was that strictly from a business point of view (which is what marketing is about), racing needs to completely change its understanding of its own business and customers.
We just spent three days with PETA controlling the national image of racing.
Racing doesn\'t even know who it\'s industry spokesmen or leaders are.
Help.
-
Firstly,
You legalize ALL medications EPO, Bloodpacking, Steroids, Tubing, Hot sauce on their gonads, Electronic Buzzers, Whips with hooks on them and threaten horses that run weakly with the fact that unless they run hard their Peppermints will be cut off. you level the playing field for all concerned and if a trainer won\'t treat his horse and wants to be a namby pamby and run clean....screw him.
Secondly, You space the triple crown. You run the Derby on the fourth Saturday of June, the Preakness on the second Sunday of September, and the Belmont on the third Friday of March in their 4YO year. With this format you let them both mature and recover from the effects of drug induced Negative Twelves.
Lastly, you decrease the ridiculous distances we are asking them to run with fragile breeding and drug jump ups. You can\'t ask a horse to run 12 poles that is high on meth. That horse could have a grabber anywhere after the mile marker. So you shorten the distances. The Derby becomes a six furlong race. The preakness 5.5 furlongs and the Belmont 7 whole poles.
Sell it
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jerry,
>
> I hear you, but my point is what do you want to do
> about it? Did you want Barbaro held out of the
> Preakness? The connections got criticized at that
> time for running on 5 weeks rest before the derby,
> something which no horse had been able to win
> previously with (tradition said 3 or 4 weeks rest
> was the maximum). So, the connections did the
> right thing before the Derby, the horse ran his
> race in the Derby and won. The Preakness is 2
> weeks later. You don\'t really think that the
> industry is going to become so conscious of
> spacing that Derby winners are going to skip the
> Preakness and point to the Belmont?
>
> Moving forward to today\'s situation, what would
> you do with Big Brown. Let\'s assume he is running
> these figures non-aided with one of the trainers
> that you work with. Are you advising the trainer
> and owner to skip the Preakness? Retire the
> horse? Point to the Belmont? Or are you running
> in the Preakness and just hoping he doesn\'t get
> hurt?
-
>I disagree with Jerry and the rest. It ALREADY HAPPENED with Barbaro. That was only two years ago and it didnT do a thing. What happened with Barbaro had EVEN MORE chance to enact change than a horse simply breaking down and dying after a Derby win. He broke down, then survived for months, keeping the story alive, gave the mainstream media a chance to call for changes, put pressure on the racing industry, etc.etc. Even with this \"captive audience\" for months as Barbaro struggled to survive, there was no major push for change, at least not one that I saw. <
This is a country where people have been calling for a ban on boxing for decades, but right now millions are embracing MMA. Anyone that watches MMA understands my point. As terrible as this death was, it will be forgiven if racing provides entertaining races among the best equine athletes and a game that is competitive against other forms of gambling.
-
>If I owned Big Brown, I\'d bop him over to the local veterinary hospital, do a MRI of limbs, and if nothing lit up to show any indication of any physical problem, I\'d run him in the Preakness and not think twice.>
That makes two of us.
The chances of something going wrong with this horse are probably higher than for the typical horse. But that tells us nothing about whether something has gone wrong since or because of his effort in the Derby.
IMO this is entirely a matter of the trainer making sure that the stress of the Derby didn\'t cause any old problems to resurface or create any new ones. As long as the horse is acting well and everything checks out OK, if the horse is still fresh and sound, IMO you\'d be foolish to skip the Preakness.
You could have made a case that he was going to react badly in the Derby because of his big performance in the Florida Derby and his history. In fact many did. Well he just won the Derby with one of the best performances we\'ve ever seen by a spring 3YO and probably increased his value by 20 million.
Dutrow is a very unpopular guy, but I think people need to conceed that regardless of what he does on a day to day basis to move up horses, he did a spectacular job getting this horse ready for a brilliant performance at 10F in only his 4th start despite repeated setbacks and physical issues. So why not give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to deciding whether the horse is sound and fit enough to handle the Preakness?
This is about trainer competence.
-
Dutrow is terrified to run him in the Preakness, according to what he\'s said the past couple days. He knows it\'s a quick turnaround
The technology is there, they just insured the horse for 50 million (there\'s the stud deal value) so spend $1500 or $2K and see what\'s up.
-
Sighthound -
Do the insurance comapnies ever insist on the kind of examination you are suggesting?
-
Sight-- in an op-ed in today\'s Thoroughbred Daily News, Arthur hancock makes that point, and calls for federal oversight (!!!).
-
Yes.