Lets not provide the \"Al Capone\" of Thoroughbred racing with the cover he desires. Of all places, certainly not here.
The Belmont can be summed up in one word.
The pace was tepid.
Hard Spun bounced
CP West bounced
Curlin Regressed
Tiago managed to find trouble
Slews Tizzy didn\'t get over the Sandy
Wild Guy was compromised by the pace and the Sandy
Rags to Riches was by a Belmont Winner out of a Mare that had produced a Belmont winner before her. Pletcher had nothing to do with those factors.
Pletcher positioned Rags to come in fresh and the stars aligned to enable her to eek one out.
Al Capone had some legitimate businesses. They got him on Tax Evasion, but he murdered people and sullied a city for years.
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Alm:
>
> You wrote the below post in reference to a
> pessimistic, woe is us, state of
> racing post I wrote on 5/24. Your post ends \"From
> my point of view, the sport is
> better than it ever was\"
>
> Fast forward to the day after the Belmont Stakes,
> and you are absolutely
> disgusted. Dispersing your racing and breeding
> stock. Absolutely disconsolate
> that TAP the ALLEGED \"blood doper\" won the Belmont
> Stakes. It is almost as if
> TAP took a humbly bred animal that you once owned,
> ran her up the class ladder,
> and ended up winning the Belmont.
>
> Lets forget about the allegations surrounding
> Pletcher, his vets and blood
> doping. Rags to Riches was a logical winner of the
> Belmont; her victory
> strengthened, not shook, a lot of the foundations
> of handicapping as most of us
> know them. How about (A) she was the best bred
> animal in the Belmont; only a
> hard spent Hard Spun\'s breeding comes close. How
> about (B) she was a fresh
> animal going against 2 colts who had demanding 3YO
> campaigns. How about (C) the
> five pound weight allowance she received as a
> filly may have been the
> difference in the race (I will leave it to the
> true numbers guys to determine
> whether her ground loss canceled her weight
> advantage). How about (D) she was
> ridden flawlessly after a stumbling start by John
> Velazquez. The only
> aberration might be that she is one of the few
> 3YOs to campaign in California
> in recent years to have an impact in the Triple
> Crown series.
>
> Get off the grassy knoll. Pletcher\'s advantage is
> not blood doping. TAP has
> access to major resources, not the least of which
> is high priced stock. He gets
> major stall allocations at any track he requests
> them from, which allows him to
> stable his young horses at the track long before
> they are ready to run (IMO a
> big advantage). TAP employs exercise riders in
> large numbers, which allows him
> to train these youngsters in large sets, giving
> them seasoning. The racing
> offices at all tracks write races to satisfy TAP,
> which is another way of
> saying that TAP has candidates for almost every
> race in the condition book save
> for the bottom claimers. His owners allow him to
> take the necessary time to
> allow his stock to develop, perform and recover.
>
> I can not say this enough times. Pletcher runs as
> many horses as any trainer in
> the US; he wins with around 25% of these runners,
> and has year after year. As
> such his runners are subjected to more testing
> than the runners coming from any
> other stable. He has had one positive-- for
> mepivicaine. So after what-- a ten
> year training career, during which he has won
> major and minor stakes races
> across the country at a staggering rate-- he has
> been \"sat down\" a total of 45
> days.
>
> But enough already with TAP. In your post you
> said the following: \"Many more
> people are betting because of the internet,
> interstate wagering and offshore
> betting so might be just as EASY to conclude that
> there is more interest
> than ever. Depends on which side of the telescope
> you are using and which facts
> you observe and comment about.\" (My emphasis on
> the word \"easy\", because you
> certainly tailored your analysis to fit the
> conclusion)
>
> Here are the facts, plain to see with the naked
> eye, no \"telescope\" necessary.
> (1)There are less people going to the races; (2)
> It is likely that a good deal
> of all the money you see wagered-- interstate,
> intertrack, offshore, whatever--
> is wagered by a smaller nucleus of heavy gamblers,
> whom your pal Miff would
> call whales. All of the modern technology you
> mention has simply made it easier
> for the whales to spread their money around to
> various racing venues.
> Since \"whaling\" is as far as I can tell not a
> family business, I can not say
> for certain whether a new generation of cetaceans
> is being spawned to continue
> to prop up pari mutuel wagering.
>
> I make you for a retired guy who has plenty of
> leisure time and you are happy
> that you have so many outlets for your wagerlust.
> Lets talk about the FUTURE of
> Racing. Lets take an age group say 25- 40 years
> old, males, with disposable
> income. Lets play it Karnak\'s way: the answers are
> Sports Betting, Poker and
> Horse Racing.
>
> The question, once again, is where the next
> generation of horseplayers is
> coming from. A lot of 20 and 30 somethings don\'t
> have the kinship with the
> horse that comes from being around them when they
> were growing up. A lot of 20
> and 30 somethings don\'t have a parent or uncle
> that introduced them to Racing
> when they were young. And while some college
> campuses may be close to a
> racetrack, almost all of these campuses have
> thriving though not welcome sports
> betting enterprises and plenty of poker, whether
> it be online or the old
> fashioned game held around a keg at a frat house
> or in a dorm room.
>
> Put it this way: If Steve Crist and Jerry Brown
> were 30 years old, instead of
> nearly in their dotage, and they wanted to
> continue doing what they are
> currently doing for the next 25 years, they would
> be quite worried about
> cultivating a future fan base for horse racing to
> support their respective
> enterprises.
>
> And by the way, although some might say that
> Kelso\'s five consecutive HOTYs
> and JCGCs were not as impressive as Teriyaki
> Steak\'s 5 NYRA wins in one month,
> you, as a breeder/ owner, should know better.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> alm Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > These posts remind me of an op-ed piece I read
> the
> > other day about how scared the media make us
> and
> > have always been making us on issue after issue
> > for decades. Everything always looks dire when
> > the media focuses hard on the bad parts of an
> > issue, but it\'s only one view and it usually
> > passes in time.
> >
> > Same with racing.
> >
> > No matter how dispiriting it is to see the
> effects
> > of blood doping on individual race results or
> > overbreeding to fit lucrative state programs or
> > the empty grandstands, there are other sides to
> > these issues.
> >
> > Many more people are betting because of the
> > internet, interstate wagering, off shore
> betting,
> > so might be just as easy to conclude that there
> is
> > more interest than ever. Depends on which side
> of
> > the telescope you are using and which facts you
> > observe and comment about.
> >
> > Better horses are being bred no matter what you
> > say about the good old days and so on. Jerry
> > Brown will tell you the good horses are getting
> > faster and they are. The scientific approach
> to
> > breeding, led by groups like Equix Biomechanics
> > and individuals like Casey Seaman and Bob
> Fierro
> > are producing stakes quality distance runners
> from
> > stallions who were sprinters. It\'s the same
> gene
> > pool and it\'s being used better than ever by
> savvy
> > breeders. Stupid breeders are what they are.
> > Forget them.
> >
> > I personally watch more racing than I ever did
> in
> > the old days because of simulcasting and
> streaming
> > video and it makes me happy.
> >
> > So I won\'t go down this path with you guys. I
> > grew up at Aqueduct in the 60s going to the
> races
> > with 40,000 other people on Saturdays and it was
> a
> > gas, but it\'s over. If a racetrack today has a
> > thousand people in attendance and a grandstand
> to
> > hold only five thousand, it\'s irrelevant to me.
> >
> > The horse is what counts. From my point of
> view,
> > the sport is better than it ever was.
