Owners Conspire to Keep Filly Out of Preakness

[Lost Cause]

Funny Cide Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Jackson bashing gets old.  Didn\'t IEAH buy 2
> made horses in Patena and I Want Revenge just so
> they could get in the Derby (even if it didn\'t
> work)?  Didn\'t Prince Salman buy War Emblem just
> to get in the Derby?  

Buying the horse is not the issue here..Running her back in 2 weeks after a monster performance for seemingly no good reason is the issue.  There is still another triple crown race up for grabs with better spacing after this one if that\'s what he covets.

[miff]

Seems like the loons are getting to quite a few people.The breakdown rate per  thousand starters is something minuscule. Whats all this gloom and doom if she runs.Someone posted about a possible outcry from people who don\'t support the game for a quarter. Who cares about the know nothing loons except the politicians trying to score points.

RA and all the others are FAR more likely to get injured in training than in the race on Saturday. If RA has a  hidden problem, what makes anyone think she would not get injured with 4 weeks spacing instead of 2 weeks.Some horses recover from big efforts in days,some don\'t recover,ever.In my head I can remember several very promising 3yr olds who were knocked out for good from their huge efffort\'s in Jan/Feb.

Horses run back 2-3 days fairly often(at the lower level mainly) and harness horses run 2 or 3 heats, hours apart, sometimes under tough weather conditions at the Hambo,Brown Jug.Seems the negative -4 have and 2 weeks spacing have some people paranoid.

Not a word of concern from former trainer Wiggins about the short turn around,I wonder why?.All the people who know nothing are talking bad stuff while those with the most expertise are giving her the green light.

Mike

[TGJB]

Miff-- and yet, by some amazing coincidence, my record on this is that the ones I predict will go wrong IN SOME WAY (not necessarily break down in a race) is WAY higher than the ordinary rate. Like what, 10 times better? More?

You can have as much of me as you want on this, Mike. If she runs Saturday she makes no more than 2 other starts by November first. Funny Cide, you are welcome to take a piece-- contact me under a real email address with a real name.

Again-- it\'s all a matter of percentages. Horses that run freakishly fast are more likely to go wrong than those that don\'t. Horses that come back quick off efforts are more likely to go wrong than those that don\'t. And horses that come back quick off freakishly fast efforts are extremely likely to go bad, whether or not it is permanent. And this is completely independent of Rachel\'s chance of winning the Preakness.

As I have said before, there is always a reason-- Funny Cide found a few-- because by definition they MUST FIND ONE. Even if it is, horses break down all the time.

I should point out that on average fillies are 3 points slower than colts. Rachel just ran the equivelant of a neg 7 for a 3yo colt in May.

[Funny Cide]

Why aren\'t we complaining about the colts running this Saturday?  Every year, we ask them to run again in 2 weeks, with one or more of them coming off big efforts.

[TGJB]

I complain about that plenty, in many venues, and have said here that if I was involved with a Derby winner I would probably pass the Preakness. Back when I was involved with Victory Gallop horses weren\'t running as fast (we\'re not going to have that argument here again, if it starts I\'m going to be deleting), and the pattern of breakdowns was not as clear, and it wasn\'t my call anyway. There are patterns and situations where I might try it, but it\'s not great for the horses.

But this is much worse, because she did NOT win the Derby, taking the TC out of play, and because she ran so damn fast, after several other big efforts. If I were managing her she wouldn\'t run again until late July, with the Travers second off a layoff.

[Funny Cide]

Funny Cide, you are welcome to take a piece
-------------

If you tell me what I said that you have a problem with, I\'ll be glad to respond to it.

[TGJB]

No problem at all. You said to believe your eyes, easy wins with big figures don\'t cause damage, it\'s always something else. If that\'s true, there is no reason Rachel shouldn\'t have a healthy, happy campaign if she runs back Saturday off that gallop. Right?

Bet me.

[girly]

We had this same conversation last year-every year someone brings up the 2 week turnaround, and with good reason. It makes more sense for the horses, male or female. A human champion boxer usually works out for at least 6 mo. before a fight, and spends a lengthy time after recuperating. Wish we could ask the horses opinion. We can only hope a good trainer can see what\'s going on and rely on his/her judgment to make the call as to when to run again. Still, I see nothing wrong with a May June July scenario for the Triple Crown.

[miff]

\"Miff-- and yet, by some amazing coincidence, my record on this is that the ones I predict will go wrong IN SOME WAY (not necessarily break down in a race) is WAY higher than the ordinary rate. Like what, 10 times better? More?\"

JB,  

One could say that horses at all levels can go bad \"in some way\"at any time and do all the time.I\'ll bet 20 horses will \"go wrong\" in some way this month at Belmont and some never ran a race at all.

In brief, I won\'t bet on RA\'s demise, thats not racing stuff,imo.Is it a revelation that if she gets a pimple in the coming days, weeks, months she will be retired, thats a prediction tied to a negative figure she ran,you\'re kidding.  

Didn\'t you already lose this bet on Smarty, Ghost Zapper,Curlin,IWR,QR Commentator, Bernardini and many other TG big neg figd runners.Retiring to stud does not necessarily qualify as \"gone wrong\" by my count.

So,who are the horses that ran big neg figs,came back short and broke down or went wrong? Surely you are not talking about Barbaro or 8 Belles, they did not run that fast to qualify for this discussion.

Mike

[jimbo66]

AGreed 100%.

The Jackson bashing makes no sense.

The argument about \"he is a rich old guy so he has nothing better to do than run the horse for enjoyment\" also makes no sense.

The sheikhs are rich and they retire every quality animal they get their hands on.

That argument was used for the owner of Smarty Jones, who was 80 something years old and people said \"at least he won\'t retire the horse because he is old and rich and probably wants to enjoy the horse running\".  He retired the horse ASAP.

Jackson is one of the BEST sportsman in this game IMO.  What he tried to do with Curlin was great and what he is doing with the filly is great.

Bravo.

[TGJB]

In both Barbaro and Eight Belles\' case, as well as I Want Revenge\'s, I made clear comments that the big efforts were likely to cause them a problem in the near future. With Quality Road I was not as definitive (because of the strong 2yo top)but I said he still had to make it to the gate for the Derby (and lo and behold, his problem was not as serious). And you might be the one person on this board with us long enough to remember what I said about Go For Wand in the printed comments we gave out with the hardcopy before the BC.

Yes, horses go bad-- how many times do I have to say this? A much higher percentage go bad when I predict they will do so soon than in general. And it\'s not that I\'m psychic-- there are reasons I point out when I say it.

Again-- it\'s not going to happen every time, there are percentages involved, and there are complicating factors-- time between races, maybe drugs. In the case of Big Brown, he had 5 weeks after the first big one, that may have been a factor in it taking a little longer. And his being able to return after the Belmont may have been helped by the horse (and Desormeaux) taking care of himself in that race.

Nobody is saying they necessarily drop dead in the next start after the big one, though it sometimes happens. They often throw another on the way out.

If I\'m right half the time in predicting horses developing a problem it puts me way ahead of the percentage of healthy horses in the general population that fall apart short term. And in terms of the ones I have opened my mouth about, I\'m way more than 50/50.

The only ones on your list I might have predicted physical problems for that didn\'t go bad within a couple of races after a huge effort could be Smarty, and maybe Curlin. Maybe.

[chrifron]

I didn\'t bring up IEAH in my earlier post--but,since you have--at least the case can be made that IEAH knows when to hold \'em and when to fold \'em. I differ with your statement that they bought 2 \"made\" horses--what did Patena ever do as a 3yo? IEAH also bought Stardom Bound last Winter AFTER PASSING ON RACHEL ALEXANDRA due to the bone chip--and had enough sense to back her off the Derby path once she fizzled.

 By the way, War Emblem was sold for only $1 million after winning the Illinois Derby--and, to this day--is probably one of the most underwhelming horses ever to win 2 jewels of the Triple Crown (he paid $43 to win in the Derby). Prince Ahmed probably didn\'t buy the horse expecting to win the Derby, and, sadly--only lived a short time after that.

 There is a huge difference between buying a colt (with syndication potential far greater than the purchase price) and spending $10 million for a filly. IEAH didn\'t buy into the Triple Crown--they bought into the dream and came up empty--they also let Lanzman retain the right to call the shots on IWR and keep Mullins as trainer. If they had bought Mine That Bird this past week for $5 million and turned him over to Dutrow for the Preakness, I and everyone else would be cutting them to pieces.

 The criticism of Jackson here is more about timing and intent--he wants to make a big splash by being in the Preakness and was willing to do whatever was necessary after the Derby. I admire the way in which he campaigned Curlin, but this situation is not the same. I hope that it works out for the filly and that she stays sound, and gets to dance many more dances.

[miff]

JB,

Kudos really, for as you know the real valuable horses get better vet care than some humans and todays technology is fantastic(nuke scans,etc) Yet you see timebombs vet people don\'t. I\'m sure Go For Wand\'s vet did not think she was sitting on a breakdown.FWIW, Billy Badgett swears it was the \"rock hard\" surface and NYRA\'s lust for the spectacular fast \"wow raw time factor\" that took GFW.

A friend who is an old timer and a present NY trainer will look at the horses in the walking rink and tell me who is likely to go bad and in what area(hock, stifle et al)On the other hand, you are not seeing the horses, just their figs and predicting occasional stuff also.I have to wonder if it\'s all just inevitable without any particular reason.


Mike

[jimbo66]

Chrifron,

AGreed it is not exactly the same as Curlin.

I would argue that this move is MORE sportsmanlike from Jackson.  He didn\'t have much to lose with Curlin if the horse didn\'t like the turf, which he didn\'t.  His reputation was sealed already.

Jackson is making a risky move here.  Just look at all the gook on this board about hoping Rachel makes it home safely in the Preakness.  He has downside here if the horse runs poorly.  He will be killed for \"rushing\" a filly to come back in 2 weeks against the colts.

[mjellish]

Not to mention that if you are right about the ones that go off form, or get hurt, and you happen to BET against these big favorites every time and are right even 25% of the time, you can make enough money to keep your head above water for an entire year.

I just don\'t get why people debate this.  Big efforts will eventually take a toll.  How long it takes depends upon the horse, trainer, competition faced, and maybe even a little luck.

Show me a horse.  I\'m not even asking for a three year old, or one in a hundred, or even one in 10,000.  Just ONE HORSE that has run -4\'s on short rest repeatedly, over and over and over again, for a whole season while the connections just got to gobble up all the money.  

You won\'t find a single one.  Let alone a 3 year old filly...

Like I said earlier on this board.  If RA goes off at 9/5 or so, or anything above odds-on for that matter, she is going to look like the bargain of the year to most people.  She already has become a media darling, and she may even bounce and win.

But she won\'t have my money on her.  And if she doesn\'t win outright she is just as likely to finish off the board altogether as she is to take second.

Gawd I love the Triple Crown Series...