Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's an interesting article I just read that gives various reasons why the drought between Triple Crown winners has gone on so long this time around:
"There’s nothing illegal or unethical about the losing Kentucky Derby horses who skipped the Preakness in order to take fresh aim at the Belmont. But the last three Triple Crown winners didn’t face that kind of strategy from their top rivals. Sham, Secretariat's rival in 1973, ran all three races and was the Derby and Preakness runner-up."
"There would be no way that these three long races would get crammed into a five-week period if the Triple Crown were being created today. Today’s horses almost always get four weeks of rest between races, and most races are a mile—with a few here and there that go 1 1/8 miles.
In the Triple Crown series, the distances are 1 1/4 miles at the Derby, 1 3/16 miles at the Preakness and 1 1/2 miles at the Belmont.
Remember that pitching analogy above? The Triple Crown schedule is like asking a young arm to come back on three days rest, two times in a row, and not get any help from the bullpen."
JMO, but to me the fact that Secretariat raced a horse for the Triple Crown who had ended just behind him in the first 2 races probably made it much more exciting all the way around. It's like Ali and Frazier. Regardless of why, I think it's sad that we won't have a rivalry like that again because of the way they do it now.
Cripes.. what a sore loser, classless Ca brat Coburn is.
And the race was slow as snail poo @ 2:28, a full FOUR seconds slower than Secretariat, who would have been picking oats out of his teeth while Chrome was still on the track!
Cripes.. what a sore loser, classless Ca brat Coburn is.
And the race was slow as snail poo @ 2:28, a full FOUR seconds slower than Secretariat, who would have been picking oats out of his teeth while Chrome was still on the track!
But did they qualify for the Derby and elect not to run? The owner said the horses in the Belmont should have qualified for the Derby points-wise, not necessarily run in it.
I honestly don't know where you're going with that train of thought.
I assumed that he meant horses that ran in the derby because the fatigue/stress issue is the only legitimate one - the only one worthy of debate. Who cares who qualified, but didn't run? If they didn't run, they are "fresh" horses whether or not they qualified.
Even after a big stakes race with a big field it is rare you will see a horse come back and run 3 weeks later, nevermind the 2 weeks. They are usually given at least 4 weeks off, many times it is longer in a case like that.
A horse who has been laid off for too long can work against you. The purists will jump down my throat when I say this but I'd like to see these races spaced a bit more than they are now.
Steve Coburn is a greedy, arrogant, big mouthed classless jerk of an owner who did not have his horses welfare on his mind. If his horse was tired like his jockey said he was coming out of the gate it shoulld have been detected and he should have not run at all. He didn't deserve to win and he was beaten handily, period.
I had heard up to the race that his workout times were good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghengis
the owners/syndicates, race tracks, breeders, trainers and industry itself can regulate themselves just fine without any whining from these feel-good-story bumpkins or johnny-come lately public neophytes who wouldn't know the difference between a furlong and a fetlock.
Oh, oh, oh, I know, a fetlock is 1/8 the length of a horses leg!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driller1
Nope.....I have been saying a long time.....that is as fast as they go.
CC was a decent horse in a weak crop. He was 2 seconds off the last 2 (derby and Preakness) 2 crown winners like War Emblem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady
Well, I'm a horse breeder, as well as working in equine rescue, and I very much know the difference between a furlong and a fetlock. I also know the track record of owners/syndicates, race tracks, breeders, trainers and industry itself on policing themselves when it comes to the welfare of their horses - my breed of choice isn't Thoroughbreds but I do network with the folks for whom it is who clean up the mess afterwards (new rules regarding disposal of non-winning Thoroughbreds notwithstanding), so forgive me if I don't find that argument particularly compelling - it's the old fox saying he knows really well how to guard the hen house, frankly.
Races, and horse shows, used to be about showing who was the better horse. Over the years, they've become not horse shows and horse races but would be better named trainer/farrier/groom/strategist shows and races (strategy being hold your horse out of a couple of races and then race it against a horse that's been in the first two races, thus making your horse look better than it is when it beats the champion - big stud fee possibilities there - and it's all about the money these days, folks, which is why the $8,000 mare story resonated with so many fans and followers of the sport).
I see two possible solutions to this (and I'm going to be going back and researching prior TC wins and bumped from winning in the Belmont races to see just how many of them involved fresh horses screwing with the odds);
require horses that run in the Belmont to have run in at least the Preakness as a qualifier for the Belmont, or
space the races out so that every horse comes to it relatively fresh.
My personal preference would be the latter, but anything that makes it a fair contest to REALLY show who's the better HORSE would be okay in my book.
This doesn't even address the horror of racing two and three-year-olds when their joints aren't even completely fused and they're still babies, all, again, because of money. That's another story for another thread.
someone in the media should ask media darling bob baffert why 5 of his horses in California alone, this year, have died of heart attacks.
of course NBC doesn't want you to know that.
it's a disgusting industry. and these horses are too young. They'll talk about bone scans etc. but they're just too young.
in England it's a bit better, the track surfaces are better as well. Anytime you have people trying to make money of an animal there will be bad results. Even dog or cat breeders.
I've worked around horses too, mostly Arabians , but some hunt/jump places which of course had many Thoroughbreds. They're beautiful creatures that deserve better.
The Belmont is the longest race and 1.5 miles. Chrome had never run that far. Tonalist was a fresher and rested horse.
If the Belmont was before the Preakness well that would change the results from time to time.
Chrome will have offspring that will be contenders. That owner should be very pleased with his $ winnings and the future offspring.
-------------------------------------------------
Secretariat waited until near the end of the back stretch to even gain the lead and begin to pull away. Pulling away even at the finish line.
Last edited by howard555; 06-08-2014 at 02:29 PM..
someone in the media should ask media darling bob baffert why 5 of his horses in California alone, this year, have died of heart attacks.
of course NBC doesn't want you to know that.
it's a disgusting industry. and these horses are too young. They'll talk about bone scans etc. but they're just too young.
in England it's a bit better, the track surfaces are better as well. Anytime you have people trying to make money of an animal there will be bad results. Even dog or cat breeders.
I've worked around horses too, mostly Arabians , but some hunt/jump places which of course had many Thoroughbreds. They're beautiful creatures that deserve better.
Well, I'm a horse breeder, as well as working in equine rescue, and I very much know the difference between a furlong and a fetlock. I also know the track record of owners/syndicates, race tracks, breeders, trainers and industry itself on policing themselves when it comes to the welfare of their horses - my breed of choice isn't Thoroughbreds but I do network with the folks for whom it is who clean up the mess afterwards (new rules regarding disposal of non-winning Thoroughbreds notwithstanding), so forgive me if I don't find that argument particularly compelling - it's the old fox saying he knows really well how to guard the hen house, frankly.
Races, and horse shows, used to be about showing who was the better horse. Over the years, they've become not horse shows and horse races but would be better named trainer/farrier/groom/strategist shows and races (strategy being hold your horse out of a couple of races and then race it against a horse that's been in the first two races, thus making your horse look better than it is when it beats the champion - big stud fee possibilities there - and it's all about the money these days, folks, which is why the $8,000 mare story resonated with so many fans and followers of the sport).
I see two possible solutions to this (and I'm going to be going back and researching prior TC wins and bumped from winning in the Belmont races to see just how many of them involved fresh horses screwing with the odds); require horses that run in the Belmont to have run in at least the Preakness as a qualifier for the Belmont, or space the races out so that every horse comes to it relatively fresh.
My personal preference would be the latter, but anything that makes it a fair contest to REALLY show who's the better HORSE would be okay in my book.
This doesn't even address the horror of racing two and three-year-olds when their joints aren't even completely fused and they're still babies, all, again, because of money. That's another story for another thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady
Apparently he'd been talking about it for some weeks, this was just more public and emotional than previously. As I said, it's started a good public discussion in lots of areas that I think is long overdue.
The observations made by TexasHorseLady in her commentary concerning the industry is spot on. It is a tough, tough business which has been in decline over the years due to a few specific reasons. A racetrack and ALL the people it takes each and every racing day for their particular 'race dates' is a world unto itself. But as THL has said, 'that's another story for another thread'.
However Coburn comes off to many, including the public arena, he makes a valid point so perhaps a dialogue can begin taking a look at how the races lead up to the Triple Crown and maybe a change is due. For the thoroughbreds as well as their declining legion of remaining fans who devote themselves to the sport even when there is no Kentucky Derby, Preakness, Triple Crown or Arlington Million running; but rather everyday thoroughbred racing which takes place a few times a week at various venues throughout the world...something good and lasting will come of it. Just my two cents on this Sunday afternoon.
Does a horse need to win all three races to win the Triple Crown
Coburn was completely right. It is absolutely ridiculous that this sport allows owners and trainers to cherry-pick Triple Crown races to rest their horses while others gamely slog through every one and end up losing out on the sport's ultimate prize because of it. The winner of the third leg of the Triple Crown was Tonalist, who was far more rested than Chrome after sitting out the Derby and the Preakness. The last anyone saw of Tonalist, he was winning the Peter Pan Stakes right here at Belmont Park on May 10.
How is this fair? Name another sport that allows such foolishness? You either participate in a season, or a series, or you don't. Coburn's barrage after the race was nothing new. He had been talking about a system that is patently unfair all week leading up to the race.
Thoroughbreds are not bred these days like they used to be. That's the shame of the sport and the breed. There are still breeders that try to breed the old lineage, great conformation tbs though they are few and far between, mostly now in the sport horse world, instead of the racing world on average.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
