|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,944 Likes: 1
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,944 Likes: 1 |
Coburn is a whiney poor loser.
He bitched about everything along the way.
Complained about Churchill Downs about handicap access.
Had the rules changed about the nasal strips.
CC doe not like to be whipped. He slowed down the very moment the Jockey started to whip him.
What makes a Triple Crown winner is his ability to beat all competition. Fresh or otherwise.
They are California Horse and owner. They showed their true California colors. Send them home.
California Thoroughbred- what a joke! and you are all mouth too............LOL Just venting myself. I actually bet on CC. But his owner lost it! Not Cool. Pissed me off. California Chrome injured himself leaving the gate as his back foot hit his front foot The jockey posted a picture on twitter https://mobile.twitter.com/EspinozasVictor Billy Gowen tweeted that the fourth place Finnish by CC showed how much heart he truly has.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 207
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 207 |
Thanks Joel
I normally am well served to read and learn on this forum.
There are not many subjects that I have much of value to add.
I enjoy this site very much but have nightmares about teeth whitening strips
and leaving my phone unattended around some of the members here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208 |
I wonder if we will see anything factual in regards to past Triple Crown winners racing against fresh horses? Is skipping races a new phenomenon to Triple Crown horse racing?
It does seem sort of chickenschitt to accumulate enough points to enter your horse into the Kentucky Derby, but then hold him out becasue you don't feel you can win, in the hopes of finding a tired horse to beat in subsequent races.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 207
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 207 |
I wonder if we will see anything factual in regards to past Triple Crown winners racing against fresh horses? Is skipping races a new phenomenon to Triple Crown horse racing?
It does seem sort of chickenschitt to accumulate enough points to enter your horse into the Kentucky Derby, but then hold him out becasue you don't feel you can win, in the hopes of finding a tired horse to beat in subsequent races. It's not about skipping races! It is ALL about knowing your horse and his strengths/weakness and knowing the competition. Good horseman pick the spot where their animals will have the best chance to win or at least learn,gain confidence and earn a check. Do you take new hunters on dangerous game hunts?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591 |
Shouldn't be called the triple crown if all three are not raced, simple as that. Supposed to earn your way there. Talked to some trainer friends today and their comment was basically that.
Never take life to seriously, after all ,no one gets out of it alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,402
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 2,402 |
It takes a very special horse to win all 3, it has been done and will be done again, when a Slew or such horse shows up.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
You're absolutely correct! This is also part of the story missing from the Seabiscuit book/movie. But there is another factor as well, the fact that horses today can't handle the grind of racing that they once did. Being an insider as far as horse racing goes, can you address my questions regarding drug use? That's the factor NOBODY wants to discuss in my opinion. You're right. There have always been dopers in EVERY sport, including horse racing. That doesn't mean that everyone is doing it, but a lot are. In years past tracks did not drug test, and as testing became the norm there were specific drugs that were not tested for. The traditional drug of choice was some type of pain killer, the same as in most pro sports. Of course "uppers" have been frequently used to pump up a docile horse, but usually as a horse trains they naturally become more hyper and raring to go. As a horse become "hotter" he becomes harder to control and rate, which is not a good thing for a race horse that needs to be paced in a long race. Now a days we have even more effective "performance enhancing" drugs as well. However, as drug testing improves and becomes better and more inclusive the search for drugs that will pass these tests continues as well. The end result is that while testing has become better there are now new drugs that will pass the test, and once testing for these drugs begins now drugs that will pas the test are developed. But the question is does the drug testing we have today prevent horses from being able to win the Triple Crown. While it's not scientific my answer is no. It is still a level playing field as far as all horses being able to receive the same drug that is not being tested. Meaning that while Drug A that was used during Secretariat's day can no longer be used, Drug B can be used by both CC and his competition. And trust me when I say that at the top level of racing most everyone involved knows which drugs produce the desired result and are not tested for, that as in Secretariat's day, and the truth is these drugs are just as effective as drugs used in days gone by.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
CC is a great horse, but he is not a superstar horse.
If he was on the same drugs they were back in the '70's I bet he would be...  Naw, drugs today are better, just ask Barry Bonds...lol
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
I have no problem with changing the rules, but doing so would make it easier to win the Triple Crown, which means that doing so would not be as grand a feat as the 11 previous winners accomplished. Although I doubt Coburn would agree had his horse won under the new rules he promotes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
All I know is that the sport needs a triple crown winner. 36 years since the last one is pretty ridiculous. Yes it is. Perhaps eventually the industry will look at modern breeding fashions and change things.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
Again, I think the #1 reason there has not been a triple crown champion in almost 40 years is due mostly to stricter drug testing.
I'm highly skeptical of athletes that run away from the rest of the field like Ben Johnson, Lance Armstrong or Barry Bonds.
The horse racing sanctioning bodies were late to enact drug rules and those that discovered these "miracle drugs" prior to testing were rewarded with eternal greatness and millions of dollars. When did these miracle drugs start being used? I promise that the drugs of the last 10-15 years are much more effective than the drugs used in the 70's and before. I also promise that not all these drugs are being tested.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
IMHO
The biggest reason we have not had a triple crown winner in many years is breeding for speed instead of stamina.
Our horses today are bred to run shorter distances. Most modern day ( US based ) horses will never run the Belmont distance. The cost of having horses in training is extremely high and race tracks write races that are most likely to have full fields.
Buyers of racing prospects want to see their animals run and the races are written at shorter distances and animals will often compete in races that are a mile or less their entire career. In the US breeders generally prefer speed over stamina.
Animals that look the fastest (yearlings) or have the fastest workouts (two year olds) generally will command the best auction prices.
The fastest horses have a greater chance of injury and may need more time between races.
The modern Belmont is often won by a fresh distance specialist that would have been too slow to be competitive in the first two legs of the TC beating horses that may have been pushed a bit too hard to get enough earnings to make the field in the derby.
You're absolutely right. Best post in this thread!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591 |
Never take life to seriously, after all ,no one gets out of it alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208 |
I wonder if we will see anything factual in regards to past Triple Crown winners racing against fresh horses? Is skipping races a new phenomenon to Triple Crown horse racing?
It does seem sort of chickenschitt to accumulate enough points to enter your horse into the Kentucky Derby, but then hold him out becasue you don't feel you can win, in the hopes of finding a tired horse to beat in subsequent races. It's not about skipping races! It is ALL about knowing your horse and his strengths/weakness and knowing the competition. Good horseman pick the spot where their animals will have the best chance to win or at least learn,gain confidence and earn a check. Do you take new hunters on dangerous game hunts? OK points taken, but do you know if other Triple Crown winners raced against fresh horses held out of the first two races?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 28,208 |
I have no problem with changing the rules, but doing so would make it easier to win the Triple Crown, which means that doing so would not be as grand a feat as the 11 previous winners accomplished.
But did the previous 11 race against horses that were held out of the Derby or the Preakness?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
That's a good question. It takes a while to research these things but I will and I'll get back to you. In the meantime how about this (I stumbled across this information and I was able to put it together fairly quickly):
There have been 19 horses who won both the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness who then lost the Belmont. 9 of these horses lost to horses who had also run in both the Kentucky Derby and Preakness.
1961 Sherluck beat Carry Back
1964 Quadrangle beat Northern Dancer
1966 Amberoid beat Kauai King
1969 Arts and Letters beat Majestic Prince
1987 Bet Twice beat Alysheba
1989 Easy Goer beat Sunday Silence
1998 Victory Gallop beat Real Quiet
1999 Lemon Drop Kid beat Charismatic (Technically Lemon Drop Kid doesn't count because he didn't run in the Preakness but he did run Peter Pan 2 weeks prior to the Belmont so he was not a fresh horse).
2004 Birdstone beat Smarty Jones
So basically half of the horses who had a shot at winning the Triple Crown going into the Belmont lost to horses who were just as fatigued after running in both the Kentucky Derby and Preakness as well.
Last edited by okbowman; 06/08/14. Reason: Race name
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 21,699 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 21,699 Likes: 3 |
I think Bob has joined a convent. He has been absent lately.
Myself, I am already planning for next year.
Glad to hear you are well.
"The number one problem with America is, a whole lot of people need shot, and nobody is shooting them."
-Master Chief Hershel Davis
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 25,107
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 25,107 |
The owner is fat whiny SOB.
His horse ran his race and lost.
Old red faced fugger gonna stroke out if he keeps that chit up.
“Life is life and fun is fun, but it's all so quiet when the goldfish die.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,591 |
Simply calling it as it is. Jockey club of america can fix this if they chose. Again money talks integrity walks.
Never take life to seriously, after all ,no one gets out of it alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 981 |
Something else to consider is the number of foals born each year. Larger crops guarantee greater competition.
1900-1909 35,000
1910-1919 19,000
1920-1929 32,000
1930-1939 53,000
1940-1949 68,000
1950-1959 99,000
1960-1669 183,000
1970-1979 280,000
1980-1989 464,000
1990-1999 375,000
2000-2009 368,000
|
|
|
|
|
560 members (1minute, 10gaugemag, 16penny, 06hunter59, 01Foreman400, 222Sako, 63 invisible),
2,383
guests, and
1,245
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,544
Posts18,491,601
Members73,972
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
