oh mike, it's just horse racing =) if we all agreed it'd be pretty darn boring
sham was being held together with bubble gum and shoe-string even when he started the derby. i'm not sure how you know that it was expected he would race again. this was a long time ago, when the racing public had almost no access to what any owner or trainers plans were. he was retired in July 1973, around about a month after the belmont, and at least a month before the whitney, which would have been his next race.
a horse pulled up is a horse pulled up. it doesn't matter to me if the horse is vanned off or not. sham ran the second fastest derby ever run that year, if sham had been sound, and hadn't been pulled up, do really think the following would have been the case: "After about half a mile, a third of the way through the race, Secretariat increased his pace and pulled ahead rapidly as Sham began to fall back. With Pincay easing back to protect the horse, Sham ultimately finished last." Last in a field of far inferior horses, with the exception of secretariat.
not sure what your "bunch of aliases" comment is supposed to mean. I've never posted under any name on any racing site, except thorograph, with any other name but papillon, and on thorograph, the reason was based on my account there.
also not sure what you mean by "little girls" comments. however, it verges on creepy. not to mention sexist, which is weird coming from someone calling yourself"mary."
bravo for googling the 77 swaps--must feel good to pull a "gotcha" on the most trivial part (and least relevant) of the statement. but i am contrite nonetheless--the 16 lengths he lost by grew in my mind to him being last. i stand corrected.
i honestly have no opinion about which of his cropmates could have beaten him, i starting paying attention only when jerry brown was saying that this was going to be a derby for the ages and this was the best crop in 30-40 years (or something like that). then i watched the derby...and was thoroughly unimpressed with any of them, with the exception of mubtahij's gallop out--that was insanely impressive.
i don't even know how much i care about the TC anymore, I used to always think i wanted one...but I don't know if i really care anymore....
yeah, i've read this 10x and still have no clue what you are trying to say. but um, best i can decipher--when evaluating race dynamics you have to take into account the internal fractions and the running styles of the horses in the race. if that is all you are saying, i agree to your rather banal observation.
if you are trying to say that a hot pace in a route race filled solely with speed horses or a slow pace in a race filled solely with closers is going to result in final times of 2:05 and 2:01 or vice versa, then i respectfully disagree. speed that can stay, like GOD and Bayern, don't come home in 2:05 unless they are pulled up, regardless of how hot the internals. Likewise, closers that can stay, can every easily come home in 2:01 even if the internals are slow (as is shown in just about every grass race in the world).
internals have two uses--to assess past performances vis a vis other horses in the same race in order to project race shapes AND to evaluate final times (kind of like exit polling)
do you lay bets? if you don't get wrapped up in times, how are you comparing performances...even thorograph, which uses additional variables, starts with the times...poor roger bannister, devoting so much to shaving that seemingly insurmountable 6/10 of second off of 4 minutes...now those 6/10 are expected to be shaved off to even be given a spot on the stage to try to whittle your way down to the 18 seconds needed for the wrc that hasn't been been broken in 50 years...time matters or we wouldn't race against the clock.
yes it veers into concern for animal cruelty. his 32 strikes would have gotten him suspended in europe and in california. where you can really see the argument veering towards the unseemly are those who say, "but it was the ky derby, if he hadn't gone to the whip and had lost..."
why? he was a bleeder who ran on lasix and who was forced to run lasix free in the belmont. nothing irresponsible there. just straight up acknowledged verifiable facts.
if he loses the belmont though...is he any greater than any of his peers that tried and failed? if he
loses, is he even as great as some of those same peers? chances are he will lose, most who've tried have lost, so the safe bet is that he will lose too (just based on probabilities).
and if he isn't as great as some of his peers who also had the chance to win the TC at this point, it is absolutely fair for anyone before 6:32pm sat. to shake their heads at this point. So far he isn’t even as impressive as smarty jones to this point.
and can you blame those of us who can't view his efforts in isolation. do his 3 2yo accomplishments hold a candle to this: By the end of his first year of racing, X had won seven races in nine starts, set one track
record and tied another.
Do his 4 3yo accomplishments hold a candle to this: X's second year of racing began where his first left off, as he reeled off five wins in rapid succession: the
Hutcheson Stakes, the Fountain of Youth, the Florida Derby, the Flamingo Stakes, and the Blue Grass Stakes, followed by the KY derby and the Preakness,
of which he was the acknowledged record holder of until a certain old lady's b!tching finally got him knocked down to 2nd in 2012 (in a match race he would
have run that old lady's horse into the ground btw). So up to the eve of his Belmont, X had run 16 races and won 14 of them from 5.5f to 10f.
After the Belmont, I'll update this to see how AP
stands up to horse X. Though I'm not sure there is anything that AP can do tomorrow that will move him over horse X for me, but there is certainly
something he can do that will guaranty he is never mentioned in the same company as horse X by me ever again.
and AP is no zenyatta
Copyright © 2010 -
other passionate horse racing fans!