Beyer Checks In on Godolphin

[blackthroatedwind]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/80086.html

[SCUDSBROTHER]

"Certainly, Bernardini has generated little attention, despite his brilliance as a racehorse."-Beyer


Are you kid'n me? Even the women that post here have practically grown tools to whack off with while watching him run.

[blackthroatedwind]

Yes but this is a Horse Racing Message Board. Of course we all know about Bernardini. Bernardini is not a household name outside of racing by any stretch of the imagination. EVERYONE knew Funny Cide and Smarty Jones. You have no idea how many people I know in NY that have no interest in racing that were asking me about them. Now, to be fair they were TC aspirants, but even people knew about Lost in the Fog. Now, sure, Bernardini's Preakness win was WAY overshadowed by Barbaro's injury, but it also masked that there was no human interest story involving Bernardini.

I think it would be fair to say that Beyer is acutely aware of how much human interest stories fuel racing.

[blackthroatedwind]

Oops, I was typing that about Smarty and Funny Cide as you were posting it. Great minds I guess....


Mediocre minds?

[eurobounce]

This just goes to show that the Kentucky Derby is all that matters to people who are not horse racing fans. They prob have heard of Barbaro and that he got hurt or something like that, but if you were to ask them about Jazil and Bernardini and which TC race they won I bet 50% wouldnt get it right.

[blackthroatedwind]

True enough, but their Derby results have been horrendous so far, and that does not JUST include those that have run. They have paid enormous sums for many horses over the years, and not only have those that tried it done poorly, but many never even got close to making it.

In the cases of Frankel and Pletcher that you brought up, each has had some success, Invisible Ink and Bluegrass Cat were second for Todd, and Empire Maker and Peace Rules ran two-three for Frankel. Plus, Frankel has never been a trainer focused on TC races. The Sheiks have been at least trying to be effective in the Derby for quite some time.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I think he meant outside of horse racing fans. You know anyone that isn't a fan of racing that knows Bernie, because I don't. But people know Funny Cide and Smarty Jones. I personally think this article is dead on. I was also unaware that Darley really didn't breed Bernie. Rather they bought Cara Rafaela in foal.

Trainers,and breeders are whores(with regard to this.) You could be scum of the Earth,a dictator,or whatever,and Frankel would train for you.Arabs could be cutting Jews heads off(and using them for bowling balls,)and he would still train for them. These Sheiks have been rippin' their people off forever,and nobody in the horseracing industry has cared before.I Don't think they will start to care now.Is Andy saying that the imdustry will start to care if they start winning our Triple Crown races? I don't think so.The industry just cares about getting money,and they don't care where those people got it from...."Can you get an owners license"-that's all they care about.

[Cannon Shell]

Trainers,and breeders are whores(with regard to this.) You could be scum of the Earth,a dictator,or whatever,and Frankel would train for you.Arabs could be cutting Jews heads off(and using them for bowling balls,)and he would still train for them. These Sheiks have been rippin' their people off forever,and nobody in the horseracing industry has cared before.I Don't think they will start to care now.Is Andy saying that the imdustry will start to care if they start winning our Triple Crown races? I don't think so.The industry just cares about getting money,and they don't care where those people got it from...."Can you get an owners license"-that's all they care about.
As crude as the language is, astonishingly enough, you are pretty much dead on.

[Coach Pants]

Trainers,and breeders are whores(with regard to this.) You could be scum of the Earth,a dictator,or whatever,and Frankel would train for you.Arabs could be cutting Jews heads off(and using them for bowling balls,)and he would still train for them. These Sheiks have been rippin' their people off forever,and nobody in the horseracing industry has cared before.I Don't think they will start to care now.Is Andy saying that the imdustry will start to care if they start winning our Triple Crown races? I don't think so.The industry just cares about getting money,and they don't care where those people got it from...."Can you get an owners license"-that's all they care about.

I like the cut of your jib, sir.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Yeah I hear what you are saying, and I agree with some of it, but I don't think that's what Beyer is saying. IMO he is just saying that what Godolphin is now doing is detrimental to the industry from a fans perspective. Of course the breeders like the sheiks, they are lining their pockets. But the fans like a story, and there isn't much story about a horse that was one of many purchased for a crazy sum, that runs a handful of times a year. Certainly they aren't the only ones guilty of this, just the most seen.

Yes,and I can't understand where he gets off complaining about it now.Seems like people here weren't upset about these Sheiks using the Country's oil money to buy horses.That.. they didn't complain about.They are complaining about them winning our big races.If Andy really cared about these Sheiks rippin' their country's people off,then it would seem the article should be about the prices paid at auction.People didn't seem too up in arms when these sheiks spent the money,but when the horses they spent the money on do well,that's when people start getting upset.LOL..Did he expect them to keep failing after buying up all the best bred horses,and the fastest prospects they could find?

[blackthroatedwind]

The story is timely with the BC coming this weekend and Godolphin holding a very strong hand for the races. That is why it is a story of specific interest right now.

[Cardus]

The story is timely with the BC coming this weekend and Godolphin holding a very strong hand for the races. That is why it is a story of specific interest right now.

BTW,

Is this column in Wednesday's DRF?

[blackthroatedwind]

I assume it is. It was my understanding it was in tomorrow's Washington Post.

[point given]

I certainly have missed the yearly Jenny Craig runners since those nasty sheiks bought up everything with 4 legs ! For heavens sake I've gone off my diet and put on 20 pounds :D

[Cardus]

I assume it is. It was my understanding it was in tomorrow's Washington Post.

Thanks.

Either I will read it in the Form or through my Post website. I had a problem accessing the DRF website, so I figured that I would ask.

I'll say this about Beyer (to an audience of one or two at this time of early morning): this column -- not an article, by the way, for it's an opinion piece -- is probably provacative.

He is a terrific columnist.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I certainly have missed the yearly Jenny Craig runners since those nasty sheiks bought up everything with 4 legs ! For heavens sake I've gone off my diet and put on 20 pounds :D

Jenny Craig is using her money to constantly advertise on TVG.Each time that Cow Kirstie Alley comes on it's like acid coming out of the T.V....Oh,big mouth lost 75 lbs??..Well,don't stop short honey.Try 25 more.

[Cardus]

Jenny Craig is using her money to constantly advertise on TVG.Each time that Cow Kirstie Ally comes on it's like acid coming out of the T.V....Oh,big mouth lost 75 lbs??..Well,don't stop short honey.Try 25 more.

Do I hear 50?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Do I hear 50?

I really thought she would be done after losing 75lbs......I was wrong.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I agree with what Andy is saying in the article,but it is incredibly late to start complaining about the Sheiks' involvement in American Racing.It is like the father of the bride objecting to the groom on the day of the wedding.The groom has B.O.,and the father knew that for months,but he only objected to the wedding when he himself had to smell it for a couple hours.

[repent]

Yes but this is a Horse Racing Message Board. Of course we all know about Bernardini. Bernardini is not a household name outside of racing by any stretch of the imagination. EVERYONE knew Funny Cide and Smarty Jones. You have no idea how many people I know in NY that have no interest in racing that were asking me about them. Now, to be fair they were TC aspirants, but even people knew about Lost in the Fog. Now, sure, Bernardini's Preakness win was WAY overshadowed by Barbaro's injury, but it also masked that there was no human interest story involving Bernardini.

I think it would be fair to say that Beyer is acutely aware of how much human interest stories fuel racing.


lol,
its sad but true.

earlier in the year during Saratoga, I would mention to my friends that they should check out ESPN on Saturday afternoon b/c a memorable horse named Bernardini would be running.
Told them we would look back 15 years from now and talk about how we saw him run.
they would respond with something like,
"could he beat Funny Cide or Smarty Jones?"

LMAO,
the casual sports fan just will never get it.


Repent

[Merlinsky]

Can't figure out why they don't buy Lava Man. My guess is that with all the play money they throw around the real talent concerning this game really isn't there. If you buy "everything" sooner or later you're gonna nail some good ones.

I can give you two reasons that Lava Man is missing as to why they don't buy him---if you get my drift. ;) (i.e. the Bob Barker treatment). If it was solely about buying the talent on the track they've have bought up all sorts of horses they didn't. Notice Lawyer Ron, Afleet Alex, and the like didn't go to the sheikhs. They didn't want to try to stand them. I heard they snubbed Smarty Jones because they figured his sire was good enough for them and they didn't need sonny boy.

They want stallions to stand and broodmares to send to those stallions if possible. They're paying for the stallion in advance of his track performance really and if they make several million surely paying $1.4 mil or $5 mil is chump change. I was trying to think of a prominent gelding they've bought...has there been one? I'm honestly drawing a blank. Not one they've gelded later per se but did they even do that with a horse they'd bought as a colt?

[repent]

I can give you two reasons that Lava Man is missing as to why they don't buy him---if you get my drift. ;) (i.e. the Bob Barker treatment). If it was solely about buying the talent on the track they've have bought up all sorts of horses they didn't. Notice Lawyer Ron, Afleet Alex, and the like didn't go to the sheikhs. They didn't want to try to stand them. I heard they snubbed Smarty Jones because they figured his sire was good enough for them and they didn't need sonny boy.

They want stallions to stand and broodmares to send to those stallions if possible. They're paying for the stallion in advance of his track performance really and if they make several million surely paying $1.4 mil or $5 mil is chump change. I was trying to think of a prominent gelding they've bought...has there been one? I'm honestly drawing a blank. Not one they've gelded later per se but did they even do that with a horse they'd bought as a colt?


Ashkal Way is the most notable current gelding they have running.
I dont know when he was gelded.
I was thinking Afrashad was a gelding but Im not sure on that.
i know Lateen Sails was a gelding. I assume he is still running.


Repent

[Merlinsky]

Ashkal Way is the most notable current gelding they have running. I dont know when he was gelded.t

Ahhh.. ok thanks repent, that's a good one I didn't remember. But still, they say they have too many viable horses in the race so they don't run Ashkal Way but I'd have figured he was going. I'd be willing to bet at least part of the reason is what would a Breeders' Cup victory/placing do for them if it's a gelding? They can't breed him with the accolade in the trophy room, they can just stare at said trophy---heck the horse would be its own trophy for all intents and purposes so when it comes right down to it they probably try to mess with geldings at little as possible ergo I don't see them buying Lava Man anytime soon. I'm sure there's exceptions for various reasons, I just mean they probably don't look at a gelding winning big races and go 'ooh jackpot, where do I sign?' without something else to it.

[Slewbopper]

I don't see them buying Lava Man anytime soon. I'm sure there's exceptions for various reasons, I just mean they probably don't look at a gelding winning big races and go 'ooh jackpot, where do I sign?' without something else to it.

The absolute maximum Lava Man could return is another $8 mil and that is if he wins 2 BCCs and the same races next year that he did this year,. They would rather spend $11.7 on a Snap Cat yearling that could possibly win a Derby or sire one down the road.

One has to wonder when their competition at the Keeneland sales is going to finally throw in the "towel" and say the hell with it. It will be at that point when horse racing will no longer be a sport but just another form of betting like blackjack or poker.

[Dunbar]

I think Beyer's main point is right on. But, "Certainly, Bernardini has generated little attention, despite his brilliance as a racehorse." is simply a reflection of how little exposure and interest there is in racing these days.

The number of people who recognize the name of Ghostzapper or St. Liam, our last 2 HOY's, is not any greater than the number of people that have heard of Bernardini. That has nothing to do with the sheiks.

Sadly, they could let Bernardini run another year and it probably wouldn't change much as far as the non-fan public is concerned. Even Cigar barely created a blip on the sports pages during his long win streak.

--Dunbar

[philcski]

For those blocked to drf at work: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000924.html

[SniperSB23]

For those blocked to drf at work: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000924.html

Thanks, now I can figure out what the hell everyone is talking about.

[Cajungator26]

For those blocked to drf at work: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/30/AR2006103000924.html

Thanks... :D

[2MinsToPost]

I will sound crude and different here, but is their money not the same as others? It's green right? Is it money that belongs to shareholders or savings and loan customers? Is it drug money? Hey, welcome to the sport, after all, money talks and bullshiat walks right? I don't know, I don't follow what goes on over their in their country, so I can't speak politics on this. All I know is that if they were not involved in horse racing period, then maybe the landscape would be diferent? Question that begs to be asked, would it be better or worse, the state of racing?

All one has to do is go to their local track on Kentucky Derby day and look at all those unfamilar faces. Those faces that you will not see their during the Summit of Speed or the day after Thanksgiving (easily one of my favorite days to be at the track). Everyone knows, outside of us Horseplayers, that Derby is a social party. For us, it is a great day to watch and wager on those horses we have followed for months. So BillyBean wins the Derby. You go to the track for the Preakness. Look at the faces, ah, some are back. BillyBean finishes 4th. You are at the track for The Belmont, you look around. Same crowd as any Saturday in January or October, the players. For those outside of Horseplayers, it's all about latching on to that special event, time pulling for that cute animal to win all 3. Breeder's Cup, whats that?

[Coach Pants]

I will sound crude and different here, but is their money not the same as others? It's green right? Is it money that belongs to shareholders or savings and loan customers? Is it drug money? Hey, welcome to the sport, after all, money talks and bullshiat walks right? I don't know, I don't follow what goes on over their in their country, so I can't speak politics on this. All I know is that if they were not involved in horse racing period, then maybe the landscape would be diferent? Question that begs to be asked, would it be better or worse, the state of racing?

All one has to do is go to their local track on Kentucky Derby day and look at all those unfamilar faces. Those faces that you will not see their during the Summit of Speed or the day after Thanksgiving (easily one of my favorite days to be at the track). Everyone knows, outside of us Horseplayers, that Derby is a social party. For us, it is a great day to watch and wager on those horses we have followed for months. So BillyBean wins the Derby. You go to the track for the Preakness. Look at the faces, ah, some are back. BillyBean finishes 4th. You are at the track for The Belmont, you look around. Same crowd as any Saturday in January or October, the players. For those outside of Horseplayers, it's all about latching on to that special event, time pulling for that cute animal to win all 3. Breeder's Cup, whats that?
I'm dizzy.

[sham]

Take it to the extreme. What if one day all 20 entrants in the KY Derby are owned by the Sheiks? That's the day I will just turn off the TV.

[Cajungator26]

I'm dizzy.

And witty. LMAO

[point given]

In a comparison on a much lower level of the game, do we all miss Michael Gill from racing ? He still has a few horses with gammy, but he tried to monopolize the claiming game and most race fans disliked him . Tracks also disliked him for his aggressive claiming tactics among other things. Delaware Park would not give him stalls and he bought his own training center nearby.He would dominate some tracks claiming divisions by buying up so many that there was little competition. Owners/trainers kept their horses in the barn until the gill show moved on to another track. Was what he was doing legal, sure, was it good for the game, I don't think so. The same could be said for what the sheiks are doing. I'm glad that Beyer penned this column.
BTW, this past sunday the NY Times had a new sports magazine included. The name of the magazine is PLAY . ( Bill Parcells is pictured on the cover.) On page 16 is an article, GALLOPING TO GREATNESS . It is the story of Bernardini. Its a sparse article listing what's so good about Bernie with a large photo of him taking up half the page. Just suprised to see it in the NYT.

[Dunbar]

BTW, this past sunday the NY Times had a new sports magazine included. The name of the magazine is PLAY . ( Bill Parcells is pictured on the cover.) On page 16 is an article, GALLOPING TO GREATNESS . It is the story of Bernardini. Its a sparse article listing what's so good about Bernie with a large photo of him taking up half the page. Just suprised to see it in the NYT.

Yesterday they ran a big article on the sheiks' rise to prominance in American racing. This article opened on page A1 before continuing in the sports section.

--Dunbar

[SentToStud]

So Beyer makes a not so thinly veiled reference to the Maktoums as foolish and vulgar. Foolish? OK, maybe. But how/why is he compelled to refer to them as vulgar?

They can do what they want with their horses.

Sangster/Mangier/OBrien did the same thing in the 70's when they bought everything remotely tied to Northern Dancer. They'd race their horses until they won a classic or other important Group I then retire them to breed.

Sound familiar?

If Gates or Buffett suddenly decided to put a billion dollars into the American breeding industry, they'd be called a lot of things.... Sporting, Foolish, Yep. Stupid. Sure, though quietly I'd guess. Vulgar? Nah, save that, as does Beyer and countless others, for the Arabs.

Shame on Beyer. He should be an effective enough journalist by now to get his point across without referring to the Maktums as vulgar.

[blackthroatedwind]

So Beyer makes a not so thinly veiled reference to the Maktoums as foolish and vulgar. Foolish? OK, maybe. But how/why is he compelled to refer to them as vulgar?

They can do what they want with their horses.

Sangster/Mangier/OBrien did the same thing in the 70's when they bought everything remotely tied to Northern Dancer. They'd race their horses until they won a classic or other important Group I then retire them to breed.

Sound familiar?

If Gates or Buffett suddenly decided to put a billion dollars into the American breeding industry, they'd be called a lot of things.... Sporting, Foolish, Yep. Stupid. Sure, though quietly I'd guess. Vulgar? Nah, save that, as does Beyer and countless others, for the Arabs.

Shame on Beyer. He should be an effective enough journalist by now to get his point across without referring to the Maktums as vulgar.


May I suggest looking up " vulgar " in the dictionary. One use of the word suggests pretentious or, more aptly, ostentatious. Because you have a limited understanding of the meaning of the word does not give you the right to make your usual accusations.

Believe it or not, everything isn't couched with racism.

[SentToStud]

May I suggest looking up " vulgar " in the dictionary. One use of the word suggests pretentious or, more aptly, ostentatious. Because you have a limited understanding of the meaning of the word does not give you the right to make your usual accusations.

Believe it or not, everything isn't couched with racism.

Again, you must be right, as usual. Should know that by now, you make a point of telling us often enough and everyone else is just (fill in your favorite adjective/pronoun).... Really, not everyone other than yourself is as naive, limited, or (again, fill in as you wish, but of course some mental capacity reference is always fun!!) as you'd like to think.

You profess so much and yet resort to this same trash anytime anyone takes a view any different than any you care to see.

So, perhaps we won't be having any holiday dinners together. I'll get over it.

And, PLEEEEZE, don't bother trotting out your Racing/Pick6/Zito/Beyer/NYRA/Respected Handicapper/Dictionary Expert (new!!) Cirriculum Vitae!! it's not necessary. We all surely know it very well now.

Take it in the spirit offered.

[blackthroatedwind]

Again, you must be right, as usual. Should know that by now, you make a point of telling us often enough and everyone else is just (fill in your favorite adjective/pronoun).... Really, not everyone other than yourself is as naive, limited, or (again, fill in as you wish, but of course some mental capacity reference is always fun!!) as you'd like to think.

You profess so much and yet resort to this same trash anytime anyone takes a view any different than any you care to see.

So, perhaps we won't be having any holiday dinners together. I'll get over it.

And, PLEEEEZE, don't bother trotting out your Racing/Pick6/Zito/Beyer/NYRA/Respected Handicapper/Dictionary Expert (new!!) Cirriculum Vitae!! it's not necessary. We all surely know it very well now.

Take it in the spirit offered.


So, your defense of accusing someone of racism because, in this case, you don't know the true meaning of a word is to....what....trash me?

That makes sense and dramatically increases your credibility.

Nice try.

[SentToStud]

So, your defense of accusing someone of racism because, in this case, you don't know the true meaning of a word is to....what....trash me?

That makes sense and dramatically increases your credibility.

Nice try.

Please, I'm not trying anything. Really, now. But, nice try.

The vulgar reference is lousy writing, no matter who's friendly with the guy . By the way, just which of the listed definitions of the word would you think he was going for (of course, that assume you can read his mind as well as mine which, of course, we have no reason to doubt)?

[blackthroatedwind]

Please, I'm not trying anything. Really, now. But, nice try.

The vulgar reference is lousy writing, no matter who's friendly with the guy . By the way, just which of the listed definitions of the word would you think he was going for (of course, that assume you can read his mind as well as mine which, of course, we have no reason to doubt)?

You are trying something. Instead of seeing at least the possibility that you misunderstood his use of the word " vulgar " you just trashed me.

You most certainly are trying something. Don't think you can post what you did and then play the injured party.

You don't like the article, or his writing, fine...but the constant unfounded accusations of racism are tiresome....at best.

[SentToStud]

So, your defense of accusing someone of racism because, in this case, you don't know the true meaning of a word is to....what....trash me?

That makes sense and dramatically increases your credibility.

Nice try.

on second thought, F it. The last time we did this, I moved it to PM and, despite you saying you would, you never got back to me. So what's the point?

[SentToStud]

You are trying something. Instead of seeing at least the possibility that you misunderstood his use of the word " vulgar " you just trashed me.

You most certainly are trying something. Don't think you can post what you did and then play the injured party.

You don't like the article, or his writing, fine...but the constant unfounded accusations of racism are tiresome....at best.

Man, you are some special kind of something. My first post wasn't even a response to anything you wrote. Was it? But I suppose defending your friends vigorously without exception is an admirable quality.

[blackthroatedwind]

Man, you are some special kind of something. My first post wasn't even a response to anything you wrote. Was it? But I suppose defending your friends vigorously without exception is an admirable quality.


So, people can't respond to posts unless they are specifically directed towards them? Good to know.

As for why I didn't respond further with another PM, I ended up covering everything that seemed necessary, and didn't see that another PM was necessary. Had I known you were waiting for another I most certainly would have sent one. My apologies.

[Cajungator26]

Why does everything have to turn into a racisim deal? I didn't see Beyer as using the term "vulgar" in that kind of manner. :confused:

[SentToStud]

So, people can't respond to posts unless they are specifically directed towards them? Good to know.

As for why I didn't respond further with another PM, I ended up covering everything that seemed necessary, and didn't see that another PM was necessary. Had I known you were waiting for another I most certainly would have sent one. My apologies.

Well, you took offense to my opinion on his article and characterized it as me trashing on you. So be it.

As for the PM, whatever... I'll do my best to have a decent evening and I hope you'll also enjoy yours. Must go on some how.

If I had Crist's and Beyer's emails handy, I'd shoot them a note. It's on my to do list for tomorrow.

[Coach Pants]

Why does everything have to turn into a racisim deal? I didn't see Beyer as using the term "vulgar" in that kind of manner. :confused:
I'm a victim too!!!

*cries*

[blackthroatedwind]

Well, you took offense to my opinion on his article and characterized it as me trashing on you. So be it.

As for the PM, whatever... I'll do my best to have a decent evening and I hope you'll also enjoy yours. Must go on some how.

If I had Crist's and Beyer's emails handy, I'd shoot them a note. It's on my to do list for tomorrow.

I merely suggested that because you didn't understand the word " vulgar " in Beyer's usage of it, as did another poster may I add, that you were being unfair in making accusations of racism. It seems I am not the only one who feels that way. You are not the only one to disagree with some of Beyer's comments and the other posts were not criticized for their opinions. In your case it seemed you misinterpreted his verbeage and that was specifically what I was pointing out.

And, furthermore, you did trash ME in a following post. That's a fact. This was your response to my suggestion that you should look up the definition of the word " vulgar ".

I'm sure they are looking forward to your e-mails. I have already shared your thoughts with Beyer if that makes you feel better. I wouldn't want you to think your voice went unheard.

I to hope you enjoy your evening...and all your days and evenings as well.

[SentToStud]

I merely suggested that because you didn't understand the word " vulgar " in Beyer's usage of it, as did another poster may I add, that you were being unfair in making accusations of racism. It seems I am not the only one who feels that way. You are not the only one to disagree with some of Beyer's comments and the other posts were not criticized for their opinions. In your case it seemed you misinterpreted his verbeage and that was specifically what I was pointing out.

And, furthermore, you did trash ME in a following post. That's a fact. This was your response to my suggestion that you should look up the definition of the word " vulgar ".

I'm sure they are looking forward to your e-mails. I have already shared your thoughts with Beyer if that makes you feel better. I wouldn't want you to think your voice went unheard.

I to hope you enjoy your evening...and all your days and evenings as well.


I feel much better now. I did send Beyer an email at the Wash Post. I'll be certain to share with you that he has responded, when he does.

Still waiting for whch definition of vulgar you thought was appropriate to be used there. Take your time....

[blackthroatedwind]

I feel much better now. I did send Beyer an email at the Wash Post. I'll be certain to share with you that he has responded, when he does.

Still waiting for whch definition of vulgar you thought was approriate to be used there. Take your time....

I gave you the definition in my first response....as did another poster.

I am also curious as to why you believe Beyer should or will respond to your e-mail. Is he, or any writer, under some sort of obligation?

[Bold Reasoning]

I agree with much of what Andrew Beyer is saying, but I think he is stereotyping the United Arab Emirates. I saw a newsmagazine piece on ABC, NBC, or CBS(I cannot remember which) which made Dubai look like a farcry from Iraq, Iran, and Syria. The report spoke about everyone having a free education and healthcare, among other things. It seemed like a benevolent monarchy. I am not suggesting it is like living in a democracy, but it sure seemed a longway from the hellholes of the Middle East. So is Mr. Beyer being totally fair? Does he wish to paint a picture of the Maktoums that is negative, beyond the fact of them controlling our racing industry?:confused:

[SentToStud]

Mr. Beyer,
I read your article regarding Darley, "Call it Checkbook Horsemanship," with interest. While I found the article interesting, I am disappointed in your use of the word "vulgar" to describe the appearance of the actions of the Maktoums. While I believe there is arguably some merit in providing background on the source of the Maktoum wealth, I, as I expect did many readers, took exception and offense to your choice of words.

Sincerely,
Bruce ********
Plantation, Florida
954-***-****

[Cunningham Racing]

An Andy Beyer post that is negative in nature....thats a new one :rolleyes:

[Cajungator26]

I'm a victim too!!!

*cries*

LMFAO!!! :D

[blackthroatedwind]

Any columnist that is not illiciting strong responses, either or both positive and negative, is not doing his or her job.

[SentToStud]

I gave you the definition in my first response....as did another poster.

I am also curious as to why you believe Beyer should or will respond to your e-mail. Is he, or any writer, under some sort of obligation?

Of course he is not obligated to either read or respond. Nor would I expect he would.

Don't see your offering as the "use of the word" listed nor is it one of the listed synonyms...

from Dictionary.com:

vul‧gar  /ˈvʌlgər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vuhl-ger] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1. characterized by ignorance of or lack of good breeding or taste: vulgar ostentation.
2. indecent; obscene; lewd: a vulgar work; a vulgar gesture.
3. crude; coarse; unrefined: a vulgar peasant.
4. of, pertaining to, or constituting the ordinary people in a society: the vulgar masses.
5. current; popular; common: a vulgar success; vulgar beliefs.
6. spoken by, or being in the language spoken by, the people generally; vernacular: vulgar tongue.
7. lacking in distinction, aesthetic value, or charm; banal; ordinary: a vulgar painting.
–noun 8. Archaic. the common people.
9. Obsolete. the vernacular.


—Synonyms 1. unrefined, inelegant, low, coarse, ribald. See common. 3. boorish, rude. 6. colloquial.

[blackthroatedwind]

From the American Heritage Dictionary...


Ostentatious in appearance or quality; pretentious.

Example in the disctionary....." a vulgar display of wealth ".


Just to be clearer....


Ostentatious....

Pretentious display meant to impress others; boastful showiness




Just to be clear...I assume you realize words can and often do have several meanings.

[Cajungator26]

From the American Heritage Dictionary...


Ostentatious in appearance or quality; pretentious.

Example in the disctionary....." a vulgar display of wealth ".


Just to be clearer....


Ostentatious....

Pretentious display meant to impress others; boastful showiness




Just to be clear...I assume you realize words can and often do have several meanings.

Dammit, this is a VULGAR post! :eek: J/K :D

[Cardus]

Mr. Beyer,
I read your article regarding Darley, "Call it Checkbook Horsemanship," with interest. While I found the article interesting, I am disappointed in your use of the word "vulgar" to describe the appearance of the actions of the Maktoums. While I believe there is arguably some merit in providing background on the source of the Maktoum wealth, I, as I expect did many readers, took exception and offense to your choice of words.

Sincerely,
Bruce ********
Plantation, Florida
954-***-****

From a writing perspective, Beyer fulfilled his obligation as a columnist, as evidenced by your e-mail to him: he provoked a reaction. Never boring, Beyer always take a definitive stand -- not always a direct one, as when he lamented the presence of the "supertrainers" without mentioning anyone by name -- and is a provocative writer.

Also, Beyer used precisely the correct word -- no easy feat -- to describe Shake Mo's spending habits. Even if adjusted for inflation, I suspect that his spending is off the charts. Therefore, it is vulgar.

If you're a racing columnist and it's Breeders' Cup week, you should author a column regarding the central human figure. This time around, it's Mahktoum. His nearly unrestrained spending is off-putting and not the mark of an expert "horseman." His acumen regarding studying the Thoroughbred's confirmation and understanding of breeding is horsemanship. Buying Discreet Cat is not.

Beyer hits a homerun concering Makhtoum's aloofness; no warmth will be associated with a Kentucky Derby win or Triple Crown achievement. I'd say the same thing if Coolmore won either, too.

I don't know where anyone concludes that his is a racist rant. It's not there. Beyer has lamented the dominant role that economics plays in this sport in place of the competition. During a teleconference to announce Smarty Jones' retirement, Beyer exclaimed something like, "Does it always have to be about the money?" His target was Chappy Chapman. Beyer's repulsion has nothing to do with race. He is all about the racing.

[SentToStud]

From the American Heritage Dictionary...


Ostentatious in appearance or quality; pretentious.

Example in the disctionary....." a vulgar display of wealth ".


Just to be clearer....


Ostentatious....

Pretentious display meant to impress others; boastful showiness

Just to be clear...I assume you realize words can and often do have several meanings.


Just how far down the list is this use of the word?

What are those listed above/before it?

Tell you what, go ask the next 10 people you talk to what they think "Vulgar" means." If any of them come up with that, I'll .....

Holding my breath, Phone ringing!!!. "Bruce, it's Mr. Beyer on line 5."

[2MinsToPost]

the question begs to be asked so I will ask it with clarification off the bat - I am not inciting an ongoing "fight" nor suggesting what ones views are based on their posts on here, this is the internet after all. with that said..............

would this be an issue if the family was born in the Good Ole' USA?

Their money is as good as anyone else's, it'll spend at Wendy's and it will buy horses.

[Cajungator26]

the question begs to be asked so I will ask it with clarification off the bat - I am not inciting an ongoing "fight" nor suggesting what ones views are based on their posts on here, this is the internet after all. with that said..............

would this be an issue if the family was born in the Good Ole' USA?

Their money is as good as anyone else's, it'll spend at Wendy's and it will buy horses.

If I bought horses in the manner that the Sheik's do, it would be considered a vulgar display just as much... JMO. They are free to do whatever they like and I have nothing against them for it... that's just how it is.

[blackthroatedwind]

Just how far down the list is this use of the word?

What are those listed above/before it?

Tell you what, go ask the next 10 people you talk to what they think "Vulgar" means." If any of them come up with that, I'll .....

Holding my breath, Phone ringing!!!. "Bruce, it's Mr. Beyer on line 5."


So now your defense is that it isn't the first or second definition of the word that was offered?

A simple " I guess I misunderstood " would have sufficed.

I'm just glad we could clear things up for you. Feel free to check in any time in the future you are unclear as to the meaning of a word or phrase.

[Cardus]

the question begs to be asked so I will ask it with clarification off the bat - I am not inciting an ongoing "fight" nor suggesting what ones views are based on their posts on here, this is the internet after all. with that said..............

would this be an issue if the family was born in the Good Ole' USA?

Their money is as good as anyone else's, it'll spend at Wendy's and it will buy horses.

Yes, Beyer would make an example, so to speak, of anyone who spends money like Shake Mo.

It's sport, it's about competition.

[SentToStud]

So now your defense is that it isn't the first or second definition of the word that was offered?

A simple " I guess I misunderstood " would have sufficed.

I'm just glad we could clear things up for you. Feel free to check in any time in the future you are unclear as to the meaning of a word or phrase.

Well, you apparently feel the need to declare victory. That's not a big surprise. Y

ou choose to refuse to believe that people could be offended by his poor choice of words or, alternatively, you will defend blindly. Noone with anything other than misguided loyalty would read the sentence and paragraph (context, sir) and come up what you've commented. It's also more than a bit disingenuous for you to have parsed out the only portion of the Am Hert definition that you could remotely use to defend the indefensible.

That's ok. As far as what "would have sufficed," I suppose you could have gone through all the definitions of the word listed and said, "I'm sure he didn't mean this. Or this... Or this either. You could have kept going until you could say, 'THIS is what he meant.'" But no.

[blackthroatedwind]

Well, you apparently feel the need to declare victory. That's not a big surprise. Y

ou choose to refuse to believe that people could be offended by his poor choice of words or, alternatively, you will defend blindly. Noone with anything other than misguided loyalty would read the sentence and paragraph (context, sir) and come up what you've commented. It's also more than a bit disingenuous for you to have parsed out the only portion of the Am Hert definition that you could remotely use to defend the indefensible.

That's ok. As far as what "would have sufficed," I suppose you could have gone through all the definitions of the word listed and said, "I'm sure he didn't mean this. Or this... Or this either. You could have kept going until you could say, 'THIS is what he meant.'" But no.

Bababooyee offered the exact same definition in his interpretation and response to you, so clearly I am not the only one that sees it that way. Interesting that you have only argued with me and, apparently, pretended his similar disagreements don't exist. Another poster, Cajungator, expressed similar thoughts.

You also should at least entertain the possibility that I am in a position to know what he meant. I may well have asked him.

[DEES3]

This ridiculous argument over the meaning of the word "vulgar" reminds me a lot of the situation where a staffer in the Washington D.C.'s mayor's office was publicly ostracized and eventually resigned for using the word "niggardly" to describe a a budget in a public staff meeting. Before getting in an uproar it's pretty helpful to actually know what the word means.

[Cardus]

This ridiculous argument over the meaning of the word "vulgar" reminds me a lot of the situation where a staffer in the Washington D.C.'s mayor's office was publicly ostracized and eventually resigned for using the word "niggardly" to describe a a budget in a public staff meeting. Before getting in an uproar it's pretty helpful to actually know what the word means.

I was just thinking about that sorry episode the other day.

It's too bad that some people thought that niggardly was a vulgar word.

[Danzig]

I believe the same thing. Maybe I'm wrong here but I know that over the years, I've warned people about criticizing the way the Sheikhs have been trying to win the Derby. It's been my feeling for years, since watching them dominate the European racing scene, that if they so wanted to dominate American racing the same way, they could. It's been my belief that all of the criticism would lead them to taking an "oh, u don't think we can dominate your game?" kind of attitude and lead them to buying any and everything just to show that they can.

maybe next april he can buy the top 25 in graded earnings....he'll win the derby for sure! wonder if it would feel so good that way?

[Danzig]

This ridiculous argument over the meaning of the word "vulgar" reminds me a lot of the situation where a staffer in the Washington D.C.'s mayor's office was publicly ostracized and eventually resigned for using the word "niggardly" to describe a a budget in a public staff meeting. Before getting in an uproar it's pretty helpful to actually know what the word means.

a shame...i remember that story, and am reminded of it at times when people mis-hear, or misunderstand someone else. hysteria ensues, when the dust clears everyone wonders what the heck happened....

[blackthroatedwind]

a shame...i remember that story, and am reminded of it at times when people mis-hear, or misunderstand someone else. hysteria ensues, when the dust clears everyone wonders what the heck happened....

Thank god that never happens on the internet.

[SentToStud]

Bababooyee offered the exact same definition in his interpretation and response to you, so clearly I am not the only one that sees it that way. Interesting that you have only argued with me and, apparently, pretended his similar disagreements don't exist. Another poster, Cajungator, expressed similar thoughts.

You also should at least entertain the possibility that I am in a position to know what he meant. I may well have asked him.

Why would I care if you asked him to the point of wondering if you had? Sounds silly. I don't really care about your interpretation of what he said. Why would I? I did send him that email (perhaps you are already aware of that.... (shall I entertain that for a bit?)) and if he replies that's fine; if not, well that's fine too.

It's got to be thrilling to you that Bababoo has mustered up behind you. I'm reminded of an old proverb, "In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is King."

As for not paying enough attention to Baba, et al, ditto. Hope that covers it sufficiently for you. And frankly, the last thing I'd care to do is "egg" anyone on. I expressed my thoughts, you saw reason to respond as you did, etc....

Next time I offend you, I'll make sure to find some obscure use of the offensive term that translates into some term of endearment. That way, you and Baba can segue into recess unencumbered by unhappy thoughts.

[Slewbopper]

This ridiculous argument over the meaning of the word "vulgar" reminds me a lot of the situation where a staffer in the Washington D.C.'s mayor's office was publicly ostracized and eventually resigned for using the word "niggardly" to describe a a budget in a public staff meeting. Before getting in an uproar it's pretty helpful to actually know what the word means.
It upset Marion so much that he turned to hookers and crack.

[Danzig]

It upset Marion so much that he turned to hookers and crack.

b!tch set me up....

[repent]

Take it to the extreme. What if one day all 20 entrants in the KY Derby are owned by the Sheiks? That's the day I will just turn off the TV.


I dont care who owns them as long as I can bet on them.

i know this,
when handicapping the owner line is one of the last things I look at, and its really just more about curiousity.


Repent

[blackthroatedwind]

I dont care who owns them as long as I can bet on them.

i know this,
when handicapping the owner line is one of the last things I look at, and its really just more about curiousity.


Repent

I actually do pay some attention when it comes to first time starters. I'm not sure it helps a great deal but it feels like with some of the bigger trainers ( say Pletcher for example ) there are definitely owners that feel more likely to pop first out. It's hardly an exact science but I think if you paid a little more attention you might develop a bit of a feel.

[repent]

I actually do pay some attention when it comes to first time starters. I'm not sure it helps a great deal but it feels like with some of the bigger trainers ( say Pletcher for example ) there are definitely owners that feel more likely to pop first out. It's hardly an exact science but I think if you paid a little more attention you might develop a bit of a feel.


ok, fair enough.
i look, its just not something I weigh too heavily unless there is a significant trend I have noticed in trainer/owner combo.
thanks for the advice.


Repent

[blackthroatedwind]

ok, fair enough.
i look, its just not something I weigh too heavily unless there is a significant trend I have noticed in trainer/owner combo.
thanks for the advice.


Repent

I agree. It's impossible, assuming no " information ", to weigh it very heavily. I guess it's sort of a final decision maker.

[FairPlay]

Back to the Sheikhs purchasing geldings, I've read that one did offer to purchase Lava Man at some point last year for $1.5 Million. That offer has been discussed in the mainstream press, but I am not going to go research it now.

[Hwjb]

I can give you two reasons that Lava Man is missing as to why they don't buy him---if you get my drift. ;) (i.e. the Bob Barker treatment). If it was solely about buying the talent on the track they've have bought up all sorts of horses they didn't. Notice Lawyer Ron, Afleet Alex, and the like didn't go to the sheikhs. They didn't want to try to stand them. I heard they snubbed Smarty Jones because they figured his sire was good enough for them and they didn't need sonny boy.

They want stallions to stand and broodmares to send to those stallions if possible. They're paying for the stallion in advance of his track performance really and if they make several million surely paying $1.4 mil or $5 mil is chump change. I was trying to think of a prominent gelding they've bought...has there been one? I'm honestly drawing a blank. Not one they've gelded later per se but did they even do that with a horse they'd bought as a colt?


Unbelievable lack of knowledge/research from some before making comments merely to damn the Sheikhs.
Sheikh Mo has bought Formal Decree and Stage Gift, both progressive geldings, in the past few days.

[blackthroatedwind]

Unbelievable lack of knowledge/research from some before making comments merely to damn the Sheikhs.
Sheikh Mo has bought Formal Decree and Stage Gift, both progressive geldings, in the past few days.

It's just good to know the Sheik will buy any horse. I, for one, was concerned for a second.