Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Definition of "Sporting"... (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29839)

Linny 05-21-2009 09:06 PM

Clearly Jackson loves the spotlight and has the money to but stock that will keep him there.
IfsRA really worth$10M (or was she 2 weeks ago)? Realistically, she is by a young sire with no BMS record. Her family is solid but hardly glamourous. If Jackson chooses to race the offspring she produces, that slims the margin even more as a Curlin X Rachel Alexandra page would certainly draw a big price. Sure she's "priceless" now but had she not run in or won the Preakness, not exactly.

He is like many rich men (and women) who buy what they want whether a racehorse or work of art or a rare gem. They want it because they want something that is one of a kind. When Samuel Riddle was offered a million dollars for Man O' War (a rare sum in the 20's, certainly for a horse) he said (I paraphrase) "Many men have a million dollars, only I have Man O' War." That sums it up.

ateamstupid 05-21-2009 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
I am not saying that any of this is a negative for the sport but lets call him what he is, an egotistical billionaire who loves the spotlight.

Which is pretty much what I said. He's obviously an egomaniac, but to call what he did w/RA and Curlin "greedy" and "unsportsmanlike" is scary dumb.

Cannon Shell 05-21-2009 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid
Which is pretty much what I said. He's obviously an egomaniac, but to call what he did w/RA and Curlin "greedy" and "unsportsmanlike" is scary dumb.

yeah the greedy and unsportsmanlike are strange choices

Ogygian 05-26-2009 08:27 AM

Looks like I took a beating on this one, which is ok. I will try to explain the reasoning behind my opinions.
When I said the word "greed", it had nothing to do with finances at all, it had everything to do with breeding. I have to be honest, if I had not heard Hal Wiggins talk about Rachel and the plan he had already mapped out for her and the fact that he "liked" to have 5 weeks in between races I may not have been as pissed. In hindsight now we can say..."it was good for the game".
In my eyes it felt like he swooped in, bought her, rushed her back. He wasn't thinking at the time, "This will be good for the game" or "this is a great filly, Hal isn't testing her, let's buy her and test her". No he bought her with the sole intention of saying I am going to breed two Preakness winners together. She ran one heck of a race and he made the right decision...by the way everything is working out, my guess she will not run in the Belmont will have been correct, there is way to much back and forth going. And I still won't be surprised if a phantom injury pops up...

Left Bank 05-26-2009 08:30 AM

I don't think it is very sportsmanlike for what the ASS Mussen/Jackson camp is doing to Borel.Make your damn decision!! Stop leaving Calvin hanging.

Danzig 05-26-2009 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Left Bank
I don't think it is very sportsmanlike for what the ASS Mussen/Jackson camp is doing to Borel.Make your damn decision!! Stop leaving Calvin hanging.

oh please...it's the nature of the game, and i seriously doubt calvin is complaining. he has the luxury of waiting. besides, if they say she's going, and then she has a lackluster work, they just cost borel a ride in the belmont as woolly would then find and name another jock.

Danzig 05-26-2009 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogygian
Looks like I took a beating on this one, which is ok. I will try to explain the reasoning behind my opinions.
When I said the word "greed", it had nothing to do with finances at all, it had everything to do with breeding. I have to be honest, if I had not heard Hal Wiggins talk about Rachel and the plan he had already mapped out for her and the fact that he "liked" to have 5 weeks in between races I may not have been as pissed. In hindsight now we can say..."it was good for the game".
In my eyes it felt like he swooped in, bought her, rushed her back. He wasn't thinking at the time, "This will be good for the game" or "this is a great filly, Hal isn't testing her, let's buy her and test her". No he bought her with the sole intention of saying I am going to breed two Preakness winners together. She ran one heck of a race and he made the right decision...by the way everything is working out, my guess she will not run in the Belmont will have been correct, there is way to much back and forth going. And I still won't be surprised if a phantom injury pops up...

if his sole intent in buying her was for breeding, she'd already be in the shed. as for a 'phantom injury'...i'm not quite sure where that's coming from. he may have had no choice but to run curlin, but he certainly showed no fear in doing so once he had no other option.

i can't believe i'm at all in the position of defending jess jackson... he had the wherewithal to buy the top filly in the country, quite possibly the top horse in the country. he likes her pedigree, he once tried to buy her sire and was unable to.

johnny pinwheel 05-27-2009 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek
Taking a shot, when you could be proven wrong, I consider sporting.

Doing the same old thing like the Mosses with Zenyatta, not sporting.

Trying new things like Turf or running in the Classic when you're not terribly fond of the surface, but understand that the fans want to see it - sporting.

Scratching because of being highweighted like Frankel - not sporting.

Just because someone monetarily benefits from sporting actions doesn't make it any less sporting in my eyes.

i agree with this more than any of the crap about jackson. the original post is foolish. who cares about his ego or personal motives. what he does is GOOD for this game. he takes curlin, the horse of the year to the breeders cup on that poly crap knowing full well his horse is probably best but up against the surface. most would of stayed away. he puts up 10 million buys rachel and enters her in the preakness. biggest racing story this year. name one of these other knuckle heads that would of done it? this, at a time when racing needs stars. i noticed zenyatta scratched at CD. she probably stood no chance in the mud on a dirt track. we will never know because the connections took the safe bet and ran her on the cushion. this guy, jackson does not play "safe", he puts his money where his mouth is, which is more than i can say about most others. i am a gambler, not a chalk player and so is this guy. he is a throw back to the days where owners showed up no matter what to prove their horse is the fastest. most have lost sight of this and go for the easy stakes money/breeding dollar. its just one reason that the game suffers from lack of fan interest! here he offers the "buzz" of the year in our sport and people are dissing him. when these tracks start closing don't thank jess jackson for it !

sumitas 05-27-2009 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Linny
...
IfsRA really worth$10M (or was she 2 weeks ago)? Realistically, she is by a young sire with no BMS record. Her family is solid but hardly glamourous...

Rachel's 1-o family, 1925 Champion 2 year old filly Friar's Carse is the main reine de course, has produced many notable runners to this day . Maybe Rachel will add the glamour this family deserves . I confess that I am biased toward the 1-o family because of a certain muscular 2 year old colt I am fond of . If his 1-o family isn't glamorous then maybe his 5x6 Miss Disco fits the bill .

Besides Rachel, Song of Navarone and Caribbean Sunset are probably the biggest 1-o family stars today . In recent years Storm Song, Honey Ryder, High Cotton and Trust N Luck have added some glamour to the family .

Maybe Ogygian should add Sportin Man to his virtual stable .


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.