What owner would want one of theirs in a race with a Gill ?

Actually its genuine fear.. A lot of kids are getting hurt

What exactly are they supposed to see if a trainer or vet block a horse prior to prerace inspection?

most likely the reason you see Gills and his type at track like penn is they must get past the vets get in the race, a guy like a Jacobsen will claim a horse for 20-25 and run em for 5k. You wont see as many break down during a race but you will see just as many disappear because either the NY stewards wont let em get back in a race or they broke down in training, or they just cant run anymore. Rarely do those type trainers horse last from season to season or meet to meet. They know they are holding a "hot potato" and the last one holding is the loser.

I'm not talking about jocks that ride for Gill, I am talking about all the other jocks and horses in a race with Gill.

The guy/gal taking the call on the Gill horse knows the risk, win at 20% or get put in the dirt 12%.

I know the Mig story well, and we all know the inherent risk in racing. Even the PG's of this board are not ignorant or, perhaps in your case, arrogant enough to not realize this is a sport where breakdowns happen but this is a differnt case.

This is a case of an owner and his team of trainers are not caring about the horses and/or those who ride. He would rather win at 20%, and turn profits, then care for the issues at hand. Gill and crew are creating an environment where the inherited risk of racing is multiplied by the actions of Gill himself, his training staff and those who let those horses race. To think this is just part of racing is wrong, this is a man who cares about making a buck more then the lives of his horses, his jocks, his excercise riders, and those who are on the track with him. He is no different than Paragallo and others who should be banned from the sport.

The alarming rate at which he has horses going down has even the jockey colony at Penn National running scared, trainers reaching out to track managment and yet you think this is something that is just part of the sport and should not be looked at any other way?

12%?

So 120 times a jockey has hit the dirt on a Gill horse at Penn National over the last year?

Good post.

DrugS, you're watching more races than anyone, have you seen any barn turn out 14 horses that have either pulled up, DNF or completely broke down in 3 months? While the quoted poster's percentage may be off this is a ridiculous amount.

Probably Dale Baird.

Obviously an inflated statistic to make my point. However, if you look at how many starts his two trainers have made this year (49) and how many have brokedown (2), that would be 4%. I am not sure however that all starts made by Delahoussaye and Adamo have been owned by Gill, so that percentage could be higher and closer to 12% than 0%.

If you streteched those stats out over the last three months, assuming that both trainers made the similar starts (which easily could not be the case), then you are looking at a 10% breakdown rate. I would guess, that is considerably higher than Baird or anyone else you could some up with.

You mean to tell me "Sting" Ray Ganpath wont even ride for him anymore??? :zz: :wf

I could understand the jocks not wanting to ride for him at Philly Park - he's 8-for-117 with a laughable $0.89 ROI at Philly since November.

Mitchell would exceed those numbers if he ran as many and was strictly claiming horses.

I know an owner that had a horse with Mitchell, claimed for 25k won for 50k two weeks later, then went on a losing streak just below that level down to 32k. The owner flat out told him to drop the horse as he cant win there and he is tired of paying the bills for the horse.....

two weeks later he won a nw1x for a 55k purse and ran a lifetime top. I have no clue what happened to the horse, he was running for 8k last I saw.

Also that same horse, when he won for the initial 50k we cleared many thousands on the horse, he was about 10/1 and Mitchell flat out said he should be 3/5 an hour before the races started.

I wonder why

More Gill goodies.

http://drf.com/news/article/110354.html

You could substitute just about any industry for horse racing and it's the same thing. It's the reason the government had to pass labor laws, safety laws, and, for all the pain-in-the-ass they can be, the reason labor unions formed. Because there are plenty of owners of any sort of business that are interested solely in making a profit and everything else is just expenses.

Agree with this, but part of the problem is he has a private farm and ships them in- and somehow he's skirting part of the prerace vet rules because of it. Don't know the laws on how that works in PA but that seems to be the rumor.

This thread is a bunch of misguided animal lovers not understanding two very fundamental things about horse racing.

1. The sport is all about money. Period. If there wasn't money to be won, hardly anyone would want to race horses. Only the already rich would be involved at all.

2. This is not a hobby. This is a business when you own the horses. Period. At the end of the month the owner can't tell the trainer, vet, dentist, etc that I shouldn't pay this month because I am a great person who didn't start my horse who has a slightly sore ankle. It doesn't work well, I've tried.

Gill is not the greatest person in the world, but he is running his stable like a business and if animal lovers don't like it, then don't support horse racing until they change all the rules to suit you. Period.

I've owned horses. It is a tough business in every aspect. Posting a bunch of crap about a guy or his practices (the same practices as many other but on a larger scale) is much easier.

As much as it pains me... Sharp post

So you don't care about the humans riding these horses at all? Interesting...

Also interesting to note that the Penn National Jockey Colony is the newest PETA Chapter of Pennsylvania.

This could possibly speak volumes about the type of person or at least the type of business person you are...

I guess your business model has changed?

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/sho...212#post594212

Why would you start a horse that has a sore ankle??

:tro:

A totally unethical and immoral statement. I suggest you invest in inanimate objects such as Wall Street.

It is what it is. Sometimes you start out with rose colored glasses. You learn the hard way when you go broke in the horse business. It all starts like a ray of sunshine, but then financial reality hits home.

Gill is operating like a business far more than I ever did. Which, is why I am now out of the horse racing business and he continues to make money.

I was in it for the fun. The financial aspect can take the fun out of a lot of fun things.

Bad luck hits everyone in the game. Gill has just learned to mitigate the risk through numbers.

If a horse is (successfully) given something (like cobra venom injection on the farm before the horse ships in to race) to hide a lameness, the lameness is hidden.

How do you think the vet is supposed to identify that? :rolleyes:

I believe the article said they were looking into 'some' vets (probably those that vet Gill's horses). Not the track vets.

You can still be part of a syndicate such as Dee Tee Stables for fun, and it doesn't cost much.

Good Question...but unfortunately it's done all the time.

1. If you are not rich enough as an owner to race horses and not abuse them in an attempt to earn money, you don't need to be in the business.

2. If you think money trumps the lives of horses, you don't need to be in the business.

3. If you want to consciously abuse animals in the name of business, by racing them when they should not be raced, just to make money, you need to not be in the sport.

4. If "It doesn't work well, I've tried" is your excuse, that other people force you to abuse your own animals to make money to pay your bills, then you need not only to not be in the sport, you need a spine transplant.

5. If the above post defining "two fundamental things" is truely how you think of horses and horse racing, you need to not be in the sport.

It was more a statement of truth and the obvious.

Right now ... Gill has an army of cheap cripples and it's all about winning races and having constant action without subjecting himself to losing a colossal fortune.

He's the Shiek Mohammed of the $5,000 claimer.

The difference is that one goes after the choicest broodmares, yearlings, 2yo's, and proven racing stock money can buy ... and couldn't care less how great a fortune he pisses away.

The other goes after the choicest low level claimers - horses who have shown or hint at ability but have big 'For Sale' signs on them - and likely aren't entered for a claiming tag of a few thousand dollars more because they have issues. He wants to roll the dice, do some vet work, and try to turn them around.

Get a grip on reality - all horses are expensive. From hunter-jumpers to QH halter to gaited horses.

If you can't afford to play in any sport or business based upon the performance of a live animal, as you don't have the financial werewithal to do it without compromising the animal, get out.

And that goes for people who breed show dogs, show cats, show cows, and show mice, too. The only difference is the $$$ invested.

Either you care what happens to the animals, or you don't. Saying you can't make money in "the horse business" without sacrificing the animal to the dollar is a lie that proves only what an unsuccessful businessperson one is.

There is nothing wrong with the above as a business model, IMO, but one better realize that more dollars will be spent to keep their investment in safe racing condition when animals with performance-limiting chronic health problems and tenuous physical ability form your stable.

One can't ignore that care, and justify it by saying, "I'm playing at the cheap levels, so the animal care must be necessarily cheap, too". That's a cop out.

It's not business. The guy just likes watching his horses win and wants as much action as possible.

I am skeptical that the horses he has in his barn are any worse off in his hands than they are in the hands of more than a few other barns at that track.

There are a whole lot of things to not like about Gill .... but he's so blown out of proportion it isn't even funny.

I would have to say its a pretty bold statement from riders that they dont want to ride this man's horses. I spent alot of years in the jock's room and I can tell you that we all knew who the trainers and horses were that could get you hurt and if we saw someone on one that had been ridden by someone else that knew the horse was bad we told each other to be carefull.
I know alot of people think riders are stupid but we know WHO the bad guys are with the bad horses.

Honu, have you ever seen jocks unite against one guy's stock like this before?

No I havent , that is why I think it is such a profound statement .

I wonder what the immortal horsey board poster .. and sneaky great last decade move-up trainer Steve Krebs would have to say about this....


I'm guessing .....