I wouldn't want a horse capable of beating the Triple Crown winner on the outside looking in because they didn't fit into this. How could people take it seriously if they wonder about whether the best horse was in the race? You beat the horses that show up on the day. Cherry picking a smaller group is an attempt to make it easier for the horse attempting to win it. Thousands of horses are nominated for the TC and that's your pool (unless you end up with a horse like Rachel Alexandra who wouldn't have been included by her owners or whatever committee or points system would've been responsible for this 25-30 TC eligible horse group). Not everybody's ready to go at the same time. How would you decide who to include? It'd be like a version of the Derby future wager or something. The Triple Crown isn't an invitational and we don't want a 3-4 horse field in the Belmont. If we do things Coburn's way, that means no AP Indy, no Rachel Alexandra. They didn't run in the Derby, they'd be out.

Things didn't work out this year. They might in the future. Frankly I thought higher of previous TC attempters than I did Chrome and I wasn't that worked up about it this year for whatever reason. I liked him fine, thought he was gorgeous and had a story they write movies and books about so it'd be great for the sport, but it just didn't grab me at the same emotional level as in the past. Didn't have nearly the nervousness that I did about Smarty Jones, Charismatic, or Real Quiet. Coburn really left a sour taste for me. I wonder if he'll even want to apologize. I feel like he'll double down with the griping and bad sportsmanship when he has a chance to think about it and get even angrier. Someone will stick a mic in his face and we'll get plenty of soundbites and bad PR. He'd do everyone a favor if he hushed for awhile and let everyone calm down if he didn't feel like taking it back. I'm looking forward to the end of the year honors where some people will be railing about East Coast bias if Chrome doesn't win HOY or whatever. Ugh.

For what it's worth, Art Sherman's carried himself really well. Probably the benefit of decades of experience. He knew he wasn't gonna win the race at the end and handled it with grace. Disappointed but classy as far as I could see. Poor Mrs. Coburn got the icy death stare for poking her husband. The freeze frame is classic.

Triple Crown isn't a thing
 

I'm an old guy.

I've gone on my share of rants, especially when I lose a big bet. This, however was horrifying because of the high profile and the danger that this thinking poses to the game we love.

The "Triple Crown" is not a real thing. The beauty of the Triple Crown is that the races are NOT officially connected. If you've been to Churchill Downs, Pimlico, and Belmont, you see quickly that THEIR race is all that matters. Winning all three races is a true test of greatness, because you have to beat all comers, in differing conditions over a ridiculously short period of time. It's a decathlon.

Any change would cheapen things for the winner. With the status quo we always have a hope that a winner will come forward and take his (or her -heh) place alongside the greats of our game. If you restrict the field, or change the dates, you WILL NEVER have a TRUE Triple Crown winner again.

Classic !!!

Privman tweeted that Art Sherman fully expected Coburn to apologize today, but that Coburn went further into a rut today.

The highs and lows.....not everyone can handle them.

Sorry, I disagree. Leave the races alone.

The derby just found a different way to decide the 20 starters. If pimlico and Belmont get too many entrants, they have ways to decide who gets in. As for requiring a horse has to run in one to move on to the next...I find that ridiculous.

People spend far too much time worrying about producing a tc winner. It is not the sole arbiter of what makes a good horse. Its an interesting sideline to some good races.
One thing I would like to see, is a bonus format like they used to have. Nothing encourages people to start a horse more than money

Pops is digging himself deeper this morning. amazing how things can turn so fast.

An emotional rant yesterday, perhaps. Comparing Tonalist being allowed in the Belmont to him playing basketball against a kid in a wheelchair today, unacceptable.

"@horseracinghl: Steve Coburn on GMA says "I stand by what I said.""

"@horseracinghl: Coburn adds "It says Triple Crown. Those 20 horses that run in the Derby should be the ones to run for the Triple Crown.""

"@horseracinghl: Coburn comparing having to run against fresh horses to playing basketball against a child in a wheelchair."

He and Gwyneth Paltrow must have taken the same public speaking course.

Coburn is clearly a bitter, poor sport. No argument there. The dangerous part of his comments is the millions of knuckleheads who watch 1-3 horse races per year who tuned into last night's broadcast and said "gee, this guy has a really good point."

If Coburn had his way, the Belmont would routinely feature three horse fields. I guess he wanted a match race against Ride on Curlin and General A Rod for the Triple Crown?

I was hoping that, with the benefit of some time to reflect, Coburn would walk yesterday's statements back. Now, he's got to stop digging: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...-not-apologize.

Guy is a drunk'in idiot! He was upset and felt that everyone jockeys/trainers/owners conspired to beat him. Happens all the time. Part of the game. For him to be so bitter and to make statements like that just shows how ignorant he is.

OK, I try to give people benefit of the doubt. He spoke yesterday during a moment of high emotion.

Now, he's doubling down? Dude, shut up already. Better to be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

Reminded me of cartman.

You knew it was coming...a feral self-absorbed heathen enjoying his temporary bully pulpit.

It's like he's new to this sport...if anything he should be prepared for that soul crushing moment.

But he's different. This win was guaranteed. The cameras were meant for thee.

And then they weren't.

Now he can go back to cali and embarrass his wife in a more familiar and comfortable environment.

Give him some credit people, he CAN count to THREE!

Luckily, Art Sherman makes up for Coburn's lack of class.

And to think he was touted as being DAP's PR department yesterday by NBC.

Oh I so called this. He's not sorry at all. I knew a guy like him just doubles down. He compared facing fresh horses to a guy like him playing basketball against a kid in a wheelchair? Uh. :zz: There were multiple reasons you could blame for the loss and the point is to show some grace and sportsmanship. Not blame others for a series you knew the rules of when you entered. He would've been happy to crow about beating the new shooters if he won. Only cared when he lost. Sucks that taking his ball and going home means no Chrome at Saratoga or Belmont this fall.

They did ask Sherman about Coburn and Chrome, and I disagreed with his comments about spacing the races but at least he was nice about it. I'd had a twinge of 'uh oh' when Sherman was asked how Chrome's doing after how so many horses start to tail off going into the Belmont. Sherman told NBC that he was doing 'better than I thought he would.' I figured it was surprise that he wasn't getting tired maybe because that plus the 'still gaining weight' comments from others seemed okay. In retrospect that was a odd way to put it. I talked myself into thinking it was just a weird way of saying he's doing well.

I will be so upset if these guys help provide impetus for changing the series. Really don't know that I'd feel like following the Triple Crown presented by Asterisk, esp. if it gives them the satisfaction and the 'we could've won if it'd been like this before.' If they get milked for PR in an effort to shift things, I'll lose respect for the people doing the shifting. Wasn't Phipps the one on NY's end?

Oh my ***** God I just read the comments from this morning...

Can they take one of Chrome's nasal strips and use it to sew his mouth shut?

Disgraceful and embarrassing behavior. What a classless idiot.

It's really too bad.
I understand the emotional outburst at first for losing, but to have that little knowledge and respect for the sport, and it's history and traditions is really embarrassing.

There are horse owners from all over the United States who have dreamed their whole lives and invested millions into this game for the chance to be sitting in his position yesterday.
He should have realized that and enjoyed what a special, once in a lifetime position he was in.

Terrible sportsmanship.

At his age he should understand that there are winners and loser's and you should relish when you are on a winning streak and know that the inevitable hard times will come. Whining anonymously on a Selections thread ( Me) is one thing but do to it publicly when you are fully aware that your words are being heard by tens of millions is a different story.

:tro::tro:


--Dunbar

I am fairly certain he's related to WC Fields!

Same demeanor.

You never see Coburn and Wilford Brimley together at the same time. just saying.

:tro::tro::tro:

Just watched the CBS evening news and guess what was a feature story. Checked the SI site to see the basketball score and guess what was the top story? There are almost 1,600 comments on the story. I don't think horseracing has gotten 1,600 comments on the SI site in total for 2 years. This is getting more publicity than if CC won the triple crown. It is amazing how people that have never ever been to a track are commenting. I am not sure if thats good or bad.

I can't believe that someone in the Sherman barn hasn't told him to drop it and that can he not see that he is making a fool of himself. Are they that afraid of losing the horse?
As much as I would have liked to see a TC winner I am glad he didn't win because this ownership group obviously has no idea . They lucked into a special horse and should be grateful for the ride they had. Just ask the other thousands of horse owners how they would act if they could own a Classic winner.

At least Art Sherman knows better


http://www.wdrb.com/story/25722256/c...EE8Fk.facebook

Best column written today:


Tonalist missed the Kentucky Derby because he had a lung infection. He was a promising horse -- much more promising, once, than California Chrome -- but he had a lung infection and his owners didn't want to risk hurting that beautiful creature by training him and racing him at every event Tonalist would need to get the qualifying points to enter the Kentucky Derby.

And so one of the most enchanting Triple Crown candidates entering the season was denied that chance, and not because his owner was a coward who wanted to lay in the weeds for the Belmont or was a goddamn cheater who wanted to deny Steve Coburn from turning his 15 minutes of fame into a lifetime of easy living. Tonalist's owners kept Tonalist from running the Kentucky Derby because it was the right thing to do.

Steve Coburn? That dumbass wouldn't know the right thing to do if it walked up to him and placed a microphone in his face.

http://www.cbssports.com/general/wri...ecord-shows-it

Well said, Nick Zito: http://es.pn/1oBCwxJ

They can provide incentives to run in all 3, but as Jeannine Edwards pointed out, it's like the Grand Slam in tennis. Each event is its own thing, each one is special in its own right. You can't demand people/horses enter in all of them.

Old farts here will remember Billy Carter (brother of Jimmy Carter). At first he was an amusing cracker, then the more he opened his mouth, the more quickly he wore out his welcome.

Deja vu all over again, as the man said.

Just in case anyone is still interested, here's a link to a better quality version of Coburn's original comments. Looking back on it now after a couple of days I can understand why people thought it was a bit over the top:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuH7FC3R_mo

Ignorance Is Bliss
 

So Steve Coburn's rant following the Belmont Stakes was very interesting to me. Not because he is right, because he is not right... he's not even close to being right and his entire premise goes against the history and elusiveness of Horse Racing's greatest honor... to win the Triple Crown. What was interesting is that many very casual followers of the sport (non-bettors and people who only watch the Derby or a Belmont if the Triple Crown is on the line) actually agreed with Steve Coburn's opinion. It is telling how people can hear a soundbite and run with it as fact, even though the opinion was not based in any history or education of the sport, it was purely a baseless opinion from someone who was being a bit of a sore loser and has had a TON of luck in the racing business. I assume this happens throughout humanity on many different levels and topics (especially politics), people run with or support an uneducated idea because the soundbite captured their attention.

Had a houseful (neighbors / friends) all of whom know absolutely nothing about horse racing all say the same thing - They we flabbergasted that a "horse was allowed to race" in the Belmont without having to "qualify" by running in one of the other two TC races. The discussion came about even before Colburn expressed his opinion.

First question - Where did Tonalist and Commissioner finish in the Derby"

Me - "They haven't run in either of the two previous TC races"

Response - WTF??!! Seriously??!! That makes no sense. How is that fair? This sport has some stupid rules.

Me - "Whatever". "Go home".

On NBC Nightly News in one minute

Billy Carter:zz::zz::zz:

Thanks for the memory :)

I can pretty much assure you that didn't happen.

I was glued to the TV. As soon as he opened his mouth, I just knew.:eek:

It's a shame. A guy like that gets to live the dream of a life time. To react like that after the train lets you off one stop prior to your dream destination? :rolleyes:

I would give anything just to ride the train.

As many racing enthusiasts know, the concept of the "Triple Crown" did not exist until 1930 when Gallant Fox's three race sequence earned the title based on DRF's Charles Hatton designating him a "Triple Crown" champion. Only at that time was the title back-dated to include Sir Barton in 1919.

The "Triple Crown" has evolved into a brilliant marketing vehicle bringing together the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness, and the Belmont Stakes; understand that the title serves to drive the marketing despite being 36 years vacated.

These three stakes are just that : three independently owned and managed properties offered by three different racing associations. Any assertion that these three races should be an "all-in" sequence undermines the fact that they are indeed three independent stake races for three year olds. Rather than worrying about the timing between these races, leave it all in place as is.

The real challenge is not whether the "Triple Crown" itself should be changed, but rather will another marketing machine redefine the hallmark races for three year olds?

For example, why not the "Transcontinental Cup" for three year olds starting with the derby and moving to the Travers at Saratoga and the Breeder's Cup with a three-year old event at Santa Anita? What about defining a "National Cup" for three year olds that rotate three races every year?

The concept of the "Triple Crown" exists only for marketing purposes and we all know that strong marketing can change the landscape. Don't believe it? Roll the calendar back to 1985 and check what happened with Kentucky Derby winner Spend A Buck.