Derby Trail Forums
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   'Rags' with hairline fracture; '08 possible (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16779)

letswastemoney 09-16-2007 09:18 PM
Does anyone think there's a possibility that Rags is not injured and that they are just sore losers that don't want to blemish her record by risking losing the Distaff??

I'm not saying I think that's what happened because I believe she's really injured, but that entered the back of my head.

prudery 09-16-2007 09:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by letswastemoney
Does anyone think there's a possibility that Rags is not injured and that they are just sore losers that don't want to blemish her record by risking losing the Distaff??

I'm not saying I think that's what happened because I believe she's really injured, but that entered the back of my head.
Probably not, but that theory isn't as far fetched a some might think ... Blemishing this filly's record and pampering her in her works wre always Pletcher's m o here .... So backing away from a potential loss with a real, imagined, or exagerrated injury is somewhat congruent to that thinking. I don't buy the sore losers' image, but I might suggest " protecting " HER image . Not so far fetched .

Coach Pants 09-16-2007 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by letswastemoney
Does anyone think there's a possibility that Rags is not injured and that they are just sore losers that don't want to blemish her record by risking losing the Distaff??

I'm not saying I think that's what happened because I believe she's really injured, but that entered the back of my head.
I don't think they're sore losers, just pussies.

prudery 09-16-2007 10:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pillow Pants
I don't think they're sore losers, just pussies.
YEP, corporate pussies ...

easy goer 09-16-2007 11:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Watch the replay again. Are you a horse whisperer? How can you tell injuries by a horse hanging his head after a grueling race? Does your eye know better than a vet, because he went back into training after the race.
You cant tell. We have nothing else to go on. IT's just some evidence, there is nothing that can be proved. No one's going to hand us x rays etc. so that's all the evidence we have. Its not conclusive, others may form other conclusions.

As I recall he seemed to bear out in the stretch but maybe I am not remembering it well. IT's hardly crucial to the main argument is it?

nomad 09-17-2007 12:34 AM
What a disappointment. Thank you for the news. I hadn't heard.

ultracapper 09-17-2007 01:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I know that there will always be those that want to keep blinders on. Nobody ever said that every horse that runs in the race is going to come out hurt or suffer later. But the percentage of those that come out of that race to either never run again, never win again, or not even finish out the year is too high for me. In my 22 years of watching the sport, I've seen far too many horses that run in the Belmont and are seriously affected in one or more of the three ways I mentioned above.

Ferdinand, Risen Star, Hansel, Pine Bluff, Prairie Bayou, Thunder Gulch, Silver Charm, Real Quiet, Charismatic, Monarchos, Point Given, Empire Maker, Smarty Jones, Giacomo, Afleet Alex, Jazil, Rags to Riches.

To be fair, in the cases of Silver Charm, Real Quiet, Charismatic and Smarty Jones, they had to be there and I would have run there with them too. But I can't help but feel that there is some connection to that race and these horses suffering the problems they have. And it seems like it's getting worse. If it's acceptable for u that there is a 50/50 chance that if u run in that race, your career is basically over (or at least your season), then u run. For me, that's just too high a percentage. Maybe some of u are ok with losing at least one major horse every year out of the Belmont Stakes. I'm not. We've lost Rags in 07, Jazil in 06, Alex and Giacomo in 05, Smarty in 04, Empire Maker in 03, Point Given and Monarchos in 01, Charismatic in 99, Real Quiet in 98 and Silver Charm in 97. This is good for the sport how? Sure, injuries can and do happen at any time. Sure, PG, Empire Maker and Rags were injured in subsequent races. And I'm not even saying that there is conclusive proof that the Belmont has anything to do with this. But it is a fact that all of these horses have that one thing in common.
all those colts also ran in the kentucky derby. maybe that's the race that's killing them.

King Glorious 09-17-2007 01:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper
all those colts also ran in the kentucky derby. maybe that's the race that's killing them.
It's that race that starts the process and the Belmont that finishes them off.

King Glorious 09-17-2007 02:02 AM
By the way, where were all these new fans that people told us Rags brought to the sport? The return of Rags, the debut of the $16 million horse, four graded stakes races..........7500 or so fans.

Dunbar 09-17-2007 02:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
In my 22 years of watching the sport, I've seen far too many horses that run in the Belmont and are seriously affected in one or more of the three ways I mentioned above.

Ferdinand, Risen Star, Hansel, Pine Bluff, Prairie Bayou, Thunder Gulch, Silver Charm, Real Quiet, Charismatic, Monarchos, Point Given, Empire Maker, Smarty Jones, Giacomo, Afleet Alex, Jazil, Rags to Riches.
Ferdinand went on to win the BC Classic. That's usually considered a pretty good after-Belmont performance.

--Dunbar

King Glorious 09-17-2007 02:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunbar
Ferdinand went on to win the BC Classic. That's usually considered a pretty good after-Belmont performance.

--Dunbar
Silver Charm came back to do big things too. Real Quiet came back to win the Hollywood Gold Cup the next year. All three were knocked out for the remainder of their 3yo seasons though, one of the three things I am talking about. And before anyone wants to get technical, I know Silver Charm and Ferdinand made it back for the Malibu on Dec 26.

Danzig 09-17-2007 05:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy goer
You cant tell. We have nothing else to go on. IT's just some evidence, there is nothing that can be proved. No one's going to hand us x rays etc. so that's all the evidence we have. Its not conclusive, others may form other conclusions.

As I recall he seemed to bear out in the stretch but maybe I am not remembering it well. IT's hardly crucial to the main argument is it?

john servis, after the belmont:

"He's going to get three or four weeks just to rest up and then we'll get him ready and put him on a schedule and map out a plan for the Breeders' Cup. He came out of the race really good."

GenuineRisk 09-17-2007 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
What rock do you live under?
Some people have lives... unlike the rest of us here... ;)

King Glorious 09-17-2007 09:10 AM
Lives are so overrated.

blackthroatedwind 09-17-2007 09:12 AM
Tough campaigns obviously can, and often do, wear horses down. The Belmont Stakes, for many horses in history ( less so now ), is the culmination of virtually an entire career of " prep " races. The fact that some horses need rest after that race is not a function of the Belmont whatsoever, it is merely the temporary end of a long and arduous journey.

What is interesting to me is that through the flawed arguments offered by some in this thread we have seen that, in fact, the Belmont has been the springboard for many major stakes over the following 18 months.

King Glorious 09-17-2007 10:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Tough campaigns obviously can, and often do, wear horses down. The Belmont Stakes, for many horses in history ( less so now ), is the culmination of virtually an entire career of " prep " races. The fact that some horses need rest after that race is not a function of the Belmont whatsoever, it is merely the temporary end of a long and arduous journey.

What is interesting to me is that through the flawed arguments offered by some in this thread we have seen that, in fact, the Belmont has been the springboard for many major stakes over the following 18 months.
I'll tell u what I think and I'll wait for u to jump all over it but I think part of it is the effort it takes to win the race vs. being an also ran in the race. Take for example the Arc de Triomphe. Most people would be surprised to learn that no Arc winner has ever come over and won the BC Turf. Realizing that only four have tried it (Dancing Brave, Trempolino, Saumarez and Subotica) but it's still never been done. I believe that had one or more of those four won it, trainers wouldn't have stopped even trying. At the same time that they aren't able to complete the double, there have been several Arc also rans (High Chaparral twice, Daylami, In the Wings, Pilsudski, Shirocco) that have found Turf success. Why is that? I believe that the effort it takes to win some of these grueling test like the Arc and the Belmont, coming at the end of campaigns, takes a huge toll and leave horses more vulnerable to injuries.

U may say that the horses coming out of the Belmont may only need a rest. U are probably right. U've probably forgotten more about horse racing than I'll ever learn. But what I do know is that in the past seven years, we've gotten a combined total of six races and three wins post Belmont from the seven winners of the race in the remainder of their 3yo seasons. That's just not good. If it's not the Belmont, something is obviously going wrong these days.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:41 PM.
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

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