Derby Trail Forums - Dubai Esc. Out

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Dubai Esc. Out (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6316)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I totally agree with you. It's amazing how people think they can tell other people how to invest and spend their money. How in the world can you tell a guy that he should risk millions of dollars by racing his horse an extra year?

That is exactly what happens all the time in every other sport out there. Not only do the fans question every move made by owners of MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, etc teams but the owners even factor in the potential fan response when making their decisions even though it is ultimately the owners money being spent. So the question is, how do we get owners in horse racing to start factoring the fans in to their decisions on horses? Unfortunately, I am at a loss as to how that could happen since the fans are much too willing to be ignored by the owners and yet remain fans (and bettors) of the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I think we all agree that it makes good short-term business sense for an owner to retire a top-notch horse as soon as possible. pgardn is not disputing that. He said:

We are saying a few things, but we are not saying it is a bad business decision. However, some owners would be willing to risk 5% of their investiment (insurance) for the pleasure and excitement of seeing their horse run another year. These owners probably think their horse is good enough that it won't disgrace itself enough to lose any breeding value by continuing to run.

Some owners seem to value running their horses as much as the money they are putting at risk. Paulson kept Azeri running even when half the fans thought she should be retired, and she did not disgrace herself. He let Cigar campaign for a 2nd BC Classic, even after he had "nothing else to prove". Lord Darby has kept Ouija Board in training far longer than expected for a mare of her accomplishment.

You might answer that none of these horses had/has the value of Bernardini. But the owners of these other horses also do not have the money of the sheiks, so relatively speaking, the risk/reward/bankroll relationship was probably on a par with the Bernardini decision.

--Dunbar

If a horse is sound and the owner wants to run the horse as a 4 or even a 5 year old, that is fine. It's up to the owner. It's his money. If he's willing to take the risk of running his horse another year, then more power to him. But if he decides to retire the horse after its 3 year old year, there is nothing wrong with that either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I actually think it's pretty ridiculous the way people are always criticizing the owners of sports team. I also think it's ridiculous how often the owners fire the coaches. Only one team can win the championship each year. The other 27 teams, or however many teams are in that particular sport will lose. No matter how good of a job the owner, the coach, and the players do, there is still a 95% chance that the team will not win the championship. Fans just don't seem to understand that. Every team can't win. I think fans need to be more realistic about their team's chances of winning a championship. If there are 28 teams in a sport, then your team should win the championship about once every 28 years if they are an average team. You would obviously expect more from a team like the Yankees because they spend so much money. But I don't know how a fan can criticize his team for not spending as much as the Yankees. Most owners can't afford to spend as much as the Yankees. The teams in the smaller markest don't make nearly as much money as the Yankees.

Anyway, as long as a team is being run halfway competently, I don't think people should complain. Every team can't win. Even if every owner did a great job, there would still be a team that has the worst record in the league.