Wow.

Sam P. was on of those "underdog" horses that I really liked, but didn't know about this or the sale. Starlight always seems a little to eager to get a colt in the Derby, but to take this to court is really admirable.

I can't understand why Triton would choose to bring the horse back and spend all of this money in training and court fees...he's definitely not capable of winning it back on the track and really shouldn't be a breeding animal either.

one, lava man ran some good races, and for many would be a once in a lifetime horse-so if they can enjoy more races, who can blame them?

two, who the hell doesn't like money??

i knew about the original fight over the horse. what i can't fathom is why there is a stay and the horse is remaining in training while they await another ruling. the contract is clear, as are the signatures. since when is a contract not legally binding? whether the horse should be bred or not is one thing...as for starlight fighting the good fight, i hope they win. there aren't enough owners who are willing to take care of horses they own or had in the past. to have someone do the right thing, and then still end up in court due to someone else doing the wrong thing is absolutely ridiculous.

How many of the horses owned by these connections have suffered catastrophic racing-related injuries, percentage-wise? Is it comparable to the usual suspects? When you have that many good horses you are going to lose a few to tragedies, and I guarantee you the average race fan has more sympathy for that fact than you do. That is reality for the connections.

I'm not a big fan of some of the things I've read by Plonk, but I agree with this article.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...emy&id=4499660

reminds me of when wally hall wrote after the preakness that jess jackson should retire his filly before she suffered the same fate as eight belles. good thing jess ignored his bs advice, as it would have robbed us of some really good races.
no telling what lava man will or won't do-but i doubt the gelding is on many peoples' radar. not only that, but how is the risk with him any more or any less of a risk then with any other horse in training? was anyone appalled when personal ensign returned to racing after breaking a leg? how many horses have taken off months, years (jambalaya leaps to mind) and didn't garner any attention? why is lava man so special? he didn't suffer a catastrophic injury-he started to tail off. he's had time, he's had treatment, and he's possibly back in action. the very fact he's getting some attention will most likely keep his owners from continuing should he show any signs that the comeback needs to be aborted. the hysteria regarding his attempt to return is something to see, that's for sure. the odds for him are probably no worse than for any racehorse-and is probably better than many lower level and mid level claimers.

I think people might forget he was beaten a neck and just 3.5 lengths with a questionable ride in the final two starts of his career - both at the Grade 1 level.

He's had major peaks and valleys in his form before. He ran Beyers between 101-to-107 in four out of five races to end his 3yo season .. including a half length defeat in the Grade 1 Malibu.

Just 4.5 months and 3 very bad races later .. he was back in for a tag and went unclaimed at almost 7/1 odds.

All 5 times he left the state of California he performed miserably. By far and away his best effort in those 5 tries outside of the state was when he gallently was beaten 16 lengths in the BC Classic - and finished only a mere 11.25 lengths behind Giacomo that day.

I can see the arguements for both sides why he should and shouldn't come back.

Even though his best surface has been eliminated - what carries the day for me is that he's not coming back into strength. Richard's Kid just won the Pac Classic - the Cal bred divisions aren't loaded with talent - the turf handicap division out there is hardly stellar. I don't blame them at all for bringing him back ... and I'm sure they'll keep him on a short leash ... one very bad work or one bad race would be enough.

Unlike the average race fan I actually have a little experience with horses.

Why's the risk much greater now of something very bad happening than it was earlier on in his career when all kinds of stuff on paper suggested that this horse had giant issues?

After Lava Man was vanned off in the Pacific Classic ... he went to Belmont and got beat 45+ lengths in the JCGC... after that he went to Japan and got beat 17+ on dirt.

He ran again 8 weeks after that Japan loss.

I certainly don't think anyone has to have experience with horses to know that this horse looks more likely than your average to break down.

He is going to be 9 years old. He was retired because of xrays that showed "changes". Those ankles may look good now but they are still almost 9 year old legs with a lot of wear on them.

One very bad work or bad race might be the only thing it takes before no more Lava Man. It seemed when they retired him that they'd dodged a bullet. Was anybody here going 'oh I wish they'd bring Lava Man back' ? I just never heard a peep from anyone. There was no 'what more could he have done.'

I felt they used Old Friends poorly. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think you get everybody excited about him coming and then he wakes up one morning and gets Stem Cell Wheaties in his breakfast. If the folks at OF are thrilled, I'd like to know about it.

Plonk's article referenced a few horses, but one that occurred to me was Black Gold.

Age isn't the relevant factor here. Wear and tear is not always synonomous with age. A guy that comes into the NBA straight out of high school and goes to a team that plays in the playoffs competing for titles on a yearly basis, after 10 years he may have played 100 extra games. That's more than a full season's worth. So he might be 28 but have over 11 years worth of wear and tear on his body. Another guy that comes out after four years of college and is not playing deep into the playoffs each year might be 28 and only have six years worth of wear and tear. Smarty Jones had bad ankles at three. Sightseek had bad ones at five. Age is not the relevant factor here. He could be better physically at nine than other horses are at two or three.

This kind of contradicts your earlier statement above about keeping him on a short leash don't you think?

It was alright when the Tin Man came back and a sprinter Greg's Gold had semilar stem cell treatment, so why not a willing Lava Man.

From a thoroughbredchampions.com bio:

In 1984, after seven years of racing and at the ripe old age of nine, fate stepped in to remind The Steel Driving Man to pay his dues. After four straight stakes wins, John Henry was aiming for the inaugural Breeders' Cup Turf for his final start before retiring, but he suffered an injury that forced his retirement a month earlier than planned. A brief attempt was made in 1985 towards a comeback, but John Henry was re-injured and his retirement was made permanent.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

The tin man is lucky to be alive and Gregs Gold had a bowed tendon, completely different story.

A brief attempt. The point was made that horses like John Henry were sucessful at an advanced age. My point was that John Henry had no sucess after being retired or having a long layoff.

Does " lucky to be alive" mean it was OK to bring him back successfully or is just a random fact that does zero to compliment your suggestion that Lava Man shouldn't try to return to racing. Hot TV is repping a older horse who had serious issues that came back to be successful. Are you suggesting Hot TV is off base or are you suggesting Mandella is lucky? A little help here? Aren't Bowed Tendons fairly serious especially on aged geldings?