Take Control breaks down
 

You can draw a line through Take Control, who apparently broke down this morning. Quite the job his trainer did.

Just saw that, shame.

So pissed off. :mad: He was obviously unsound. He's not the first horse to be nursed along through that kind of thing, but if he was gonna be off for years like that, just retire the horse. Last time out he was last. Not sure if they thought this would be a shot to get a G2 before retirement or what. Lack of black type and the long layoff didn't exactly make him a good stallion prospect so it's not like the loss of the AP Indy-Azeri genes should be mourned unless it's from an on paper standpoint, but this didn't have to happen. He cost a lot of money I know, but geez. Could've easily broken down on tv in the Marathon. Better for the audience not to have to see that, I guess. "Bad step" is a laughable line to give. Yeah horses do that, but this one? It's not like he was super sound.

I wonder how much he was insured for.

Santa Anita clockers including Andy Harrington and Gary Young -- as respected as there are anywhere in the entire sport -- had reported Take Control as traveling smoothly, hitting well and showing NO signs of being 'off' since returning to training at the track. Young told me point blank this morning 'he was sound yesterday'.

Am sure that will be answered, but be aware that only 1 of 7 of the highly publicized Shah horses that died over the 18 month period carried any coverage.

Steve the horse made 4 starts.. Not exactly the second coming of Evening Attire.. Thrilled that the clocker's liked his work but have a heart the horse had significant issues and while he could have been sound as a tack apparently something was never OK. It's not unfair to at least speculate that the horse could have been worth significantly more dead then alive. Is it? Baffert has had a myriad of horses expire this year.

Who are these seven, and which one was covered? I had no idea he lost so many.

I was answering the statement that the horse was 'obviously unsound'. Based on how he had trained the last couple months according to professional observers, he was sound. I wasn't debating whether he was worth more as a pet, stallion, show horse, barn pony or pasture ornament. As of Thursday, he was a racehorse and his owner and trainer were engaging in the practices of what you do with racehorses.

I have no information on whether or not the horse was insured but I tend to think that given his and his trainers recent history no one would have been real willing to extend much exposure

Fascinating.

Cannon makes a good point too, I can't imagine it would have been easy to insure this horse without paying huge premiums.

There is one pretty sizable equine insurance company that has never wanted to cover horses trained by BB or DWL.

The assertion that a horse that made 4 starts in 3 years in training "was sound" for a hot minute is a stretch. Baffert is a HoF'r with few people that approach his brilliance as a trainer. That said, the horse was a complete laimo, because he had 5 minutes of galloping sound in front of Clocker A and B does not supersede 36 months of dreck.

I agree Freddy. Your interpretation is undoubtedly more insightful than that of Baffert and two of the best professional bloodstock observers in the game.

Here's a 6YO horse with four lifetime starts. He had one race in the last fifteen months, and that was a last place finish, beaten 17 lengths, in which he showed nothing. In the Breeders' Cup Marathon, his "insightful" connections sure picked out a great spot for his next start.

I agree with me too and the horse is dead very very dead. And Baffert has had a plethora of stock come to their demise this year, even while Mr and Mr Bloodstock where watching them work with agog.
You want to brush it off that the horses demise came as a bad step that is your prerogative, but surely you cant deny or pretend this horse was without past significant issue that very likely had something contributing to its end. You make it sound like this was Saginaw who raced 50 times in fine company and finally hit a speed bump. This horse raced 4 friggin times in years and was trained by an all time great that actually still races horses.

Traveling sound and yet breaking down are not necessarily things that don't happen a lot in these situations. Again I have zero information about this particular horse but they could appear sound and still have many underlying issues that may or may not be known or addressed. I can't tell you how many times trainers find out about issues that weren't readily apparent when trying to sell a horse in training (not 2yo sales) when the buyers vet does a complete set of xrays/ultrasound exam that uncovers an issue or usually a potential issue. In many cases the potential issue never actually becomes a problem but due diligence is prudent when making purchases.

This particular case is a tough one considering Baffert's recent situation with deaths in CA and this horses spotty record and recent poor race. We will never really know what he knew but it looks really bad on the surface

I agree with Freddy, this horse may have been sound, but sound to be a show horse , trail horse or some other less demanding career, he was CLEARLY not sound enough to be a race horse with the strenuous training required to do that, but to the connections these decisions are made in regard to the monetary gains, not the the love and concern for the animal. It's really as simple as that .

Appreciate Chuck separating the 2 portions of the situation. I was conveying from the original post about Take Control's 'soundness', that those nearest to him of late felt he was sound and going well. Obviously his back story indicate there have been plenty of things that kept him out of training.

Is this fair? I dont have pps in front of me, but I believe 5 or 6 starts and the horse is 6. Clear physical issues.

It's not unfair

That heart attack story last year coincided with Baffert going ice cold in the Breeders Cup including the flop of Game on Dude...Of course this wasn't a heart attack so I'm sure he'll be fine on the big days.

Im not even trying to defend Baffert, its just the way that person posted it, facts are facts. The horse had serious physical issues all along, no?

Well said.

I have to admit I even agree with Freddy in this thread and that never happens.

Poor horse.

Obviously but Baffert is ultimately responsible and while he might not have pulled the trigger he is left holding the smoking gun. Truthfully we don't even know what issues that he had in prior years and if they were related to the fatal injury. However as trainers we must assume the moral/ethical responsibility when we are putting horses out on the track in the morning and afternoon. It is not a coincidence that certain trainers have a far greater % of breakdowns than most. One of the big name trainers in NY has had far too many breakdowns than should be kosher but because they are rarely big names or have pretty horse people followings they basically get shrugged off. Like most everything else in life, without consequences you wont see a change in behavior or in this case fatal injuries.

Steve, a horse doesn't have to be hobbling on the track to be a ticking time bomb. He was in my stable mail, I had a pretty good idea of much hard training he got and was concerned but I just figured the fact that Bob was still making a go of it was a good sign. Now I wonder what it was a sign of exactly. TC was sound until he wasn't and when he wasn't he really really wasn't. Three times and we all know how the 3rd one went. Compared to TC, Monzante was an iron horse.

Take Control clearly had issues that could appear all of a sudden (well, as far as we were concerned) and take him out for lengthy periods of time. You'd think that'd make them a little trigger happy with the x-rays after a poor performance. I'd be looking at him like he was made of glass after his last two incidents. No way does his Awesome Again not call for a thorough going over. Did he get it? Orb did after his last face plant. Great that clockers thought TC looked fine. Clearly wasn't fine enough to finish anything other than dead last in his last race. He's a better horse than that. Something wasn't right, the kind of not right that would get some connections to wait for next year, not go to the Breeders' Cup. Imagine if they decided to give him the winter off so as to not risk another year lost or worse. Didn't Baffert talk about how well a horse has to be doing to warrant coming to the BC? TC was gonna bring his A game? What exactly does that look like? Forgive me I've only seen it once in 2009 and once in 2012. It sounds harsh because I was invested in a horse I felt had writing on the wall, but I can't be sorry for that harshness. It's just something that seems obvious to me, and clearly other posters here. I don't get how this happened despite that obviousness. Whatever his training, his racing form didn't make me think he was sitting on a big one.

Take Control was a very talented horse. It's a shame he couldn't hold it together long enough to survive training.

That being said, I heard he's now being pointed to the new Breeders Cup Rainbow Bridge sprint.

Fair Chuck, and seriously I appreciate you taking the time and discussing this kind of stuff. It’s good to have an actual trainer, who makes himself overly accessible to anyone who wants to learn, or just talk horses. I think its admirable. I read your stuff on PA all the time in the ask a trainer thread, good stuff. Agree or disagree with you, you have an opinion and share it, its cool.

I understand every aspect of what you're thinking/feeling. It's obvious that Take Control needed extensive time off for periods but it's also implausible that Baffert and Shah, already facing intense critique for the group of horses that died, would press on with him if he was presenting as in a danger zone. You can then make the argument that his entire body of non-work put him in a danger zone and that's not wrong. But they're all in a danger zone to varying degrees. An unknown 12yo named Who's Livin Bettor that should be retired made his 99th start at Finger Lakes Thursday. Who's worried about his well being? What's more 'wrong'.. continuing to campaign him or Take Control? This is always a difficult arena. I'm saddened by Take Control going down. I thought he was going well and was pulling for him to fulfill as much of his promise as he could.

Bingo.

It looks like Who's Livin' Bettor has been owned by the same person since he broke his maiden in 2004--Edward Perdue. He's been in $4,000ish claimers for what seems like the whole time, running every year for now the 10th year. He last ran in a $4,500 claimer from what I can tell. Hope they're gonna go for 100 and call it a day just because it's nice timing and really why do another year. The thing is, looking at Equibase it seems like they've put him in several races regularly during his season, given him the whole winter off, then come back late spring. It's probably why he's made it this far. No signs of unsoundness just considering the regularity of his appearances. I haven't gone through all 99 starts but I noticed a pattern.Yes the age is gonna be more of an issue but this looks like more of an iron horse of a sort. At least for this day and age. 8 starts this year starting in May. He's the anti-Take Control. If you'd shown me both Take Control and Who's Livin' Bettor and told me to pick one of the two to risk making one more start, I'm taking Who's Livin' Bettor. He's in for so cheap, if someone wants to do a good deed, either claim him or approach the owner. I'd imagine Perdue's gonna say no and people at Finger Lakes would give you the stink eye for taking his horse away.

You've officially made me a fan of this horse, Steve. I don't know that owner, but I'd guess the horse is beloved and well looked after. I wouldn't say it's wrong at all to campaign this horse. I don't know that age 13 is a great idea, but I could see wrapping up 2013 in fine style and sending him to a farm.