Lawyer Ron
 

”I was hoping with the case settled and a few less lawyers on the horse’s back, he might run just fast enough to win the Jockey Club Gold Cup,” joked John T. Hamilton, an attorney representing Stonewall. “I guess the truth is, there’s a few less lawyers on Curlin’s back, too.”

:D :D :D

Blood-Horse.com

yeah, but does anyone really think lawyer ron will be back after the classic? unless the guy handling him (his namesake i believe) wants to go to dubai.

There's a pull-out ad in the latest Bloodhorse advertising Lawyer Ron as a stud for 2008, so I think he's done after the BCC.

It will probably be another arguement, although the farm seems to have acquiesced in trying to keep even fingers on the lever of control. If what the media reports is true -- and I question that, and it's accuracy and thoroughness -- unless the conditions are met, it seems that the farm has very little or even no say in the horse's career.

OTOH, I think given the horse's defeat, it certainly opens the door to more discussions . . . or arguements, LOL. Let me preface that I was never a fan of Lawyer Ron, just wasn't. I expected a top effort and a win in the Whitney, but that is because I was at Monmouth and saw what I saw in that previous race. But that race -- the Whitney -- was kind of freaky. Then the Woodward -- the freak show continues, LOL.

We all know the horse for course routine, and unless you saw this horse regularly (and working) at the Spa, I am not sure there was a reason to believe that he would fall into that category. So if you throw that out, after those 2 starts there at the Spa, you had to be thinking this might have been the best horse on the planet.

Now last Saturday? It's shaping up to be one great Classic.

Eric

I thought I read somewhere that the contract had a provision that as long as Ron keeps finishing in the top two in Graded Stakes he is to be kept in training until both parties agree on retirement. If he should fail to do so in two consecutive graded Stakes than Stonewall gets him or somethng to that effect.

Ron, the human, said he was going to Dubai next year as far as he was concerned.

Then why the ad? Would they spend the $$ if it wasn't decided?

I hope he runs as a 5-year-old, but as soon as I saw the ad I figured he was done after 2007.

Update- here's the link to the article Riot quoted, with the specifics of the deal Sightseek mentioned:

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=41101

So, do you think LR's stud fee was helped by continuing to run him, or not affected?

Oh, his fee has most definitely skyrocketed b/c of his 4YO campaign.

Obviously, nobody knows what the contract says, except the people who are a party to it. However, based upon what was reported, it seems to me to be an "interpretation" issue and that's what the dispute was about. Each side was interpreting the actual contract/clause to mean something different.

Regardless, problem solved -- for now. I would expect that each side would look to find an "interpretation" that was favorable to them and their motivations, and I don't see any reason why it couldn't happen again. All one would have to do is to continue to try and find a way to interpret the contract/clause in a way that was favorable and desireable. Litigation is easy -- often foolish, but easy.

As far as his stud fee, the Whitney is an extremely prestigious race. The Oaklawn Handicap is a GII (I think) and while it doesn't hurt, I don't think it changes anything. He had won graded stakes at 3. The only way the Oaklawn race would add to his value is if that's all he won as a four year old. He came back and was placed in a GII and GIII, but adding the Whitney to his resume enhanced his value very significantly. After that, the Woodward certainly didn't hurt -- it further enhanced as it was his second GI and like the Whitney it was at the Spa. These are the most prestigious races, and the most prestigious track, during the most prestigeous meet, in the world.

At the same time, the attorney for the estate has a fiduciary responsibility. That too could play into this. The other side could throw money at the issue.

Eric

Since Stonewall didn't express any positive opinions about him racing in '07, I started speculating- from their point of view, did his '07 career enhance his stud fee enough to make up for the lost revenue of '06?

It is nice to see a horse show improvement from 3 to 4. Last year I thought Ron was underrated. Now I think he's a bit overrated. Nevertheless, he's a campaigner and shows it on the track. Gotta love him for that.

I would think it's a circular discussion to some extent. If he earned more as a 3yo, by better performances where it counts, that too would have enhanced his stud value -- so I don't know if there is a real answer.

The farm wants him. I think that's clear and without question after this year, they want him more. The attorney -- well, it sounds like he wants to race him. I guess we'll soon see.

Eric

Crushing a Saratoga track record obviously enhances his stud value.

between his four year old season and langfuhr having an outstanding year, i'd say his fee was helped enormously. instead of a lower fee, and possibly not a full book, he'll get a higher fee, and shouldn't have as much of a problem getting his 100-odd mares.
BUT, he is going to stonewall, so that will hurt him imo. that place doesn't strike me as the best to make a stallion. then there's the stallion manager leaving--and he was definitely not happy with the program. and the lawyer ron suit wasn't the only court case they had going either.