If you're not a horse then maybe you're a rabbit

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't see anyone disputing the value or fairness of rabbits. Certainly they are used constantly in European races and, as you mentioned, they have been used in the US at different times.

The problem in the Woodward was twofold. First of all the rabbits were neither owned by the same people that they were helping and they were a seperate betting interest than that horse. It is one thing to look to help yourself and another for different owners to effectively gang up on another horse in a given race. Once again, this was not Dutrow's fault, it was the fault of the track and the powers that be for allowing this situation to occur. If nothing else, the owners of Saint Liam should have bought at least a partial interest in both rabbits prior to the race. The second situation was, IMO, Dutrow's fault, and that was the manner in which the rabbits were ridden. It is one thing to ensure an honest pace, or even duel a speed horse into submission if that one is unable to rate, but an entirely different thing to look to physically intimidate another competitor. Any unbiased view of the head-on shot down the backstretch would have trouble defending the notion that the two rabbits were ONLY trying to ensure a fast or honest pace that day.

I happen to agree with you on this BTW. It's the rules that are unfair.
The problem is how to tell a guy he cant run a horse in a race.
They will point to Seek Gold at 99-1 as an example that anything can happen.
I wish the stewards in the US had the authority and power like those overseas to suspend and question trainers and jocks who give race altering rides. I mean, in theory they do, but they never do it.
I'd love to have stewards asking all these jocks and trainers in grade one races why their horses have great speed until the grade one comes along(especially with fillies who are so much more valuable when getting a grade one placing) and they grab.
I don't think Dutrow was real happy or proud of what occurred that day.
I know for a fact he was furious that Prado got yanked, and it was not his call. Thats why after Silver Train ran the BC sprint and won he said on Tv that he was standing next to the greatest jockey alive. It was a not so subtle message. There are owners and racing managers involved with some of these horses, and the trainer doesn't get the whole say.
I thought that what Bailey and Solis did to Smarty Jones was even worse. Two hall of fame jocks who know pace and the running style of their horses(espcially Bailey) sacrificed any chance their mounts had at winning the race, just to try and make sure another horse was defeated.
I'm quite sure if Bailey had to do that all over again, he would do it differently. It was a black eye on an other wise classy and spectacular career.
But as the rules stand, rabbits are used. And not everything is just a reflection of winning.
The Coolmore thing has gotten very ugly with the Sheikhs. By boycotting the sires and offspring of Coolmore, they have basically made breeders afraid to breed to Coolomores stallions because they know they won't hit a home run at the sales. That can potentially cost them hunderds of millions. So Coolmore wants to beat the Sheikh's stars.
Its spilled over into a complex situation that has effects on the track and off the track in so very many ways.
And none of it is pleasant.