Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
Is that description akin to running a rabbit in a race for whatever reason one is employed? (Soften up a pace type/add speed for a closing stablemate?)
|
I was just talking about this on another thread. The difference to me is that employing speed with a rabbit is a legal race tactic that can be discerned by the betting public on paper whereas Espinoza clearly had no intent not only to ride his horse to attempt to win the race, but had clear intent to illegally physically impede another horse from winning the race. That is something that can't be discerned on paper and isn't fair.
Using a rabbit is not inherently dangerous, physically impeding a horse in the manner that Espinoza did is dangerous to both the horses and riders. Plus, using rabbits doesn't always work, rabbits can break poorly, may not be fast enough to set up the closer or the specific horse or horses may relax and just let the rabbit go knowing it is likely to come back (which may not happen) and let the real race go on behind without the great set up for the closer. While it won't always work, it is not likely to be dangerous when it does.
It is tactics vs. deliberate impeding as far as I see it and to me what Espinoza attempted to do was clearly deliberately physically impede Shared Belief from winning, as opposed to using a race tactic to legally beat the horse.
09-29-2014, 02:58 PM
Threaded Mode