Strong Pretender Excuses Thread

[Kasept]

Sniper..

There's no need to apologize for starting the thread or feeling that you shouldn't express critical opinions. In terms of calling jockey's "gnomes" or horses "goats", I can't police and legislate every post, every thread, every minute, every day. As it happens, both of those comments were responded to in a manner that appropriately debunked the poster who made the silly references.

That pair of comments are examples of isolated, individual boorishness. The theme of this thread though is an example of a much larger, and vitally more important trend around the game. For my part, I'm sorry if my response was overly harsh, and I wasn't trying to single you out as a villain. It just hit a chord with me though as it set the responses in a direction that has an undertone all too prevelent in the game, and sports in general these days: the ridiculing of loser(s) as opposed to the complimenting of winner(s).

John Ward made it clear before the race that the Donn and Santa Anita Handicap were his targets for Strong Contender. Mike Trombetta made it clear that the Sunshine Millions Classic was his target for Saint. McLaughlin made it clear that the Gulfstream Park H. or Donn was the target for Jazil. While trainers and connections would love to win every race they enter, conditions and situations preclude that they are going to...

Unfortunately, we live in an era of racing where we don't get to see our horse heroes run as frequently as in generations past, and because of that, we tend to ovedrvalue, and be hyper-critical, of every single perfolrmance because we have so few performances to go on anymore.

The most telling example of this was the hyper-critique overkill of Bernardini post-BC Classic. In a perfect world, we'd get to see Bernardini at least all this year in maybe 2-3 more matchups versus Invasor, Premium Tap and this year's 4 year olds. Only then could we truly determine if Bernardini was a true great or near great or better than average. Instead, he loses by a length to a fabulous and nearly undefeated champion six months his elder, and is decried a "fraud" by many eager to tear down anything that resembles a quality runner.

Because our opportunities to evaluate horses are limited in this era of the abbreviated career, there is an incredible rush to judgement on every single animal from the second they hit they the track. We are so anxious to annoint a "next superstar" that any 2 year old that wins impressively and earns a big figure is instantly set up for criticism and ridicule with any subsequent
"failing".

Not to get into the why's and wherefores of this, but the short-sightedness of the breeding community and lack of leadership within industry management has created a terrible scenario whereby fans have little to grab on to in terms of continuity and sustained adulation of horses. Because racing is a pari-mutuel based enterprise, it elicits strong opinions in its' fan base, and I'm not looking to limit anyone's predilections.

But we have to be appreciative of what we have, and Saturday's Mr. Prospector was a race worthy of appreciation for a variety of reasons. The winner emerged as a serious racehorse and set a track record in an excellent race that saw three quality runners with a chance to win at the finish. While it makes sense to include the fact that Strong Contender was not ready for a competitive effort as part of its' evaluation, I was of the opinion that the more reasonable focus of the post script was the action at the front of the pack.

[todko]

Originally Posted by Kasept

The most telling example of this was the hyper-critique overkill of Bernardini post-BC Classic. In a perfect world, we'd get to see Bernardini at least all this year in maybe 2-3 more matchups versus Invasor, Premium Tap and this year's 4 year olds. Only then could we truly determine if Bernardini was a true great or near great or better than average. Instead, he loses by a length to a fabulous and nearly undefeated champion six months his elder, and is decried a "fraud" by many eager to tear down anything that resembles a quality runner.

I agree for the most part Kasept. With Bernardini however I think the level of hype was appalling enough to deserve some critique. The critique should have really been directed more at the racing press instead of the horse. Beyer is a perfect example -- he cranks superstar figures for a horse that beats weak/injured fields and then when Bernardini loses to a relatively mediocre performance by Invasor -- Beyer instantly changes his tune and says, "Bernardini is no superstar".

Like I said before -- if some of the racing press worked in the financial services industry they would be in jail for fraud. Yeah, I know, it's gambling -- but the betting public (especially the novice) bettors deserve a fair shake from the "experts". Maybe they'd stick around and become horseplayers if so many weren't led astray from the start.

Just my $2 worth.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Sniper..

There's no need to apologize for starting the thread or feeling that you shouldn't express critical opinions. In terms of calling jockey's "gnomes" or horses "goats", I can't police and legislate every post, every thread, every minute, every day. As it happens, both of those comments were responded to in a manner that appropriately debunked the poster who made the silly references.

That pair of comments are examples of isolated, individual boorishness. The theme of this thread though is an example of a much larger, and vitally more important trend around the game. For my part, I'm sorry if my response was overly harsh, and I wasn't trying to single you out as a villain. It just hit a chord with me though as it set the responses in a direction that has an undertone all too prevelent in the game, and sports in general these days: the ridiculing of loser(s) as opposed to the complimenting of winner(s).

John Ward made it clear before the race that the Donn and Santa Anita Handicap were his targets for Strong Contender. Mike Trombetta made it clear that the Sunshine Millions Classic was his target for Saint. McLaughlin made it clear that the Gulfstream Park H. or Donn was the target for Jazil. While trainers and connections would love to win every race they enter, conditions and situations preclude that they are going to...

Unfortunately, we live in an era of racing where we don't get to see our horse heroes run as frequently as in generations past, and because of that, we tend to ovedrvalue, and be hyper-critical, of every single perfolrmance because we have so few performances to go on anymore.

The most telling example of this was the hyper-critique overkill of Bernardini post-BC Classic. In a perfect world, we'd get to see Bernardini at least all this year in maybe 2-3 more matchups versus Invasor, Premium Tap and this year's 4 year olds. Only then could we truly determine if Bernardini was a true great or near great or better than average. Instead, he loses by a length to a fabulous and nearly undefeated champion six months his elder, and is decried a "fraud" by many eager to tear down anything that resembles a quality runner.

Because our opportunities to evaluate horses are limited in this era of the abbreviated career, there is an incredible rush to judgement on every single animal from the second they hit they the track. We are so anxious to annoint a "next superstar" that any 2 year old that wins impressively and earns a big figure is instantly set up for criticism and ridicule with any subsequent
"failing".

Not to get into the why's and wherefores of this, but the short-sightedness of the breeding community and lack of leadership within industry management has created a terrible scenario whereby fans have little to grab on to in terms of continuity and sustained adulation of horses. Because racing is a pari-mutuel based enterprise, it elicits strong opinions in its' fan base, and I'm not looking to limit anyone's predilections.

But we have to be appreciative of what we have, and Saturday's Mr. Prospector was a race worthy of appreciation for a variety of reasons. The winner emerged as a serious racehorse and set a track record in an excellent race that saw three quality runners with a chance to win at the finish. While it makes sense to include the fact that Strong Contender was not ready for a competitive effort as part of its' evaluation, I was of the opinion that the more reasonable focus of the post script was the action at the front of the pack.

This is all so true.

I love everything from reading about bloodlines, learning of great champions and pick 3's and 4's, but most of all I love the horses running. Being this sort of fan isn't the easiest thing on a forum or following the sport due to the failure of management to recognize that there are fans as well as people who bet, own or breed thoroughbreds. The fan is the often forgot element in this because they are not supporting the sport heavily with their betting dollar or ownership, but they are an important part of the community of racing. If the horse isn't retired prematurily, I'm told I can't think my favorite race was the Belmont Stakes. I may have been born in 1978, but it doesn't mean I don't know who Secretariat, Dr. Fager and Buckpasser were and how good they were. The difference is, horses like Jazil, Memorette, Bernardini and Saint Liam ran when I was watching...they bring me out to the track. So I guess what I'm really trying to say is; I understand your message and as usual it's a good one. Be thankful for what we have.

[ShadowRoll]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

This is all so true.

I love everything from reading about bloodlines, learning of great champions and pick 3's and 4's, but most of all I love the horses running. Being this sort of fan isn't the easiest thing on a forum or following the sport due to the failure of management to recognize that there are fans as well as people who bet, own or breed thoroughbreds. The fan is the often forgot element in this because they are not supporting the sport heavily with their betting dollar or ownership, but they are an important part of the community of racing. If the horse isn't retired prematurily, I'm told I can't think my favorite race was the Belmont Stakes. I may have been born in 1978, but it doesn't mean I don't know who Secretariat, Dr. Fager and Buckpasser were and how good they were. The difference is, horses like Jazil, Memorette, Bernardini and Saint Liam ran when I was watching...they bring me out to the track. So I guess what I'm really trying to say is; I understand your message and as usual it's a good one. Be thankful for what we have.

I agree completely, Sightseek.

Although I do bet, that's just one part of the game, and not the best part. I also love the big things about this game -- the excitement, the grandeur, the history. And I love the little things, like the smell of the dirt when I'm leaning on the rail watching the first race post parade on a perfect summer day. But most of all, I love the horses.

I can't say what it is exactly that affects me so. I see one throw a wild eye, or give a thundering snort, and I'm struck by both their fragility and power. Personally, I would never call a horse -- any horse -- a goat. Maybe it's because I'm an outsider, not around racing every day, and not yet become cynical of the people or inured to the sight of the animals. Win or lose, I think they're magnificent.

On the other hand, I don't condemn people because they sometimes express themselves in blunt terms. That's part of what makes this site interesting, and free speech is part of what makes this country great. (Having said that, I recognize that this site is not really a public forum, although Steve allows the public to participate, and that Steve has every right to control the content). Also, everybody goes for the cheap laugh sometimes, and what they say isn't necessarily what they really feel.