Santa Anita gets 2008 Breeders Cup

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Honu

Dont fool yourself into believing that me making a living depends on your dollar , because it doesnt , I get paid a wage and my boss gets paid by the head and the people he trains for have more money to blow on horses than they will ever be able to spend before they die. They are not soley in this game for winning purses , they are also in it for the sport and the bragging rights, they all have breeding farms and sell horses and stand them at stud.

Wow....nice touch.

That kind of attitude might get you elected president of a horsemans organization.

[parsixfarms]

I could see this coming. I really do not wish to get into a debate about who's more important to racing: bettors or owners (I am both). Let's stipulate that both are necessary for racing to thrive. What does bother me is the suggestion that either should be placed above the interests of the horse.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I could see this coming. I really do not wish to get into a debate about who's more important to racing: bettors or owners (I am both). Let's stipulate that both are necessary for racing to thrive. What does bother me is the suggestion that either should be placed above the interests of the horse.

I've always been a bettor, and in the past I've owned a few lower level claiming horses. I agree that both owners and bettors are very important to racing. I don't talk to many current owners, and I know two who detest artifical surfaces. While the consensus of owners may favor artifical surfaces, I'm not so sure it's a strong consensus....and I'm not so sure they aren't basing there approval on what they are hearing from horsemen.

From a bettors prospective, this "welfare of the horse" arguement just seems incredibly hypocritical. When you look at the actions of horseman and commerical breeders over the past few decades---you'll see two groups who have placed themselves MILES above the interests of the horse.

From a racing fans prospective, and I can't speak for everyone when I say this, but I am in the camp that feels these races just plain aren't that fun to watch.

[parsixfarms]

I think that your ire about over-medicated horses is properly directed towards a minority of trainers (there is a difference between a trainer and a horseman); most of these individuals train for owners who can afford to spare no expense when it comes to veterinary bills. As you probably know from your experience, owners of low level claiming horses cannot afford four-figure vet bills.

As for commercial breeders, I agree that their overemphasis on speed (perhaps over soundness) has been detrimental to the breed. However, if Polytrack and other artificial surfaces force breeders to plan matings that are more geared towards stamina, I think that's a good thing. Eventually, the marketplace will adjust, and not every son of Storm Cat or Unbridled's Song will get a chance to stand at stud somewhere.

As for your final point, I guess we can agree to disagree. I much prefer racing over the "new" Keeneland where seemingly all horses can get involved in the race than the "old" conveyor-belt Keeneland where horses drawn outside had virtually no chance; just like I enjoy turf racing.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I much prefer racing over the "new" Keeneland where seemingly all horses can get involved in the race than the "old" conveyor-belt Keeneland where horses drawn outside had virtually no chance; just like I enjoy turf racing.

KEE new and old is from one extreme to the other.

Personally, I didn't like watching races at either one from a fan standpoint. The old KEE racetrack was very unfair to horses caught wide, or void of speed. It was my least favorite of the dirt tracks.

From a bettors standpoint---I think the old KEE dirt presented better oppertunites, because you can make note of the horses who ran well against the grain of the track, and bet them back if placed correctly next time out. Or, you could confidently bet against a horse who took advantage of the bias.

I agree with you that not all trainers are as guilty as others when it comes to medication.....and it's unrealistic to expect trainers to all go back to hay, oats, and water.

The popularity of the sport is always taking a hit because nothing is ever to the fans advantage. And certainly, we all know in this industry, that NOTHING IS EVER to the advantage of the bettor.

[Honu]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Wow....nice touch.

That kind of attitude might get you elected president of a horsemans organization.

Dont wanna be , if I had my way right now Id be catchin waves in Hawaii , but for now Im just a horse whore.
Dont be so sensitive , he can say the horses soundness doesnt matter and thats ok , but if I say I dont care if he ever bets another race again Im an asswipe. Whatever

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Honu

Dont be so sensitive , he can say the horses soundness doesnt matter and thats ok , but if I say I dont care if he ever bets another race again Im an asswipe. Whatever

That's one thing I'm rarely accused of being.

Please link me to where I said the horses soundness doesn't matter. .

[Honu]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

That's one thing I'm rarely accused of being.

Please link me to where I said the horses soundness doesn't matter. .

I didnt say you , I quoted Ateamstupid as you can clearly see in the posting .