Crazy Ideas

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What would you do about the 2 yo races and Sprint?
I would love to know how many horses have skipped a BC race that they had a good chance of winning because of a "phantom "injury?

The 2 yo races should be done away with for other reasons that are apparent.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

The 2 yo races should be done away with for other reasons that are apparent.

Because I finally bet the winner of one of them?

[Linny]

The fact is that with horses making fewer starts per season, racing is just far less competitive than it once was. From the fans point of view, it's great to see good horses knocking heads over and over but those days are GONE.

I'm not sure if monetary incentives are enough because they cannot compete with the extraordinary values of colts as breeding prospects. Protection of the investment has become the watchword. When horses races 10-15 times a year, losing 5 or more times per season was not unexpected or a tragedy. Now it seems that one loss is cause for retirement to "protect the investment" from losing any more value.

The exceptions are horses like Tiznow or Albert the Great, very talented colts with moderate pedigrees for which the breeders are not screaming.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pgardn

The 2 yo races should be done away with for other reasons that are apparent.

Apparent to whom?

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Apparent to whom?

To people that understand its like asking a teenage pitcher to throw 90 curveballs in a little league game.

I like watching them run also. But ultimately, its just not good for the animals. They are too young to be run this hard. It is apparent to me.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by pgardn

To people that understand its like asking a teenage pitcher to throw 90 curveballs in a little league game.

I like watching them run also. But ultimately, its just not good for the animals. They are too young to be run this hard. It is apparent to me.

The entire game is then bad for the horses.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The entire game is then bad for the horses.

Yes it is.
But its worse for two year olds.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

To people that understand its like asking a teenage pitcher to throw 90 curveballs in a little league game.

I like watching them run also. But ultimately, its just not good for the animals. They are too young to be run this hard. It is apparent to me.

Asking any pitcher on any level at any age to throw 90 curveballs in a given game is a bad idea but I have yet to understand what we are supposed to do with 2 year olds if we cant race them? Send them to prep school for a year?

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Asking any pitcher on any level at any age to throw 90 curveballs in a given game is a bad idea but I have yet to understand what we are supposed to do with 2 year olds if we cant race them? Send them to prep school for a year?

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

There is this falicy that horses only get hurt when they are giving all they have. Horses get hurt in most cases because they have conformational defects that dont allow them to strike the ground on an even, consistent basis. Eventually the problems that crop up as either primary lameness in the defect area or secondary lameness somewhere else due to the original defect. Younger horses are more apt to get sore shins but the thing about young horses is that they recover and heal quicker also.

Of course having a year's worth of training expenses in a 2 year old with no chance of recovering anything is not going to make the owning horses any more economically viable.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

There is this falicy that horses only get hurt when they are giving all they have. Horses get hurt in most cases because they have conformational defects that dont allow them to strike the ground on an even, consistent basis. Eventually the problems that crop up as either primary lameness in the defect area or secondary lameness somewhere else due to the original defect. Younger horses are more apt to get sore shins but the thing about young horses is that they recover and heal quicker also.

Of course having a year's worth of training expenses in a 2 year old with no chance of recovering anything is not going to make the owning horses any more economically viable.

Never said this is how they only get hurt.

I said two year olds are still developing and to run them in races increases the probability of injury. And yes they do recover quicker, for the same reason they get injured, they are still growing. Same in humans.

ANd the money is the main reason why they are on the track at this age. It aint for their health and longevity.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Train them.
Because you know most of the animals, if trained properly, will give you everything they have in a race. Enough to hurt themselves at this age. And the rider cant slow them down when there is money on them.

I believe Phalaris has collected data that strongly supports the idea that the MORE you race 2-yr-olds, the longer their racing careers will be. This was on the ESPN board awhile back. There may have been constraints on how long the races should be. I don't remember the details, but Phalaris has posted here occasionally, too. Maybe he/she will check in.

--Dunbar

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I believe Phalaris has collected data that strongly supports the idea that the MORE you race 2-yr-olds, the longer their racing careers will be. This was on the ESPN board awhile back. There may have been constraints on how long the races should be. I don't remember the details, but Phalaris has posted here occasionally, too. Maybe he/she will check in.

--Dunbar

Love to see the study. I would love to see the data on the two year olds that failed to run after two that was certainly taken into account (and why they failed to run; good luck with that injury report).

I just dont see breeders advertising longevity on the track as heavily as who their mommy and daddy were/are. So I cant believe horses are currently being bred for longevity on the track.

Two year olds need to run. Just not in races where they have a chance of getting totally exhausted, having their young immature bones and muscles go wobbly on them, and then taking that bad step. Or running them when they are already sore, which is going to happen more often in youngsters with developing muscles, having them go wobbly, and having to continue to the finish line under pressure from the jockey.