Bernardini probably done...

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

These doing " what's best for the horse " arguments are completely hypocritical. " What is best for horses " is to not race them period, as pretending this is a game that is about " what's best for horses " is pretty much to flat out lie. Frankly, these horses shouldn't even be born if one cares about " what's best for horses ".

Sorry, animal welfare arguments and racing simply do not mix. If they care so much about the safety of horses they should be spending their money to try to stop thoroughbred racing. Since, apparently they aren't doing that, at least in some ways, spare me that excuse. They are simply making a selfish economic decision. Stop trying to sugar coat it.

I flat out stated in the other Bernardini post that at no point in the future will he be as valuable as he is right now. They would, more than likely, diminish his value to them by racing them next year. Absolutely.

But on the same hand, you nor me, know whats going on with the animal. It more than likely is an economic decision... and im fine with that. I'd do what they're doing and run all the way to the bank... but there may be more than whats being said. Having had parents who owned a racing stable, I know there's almost always little things nagging runners... some worse than others... some just a matter of time before they get serious.

This may be one of those situations, it may not. But im not going to assume anything and fault owners for behaving exactly how I would. 406 million were spent at public auction by the sheiks... im sure they'd like to get some of that back... and im sure, above all else, nothing will be as thrilling for them as racing homebreds by him.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Balletto

I flat out stated in the other Bernardini post that at no point in the future will he be as valuable as he is right now. They would, more than likely, diminish his value to them by racing them next year. Absolutely.

But on the same hand, you nor me, know whats going on with the animal. It more than likely is an economic decision... and im fine with that. I'd do what they're doing and run all the way to the bank... but there may be more than whats being said. Having had parents who owned a racing stable, I know there's almost always little things nagging runners... some worse than others... some just a matter of time before they get serious.

This may be one of those situations, it may not. But im not going to assume anything and fault owners for behaving exactly how I would. 406 million were spent at public auction by the sheiks... im sure they'd like to get some of that back... and im sure, above all else, nothing will be as thrilling for them as racing homebreds by him.

Supposedly they were the ones that didn't have to make selfish financially based decisions. They were the ones with so much money that they could do what was best for the game and not themselves. Apparently, when push comes to shove, they are as selfish as anyone. I understand why people who need the money do it. They don't need the money....that's for sure. If they cared at all about what was good for the game they would be racing Bernardini next year. At least this issue has been settled once and for all. Sportsmen they are not.

Please, spare me the " problems nagging horses " lesson. I think we all know that horses have nagging problems. I think we also knew that this particular decision was made a while ago and it is a financial one. Once again, let's stop pretending to care about the welfare of horses to the detriment of the game...unless you're just ready to go completely pro-Peta.

[Bystander]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Please, spare me the " problems nagging horses " lesson. I think we all know that horses have nagging problems. I think we also knew that this particular decision was made a while ago and it is a financial one. Once again, let's stop pretending to care about the welfare of horses to the detriment of the game...unless you're just ready to go completely pro-Peta.

Not to metion the fact that they made the choice to retire Bernardini before the BC, stating that they'd be running Discreet Cat next year. If Bernardini has untold nagging problems, Discreet Cat must then be the picture of soundness.
Right?

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Bystander

Not to metion the fact that they made the choice to retire Bernardini before the BC, stating that they'd be running Discreet Cat next year. If Bernardini has untold nagging problems, Discreet Cat must then be the picture of soundness.
Right?

Yes, they are disingenuous to boot.

[Sightseek]

Henny for $40,000, we should all line up though, because Andromeda's Hero will also be standing at a Stud farm near you.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Supposedly they were the ones that didn't have to make selfish financially based decisions. They were the ones with so much money that they could do what was best for the game and not themselves. Apparently, when push comes to shove, they are as selfish as anyone. I understand why people who need the money do it. They don't need the money....that's for sure. If they cared at all about what was good for the game they would be racing Bernardini next year. At least this issue has been settled once and for all. Sportsmen they are not.

Please, spare me the " problems nagging horses " lesson. I think we all know that horses have nagging problems. I think we also knew that this particular decision was made a while ago and it is a financial one. Once again, let's stop pretending to care about the welfare of horses to the detriment of the game...unless you're just ready to go completely pro-Peta.

So, I guess anyone with seemingly unlimited financial means should not look at anything from a business perspective. They should just spend and not worry about attempting to possibly break even or succeed if something is a business. Then again, im sure its easier said than done when its not your money.

And your whole "horse racing is cruel" cry at countering what I originally stated is rather old. Granted, you were playing Devil's Advocate, but give me a break. If you wanted to sensationalize the sport, why stop there? Lets all hunt our food because lord knows, we shouldnt breed our food.

Here's an interesting tidbit for you... In a genetics class we learned that horses would be extinct right now if it wasnt for human prevention/interaction. There is not one truly wild herd of horses left on the planet. Anything that is wild has come from domesticated stock at one time or another. The horse, as we know it, is not an animal that evolution has been kind to... its why these animals, especially thoroughbreds, seem to find ways to kill themselves.

Regardless, throw your fits, bash the sport, claim you're a fan of the racing and not the breeding, but its a symbiotic relationship that is always seeking a balance. Right now, the balance is in a good financial state... even though most claim its not kind to fans. In that case, find a gelding and bat your eyes away... or better yet, enter the sport so we can all comment on your decisions as an owner, I mean, the sport is built around us, right???

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Balletto

So, I guess anyone with seemingly unlimited financial means should not look at anything from a business perspective. They should just spend and not worry about attempting to possibly break even or succeed if something is a business. Then again, im sure its easier said than done when its not your money.

And your whole "horse racing is cruel" cry at countering what I originally stated is rather old. Granted, you were playing Devil's Advocate, but give me a break. If you wanted to sensationalize the sport, why stop there? Lets all hunt our food because lord knows, we shouldnt breed our food.

Here's an interesting tidbit for you... In a genetics class we learned that horses would be extinct right now if it wasnt for human prevention/interaction. There is not one truly wild herd of horses left on the planet. Anything that is wild has come from domesticated stock at one time or another. The horse, as we know it, is not an animal that evolution has been kind to... its why these animals, especially thoroughbreds, seem to find ways to kill themselves.

Regardless, throw your fits, bash the sport, claim you're a fan of the racing and not the breeding, but its a symbiotic relationship that is always seeking a balance. Right now, the balance is in a good financial state... even though most claim its not kind to fans. In that case, find a gelding and bat your eyes away... or better yet, enter the sport so we can all comment on your decisions as an owner, I mean, the sport is built around us, right???

First of all, they could still do quite well with Bernardini financially and still race him next season. Certainly you realize the two are not mutually exclusive.

Second of all, it is you that is pulling the " what's best for the horse " argument. I am simply the one showing it as hypocritical.

And, of course, as the supposed daughter of owners you are certainly are in no position to make your snide little digs in the final paragraph. Frankly, I have " entered the sport ". I'm sure, in fact, I have given quite a bit more to it than you have. But, hey, thanks for the advice. Next time you choose to discuss racing you might want to stick to the issues and leave the personal advice out.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

First of all, they could still do quite well with Bernardini financially and still race him next season. Certainly you realize the two are not mutually exclusive.

Second of all, it is you that is pulling the " what's best for the horse " argument. I am simply the one showing it as hypocritical.

And, of course, as the supposed daughter of owners you are certainly are in no position to make your snide little digs in the final paragraph. Frankly, I have " entered the sport ". I'm sure, in fact, I have given quite a bit more to it than you have. But, hey, thanks for the advice. Next time you choose to discuss racing you might want to stick to the issues and leave the personal advice out.

My intentions were not to be "snide". I've just learned countless times that the fans mentality are usually quite different than the owners. And nothing was directed at you personally. It was a general statement about the financial dedication this sport needs from its owners.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Balletto

My intentions were not to be "snide". I've just learned countless times that the fans mentality are usually quite different than the owners. And nothing was directed at you personally. It was a general statement about the financial dedication this sport needs from its owners.

No disrespect to the owners, as I understand well their financial dedication to the game, but it is the bettors' " financial dedication " to this game that keeps it going.

I think the argument in this particular situation exists because there was a feeling, obviously unjustified, that the Sheik's interests in the game could transcend the average owner's, in that he was one of very few that could afford to race an extra year, as the lure of instant dollars was not an issue for him. I absolutely agree if " regular " people, like probably just about anybody here, owned a horse and was in a life changing situation which necessitated a retirement, that situation would be understandable.

However, I agree with the posters who suggested the breeding end of the game is hurting it from a fan's perspective, and the general hope was that the Sheik would be immune to that. Obviously he is not.

Look, I'm a bettor, I am liable to bet as much on a Thursday in February as BC Day. Personally none of this really affects me. However, I like seeing good horses racing, and I am heartened by enthusiasm for the game, and I find the rush to the breeding shed depressing. Wouldn't a showdown in the Met Mile between Henny Hughes and Discreet Cat have been exciting?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

No disrespect to the owners, as I understand well their financial dedication to the game, but it is the bettors' " financial dedication " to this game that keeps it going.

I think the argument in this particular situation exists because there was a feeling, obviously unjustified, that the Sheik's interests in the game could transcend the average owner's, in that he was one of very few that could afford to race an extra year, as the lure of instant dollars was not an issue for him. I absolutely agree if " regular " people, like probably just about anybody here, owned a horse and was in a life changing situation which necessitated a retirement, that situation would be understandable.

However, I agree with the posters who suggested the breeding end of the game is hurting it from a fan's perspective, and the general hope was that the Sheik would be immune to that. Obviously he is not.

Look, I'm a bettor, I am liable to bet as much on a Thursday in February as BC Day. Personally none of this really affects me. However, I like seeing good horses racing, and I am heartened by enthusiasm for the game, and I find the rush to the breeding shed depressing. Wouldn't a showdown in the Met Mile between Henny Hughes and Discreet Cat have been exciting?

Maybe he's just anxious to see the "Bernie's Babies" hit the track.

Maybe the cost to insure him ($3 mil? $5 mil?) for a year without a realistic chance to earn that much on the track coupled with the chance of a catastrophic breakdown plus the desire to get him going as a stallion makes it a more palatable decision.

It ain't likely about the money. Probably the chance of him getting injured or worse is more important to the owner than it would be to most other people.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Balletto

So, I guess anyone with seemingly unlimited financial means should not look at anything from a business perspective. They should just spend and not worry about attempting to possibly break even or succeed if something is a business. Then again, im sure its easier said than done when its not your money.

And your whole "horse racing is cruel" cry at countering what I originally stated is rather old. Granted, you were playing Devil's Advocate, but give me a break. If you wanted to sensationalize the sport, why stop there? Lets all hunt our food because lord knows, we shouldnt breed our food.

Here's an interesting tidbit for you... In a genetics class we learned that horses would be extinct right now if it wasnt for human prevention/interaction. There is not one truly wild herd of horses left on the planet. Anything that is wild has come from domesticated stock at one time or another. The horse, as we know it, is not an animal that evolution has been kind to... its why these animals, especially thoroughbreds, seem to find ways to kill themselves.

Regardless, throw your fits, bash the sport, claim you're a fan of the racing and not the breeding, but its a symbiotic relationship that is always seeking a balance. Right now, the balance is in a good financial state... even though most claim its not kind to fans. In that case, find a gelding and bat your eyes away... or better yet, enter the sport so we can all comment on your decisions as an owner, I mean, the sport is built around us, right???

c'mon balletto...the guy spent almost $60 million at ONE sale alone. doesn't sound like he's trying to break even, or is concerned in any way about being in the black years' end if he's tossing around that kind of money.

Originally Posted by Cardus

"Anything wild has come from domesticated stock at one time?" You meant the opposite, right?

No, any "wild herd" of horses in the world today have come from domesticated stock. There are no genetically true wild horses left. I was shocked to learn this as well. Of course, domesticated animals came from wild stock long ago, but they died out while the domesticated animals flourished.

[GenuineRisk]

Gambling is what drives racing, not breeding. If all the gamblers who bet on the ponies decided to spend their dollars on other sports, breeding would have nothing to breed for.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Gambling is what drives racing, not breeding. If all the gamblers who bet on the ponies decided to spend their dollars on other sports, breeding would have nothing to breed for.

A case can be made for that.. as it can for breeding, racing, etc. Its why I said its all a symbiotic relationship. If one side falters badly, the others will follow soon. But yes, gambling drives a lot of the money.... that inturn drives the racing and in the breeding... cycle.....

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Balletto

A case can be made for that.. as it can for breeding, racing, etc. Its why I said its all a symbiotic relationship. If one side falters badly, the others will follow soon. But yes, gambling drives a lot of the money.... that inturn drives the racing and in the breeding... cycle.....

I respectfully disagree. If every Thoroughbred breeding operation in the country went out of business tonight and every Thoroughbred horse dropped dead at the same time, Aqueduct would have donkey races running within two weeks and people would wager on them. People are willing to bet which raindrop will roll down a window first. Gambling is running the show.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Balletto

A case can be made for that.. as it can for breeding, racing, etc. Its why I said its all a symbiotic relationship. If one side falters badly, the others will follow soon. But yes, gambling drives a lot of the money.... that inturn drives the racing and in the breeding... cycle.....

If the breeding bubble burst the owners would certainly suffer by reduced purses and lack of breeding value but the racing quality would actually improve. Seems breeding is more parasitic to racing than symbiotic to me.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Gambling is what drives racing, not breeding. If all the gamblers who bet on the ponies decided to spend their dollars on other sports, breeding would have nothing to breed for.

Thank you.