California Chrome's owner just blew any goodwill.

[ADJMK]

At least Art Sherman knows better


http://www.wdrb.com/story/25722256/c...EE8Fk.facebook

[ADJMK]

Best column written today:


Tonalist missed the Kentucky Derby because he had a lung infection. He was a promising horse -- much more promising, once, than California Chrome -- but he had a lung infection and his owners didn't want to risk hurting that beautiful creature by training him and racing him at every event Tonalist would need to get the qualifying points to enter the Kentucky Derby.

And so one of the most enchanting Triple Crown candidates entering the season was denied that chance, and not because his owner was a coward who wanted to lay in the weeds for the Belmont or was a goddamn cheater who wanted to deny Steve Coburn from turning his 15 minutes of fame into a lifetime of easy living. Tonalist's owners kept Tonalist from running the Kentucky Derby because it was the right thing to do.

Steve Coburn? That dumbass wouldn't know the right thing to do if it walked up to him and placed a microphone in his face.

http://www.cbssports.com/general/wri...ecord-shows-it

[Merlinsky]

Well said, Nick Zito: http://es.pn/1oBCwxJ

They can provide incentives to run in all 3, but as Jeannine Edwards pointed out, it's like the Grand Slam in tennis. Each event is its own thing, each one is special in its own right. You can't demand people/horses enter in all of them.

[tector]

Old farts here will remember Billy Carter (brother of Jimmy Carter). At first he was an amusing cracker, then the more he opened his mouth, the more quickly he wore out his welcome.

Deja vu all over again, as the man said.

[Dawgswin]

Just in case anyone is still interested, here's a link to a better quality version of Coburn's original comments. Looking back on it now after a couple of days I can understand why people thought it was a bit over the top:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuH7FC3R_mo

[Antitrust32]

So Steve Coburn's rant following the Belmont Stakes was very interesting to me. Not because he is right, because he is not right... he's not even close to being right and his entire premise goes against the history and elusiveness of Horse Racing's greatest honor... to win the Triple Crown. What was interesting is that many very casual followers of the sport (non-bettors and people who only watch the Derby or a Belmont if the Triple Crown is on the line) actually agreed with Steve Coburn's opinion. It is telling how people can hear a soundbite and run with it as fact, even though the opinion was not based in any history or education of the sport, it was purely a baseless opinion from someone who was being a bit of a sore loser and has had a TON of luck in the racing business. I assume this happens throughout humanity on many different levels and topics (especially politics), people run with or support an uneducated idea because the soundbite captured their attention.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So Steve Coburn's rant following the Belmont Stakes was very interesting to me. Not because he is right, because he is not right... he's not even close to being right and his entire premise goes against the history and elusiveness of Horse Racing's greatest honor... to win the Triple Crown. What was interesting is that many very casual followers of the sport (non-bettors and people who only watch the Derby or a Belmont if the Triple Crown is on the line) actually agreed with Steve Coburn's opinion. It is telling how people can hear a soundbite and run with it as fact, even though the opinion was not based in any history or education of the sport, it was purely a baseless opinion from someone who was being a bit of a sore loser and has had a TON of luck in the racing business. I assume this happens throughout humanity on many different levels and topics (especially politics), people run with or support an uneducated idea because the soundbite captured their attention.

Had a houseful (neighbors / friends) all of whom know absolutely nothing about horse racing all say the same thing - They we flabbergasted that a "horse was allowed to race" in the Belmont without having to "qualify" by running in one of the other two TC races. The discussion came about even before Colburn expressed his opinion.

First question - Where did Tonalist and Commissioner finish in the Derby"

Me - "They haven't run in either of the two previous TC races"

Response - WTF??!! Seriously??!! That makes no sense. How is that fair? This sport has some stupid rules.

Me - "Whatever". "Go home".

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So Steve Coburn's rant following the Belmont Stakes was very interesting to me. Not because he is right, because he is not right... he's not even close to being right and his entire premise goes against the history and elusiveness of Horse Racing's greatest honor... to win the Triple Crown. What was interesting is that many very casual followers of the sport (non-bettors and people who only watch the Derby or a Belmont if the Triple Crown is on the line) actually agreed with Steve Coburn's opinion. It is telling how people can hear a soundbite and run with it as fact, even though the opinion was not based in any history or education of the sport, it was purely a baseless opinion from someone who was being a bit of a sore loser and has had a TON of luck in the racing business. I assume this happens throughout humanity on many different levels and topics (especially politics), people run with or support an uneducated idea because the soundbite captured their attention.

It's not surprising that people who don't know the sport would agree with him because when you just hear one side of the argument about one aspect of something, you're probably going to think the argument makes sense. If you don't know the facts of a case and you just listen to the defense attorney's arguments for a couple of minutes (without hearing the prosecution's case), it will sound like the defendant has a great case.

The truth of the matter is that fresh horses do have an advantage. So what? An owner has a right to get to a race any way he wants. Nobody has the right to dictate to an owner what races his horse has to run in. Each individual TC race is a huge race. Each race has top horses and fresh horses. That is one of the reasons that each race is tough to win.

As others have said, can you imagine if the rules were the way that Coburn wants them to be? The Belmont would be a 3 horse field every year. This year it would have been a 3 horses field with CC, General A Rod, and Ride on Curlin. To have Belmonts like that, it wouldn't even be a big deal to win the TC.

So it is true that CC was at a disadvantage compared to the fresher horses but that is the way it should be. That is one of the reasons that winning the TC is so elusive and why winning the TC is such a huge accomplishment. You have to take on all comers. That is the way it should be.

If you simply go up to a novice without putting things in context and ask him if he thinks it's fair that CC ran in all the races and the other horses didn't, the guy will probably say that it's not fair. But then if you explain all the facts to the person, he will probably change his mind.

[TheSpyder]

Billy Carter

Thanks for the memory

Originally Posted by tector

Old farts here will remember Billy Carter (brother of Jimmy Carter). At first he was an amusing cracker, then the more he opened his mouth, the more quickly he wore out his welcome.

Deja vu all over again, as the man said.