Censorship on Bloodhorse

[Revolution]

You guys all seem to know so much but Haskins article is still gone. There must be something more to it than they didn't like his opinion.

I am going to guess Haskin will lose any fight he starts with Godolphin.

This is horse racing and everyone has an agenda. I wonder what Haskin's is. Criticizing a family for retiring their 3rd best horse doesn't exactly make sense.

It is hilarious that this guy thinks they shouldn't retire him when the horse will stay in America. They aren't taking him out of the country.

[ironprospect]

seen the article. But when I referenced the link it was gone.

In a perfect world, or should I say my perfect world.....Yes all the stars should stay until at least their the five year old season is over. Like my freshman year at Fordham when a spent more time on the train from the Bronx to Queens than I did in class...alydar, affirmed, exceller, seattle slew etc....Quiet Little Table, who ran in every stake in NY he was eligible for) , oh and if I don't put Forego in this post that old cheese Don Meyers might actually come out of the ground and hunt me down and my favorite OVERSKATE who for the loss of a shoe could have pulled off one of alltime biggest upsets/dorm parties ever.

There have been some nice three year olds in the past couple of years but I can state in my opinion no horse can prove greatness in one season especially the 3yo season. Until a horse, can prove itself with its elders, or when it is an elder, face all comers....that is a true champion.

As for the complaints about the fellows from Dubai, I believe that some of what I read is correct, but it is also correct about some of the owners in the US and Canada.

By the that was 1978 and I was 17 years old

I later chased the dream and spent five years on the backstretch which I would not trade for anything and would go back in a heartbeat if a could afford another horse.

Racing writers are people who you need to make your own decisions on. Some are good and honest, some are as skewed as so far to themselves, I wouldn't trust there mothers.

One drf idiot fixed himself a trip to the old world series of horse racing at penn national by dropping his hidden ownership horse just to make sure he got the trip. yep he still works for them. And I haven't trusted a word he's written since.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

But you do seem to be speaking for them.

Suprised you didn't hear about the pulled advertising....just about everyone has heard that story.

I had to chuckle when I heard that news. And to think, when I took exception to his now widely criticized column, you wrote that he found time to speak with you about MY comments. All of your "Beyer may have meant 'ostentatious' when he wrote vulgar," ( that's paraphrased, pleeze don't sue me, ok?) explanations, with you pulling up supporting dictionary definitions were fairly amusing, if not especially interesting, along with the anger you directed at me culminating, predictably, with you questioning my mental capacity.

It was certainly curious when Crist came out a couple days later with a column on the same topic, written in far more modulated tones. A direct apology for Beyer's "working over" of the Sheiks? Maybe not, but DRF's Publisher covering the same topic as Beyer did a couple days before makes it an interesting notion.

Your thoughts are clear. So are Beyer's. Hopefully he's more open to criticism of his work on this occasion than you.

You probably don't give a rat's a ss about what I thought of his work, other than to take the occasion as opportunity to attack me in a fashion which brought to my mind the image of a rabid lhasa opso.

I doubt what you or I think about this really matters. But I'd bet my last freakin dollar the DRF's Publisher and Board of Directors care.

Give my regards to your friend, Mr. Beyer, if he's not too busy offering his expert insights on geo-politics and the collective psyche of the Dubai populace.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Revolution

I am not sure you should be talking about just making things up. You are the one throwing insane things like the bloodhorse censoring out there. The bloodhorse would never censor anything. A writer might be influenced to write something, but the magazine would never censor. Why don't you tell us how JFK was killed while you are throwing conspiracy theories out there.

JFK was killed by a bullet.

[SniperSB23]

So, who's more pathetic? Bloodhorse for pulling the article under pressure from Darley or Darley for requesting they remove it in the first place?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by redransom

Trust me when I tell you the Blood-Horse doesn't censor. I know that first-hand.

However, several different people are responsible for posting stories to the website and sometimes things get moved around and links are dropped by mistake. The "time sensitive" thing is an auto response.

You better speak with Ray Paulick about that. He's the one that had the article pulled. Of course he's conveniently out of town for a convention.

[Revolution]

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Revolution

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

If he's writing his own opinion, isn't he allowed to gather his opinion from wherever he wants? I read the article and I thought he had some good points. The chances of Bernardini reproducing himself are slim to none... I think that's pretty accurate, don't you?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Revolution

They have ever right to pull the article. They are not censoring his opinion, they are taking the article down because some of what he wrote is just not based on anything. In fact some of his statements were bizarre. Is this guy on the Coolmore payroll or something.

He said exactly what the majority of the people on here are thinking. There was nothing bizarre about anything written in the article. I'm sure if Coolmore had just retired Bernardini and Henny Hughes the same sentiments would have been directed towards them. This issue is way more racing fans vs Godolphin and Coolmore than it is Godolphin vs Coolmore.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

He said exactly what the majority of the people on here are thinking. There was nothing bizarre about anything written in the article. I'm sure if Coolmore had just retired Bernardini and Henny Hughes the same sentiments would have been directed towards them. This issue is way more racing fans vs Godolphin and Coolmore than it is Godolphin vs Coolmore.

i didn't get to read the article but IMO Coolmore doesn't seem to care much if they get bad press...they either ignore it or rebuke it, and then it goes away...the Maktoum's on the other hand get furious and threaten people the best way they know how--with money (or more accurately the loss of it)...thereby ensuring that no other negative items will be printed. They are so bent on appearing benevolent and sporting---while seeming to have no concept that their actions prove just the opposite.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

He said exactly what the majority of the people on here are thinking. There was nothing bizarre about anything written in the article. I'm sure if Coolmore had just retired Bernardini and Henny Hughes the same sentiments would have been directed towards them. This issue is way more racing fans vs Godolphin and Coolmore than it is Godolphin vs Coolmore.

Who cares what you say on a chat site. You don't have a magazine that employs people and needs advertising dollars. Maybe the editor just thought it was in poor taste. I did. I thought it sounded like a guy who didn't like a new power in racing. Much of the article read like a chat room, not an article for a top magazine.

I really think beyer wrote something and his publication slapped him around and then haskin did the same to prove some point. He got slapped around and now pricci is doing the same. These guys are really little fish in an ocean where Godolphin is the big shark.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

If he's writing his own opinion, isn't he allowed to gather his opinion from wherever he wants? I read the article and I thought he had some good points. The chances of Bernardini reproducing himself are slim to none... I think that's pretty accurate, don't you?

You can have any opinion you want, but you can't just go saying things like the stallion is not likely to produce a great horse. He has no way of knowing that.

He could have said it is "unlikely" he would produce a great horse, but instead he said his chances were "slim to none" language that is not exactly professional.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Revolution

Who cares what you say on a chat site. You don't have a magazine that employs people and needs advertising dollars. Maybe the editor just thought it was in poor taste. I did. I thought it sounded like a guy who didn't like a new power in racing. Much of the article read like a chat room, not an article for a top magazine.

I really think beyer wrote something and his publication slapped him around and then haskin did the same to prove some point. He got slapped around and now pricci is doing the same. These guys are really little fish in an ocean where Godolphin is the big shark.

Alienating the people who subscribe to your magazine isn't the smartest way to do business. The Sheikhs are a bunch of whiners.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Revolution

You can have any opinion you want, but you can't just go saying things like the stallion is not likely to produce a great horse. He has no way of knowing that.

He could have said it is "unlikely" he would produce a great horse, but instead he said his chances were "slim to none" language that is not exactly professional.

Rev,

That was his OPINION, though... he never stated it as fact. I just think he's entitled to his opinion and in all honesty, if Bernie DOES reproduce a horse like himself, than Haskin is the only one that looks dumb, so he's the one taking the bigger risk! Why should the Sheiks care who says what about their business practices and what they do with their horses? The fact that they didn't like what he said just proves to me that there is some merit in what Haskin thinks.

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Rev,

That was his OPINION, though... he never stated it as fact. I just think he's entitled to his opinion and in all honesty, if Bernie DOES reproduce a horse like himself, than Haskin is the only one that looks dumb, so he's the one taking the bigger risk! Why should the Sheiks care who says what about their business practices and what they do with their horses? The fact that they didn't like what he said just proves to me that there is some merit in what Haskin thinks.

I don't know. People complain about these Sheikhs but the writers are the ones always focusing on the negative. Maybe the editor doesn't like negative stuff written about people that aren't being given a fair deal by the writer. They are bringing back their top 2 horses. Are they just supposed to never retire their horses?

These writers have clearly banded together against Godolphin and the editor of the magazine isn't stupid enough not to see that. These writers have some agenda and it isn't for the good of the sport.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Revolution

These writers have clearly banded together against Godolphin and the editor of the magazine isn't stupid enough not to see that. These writers have some agenda and it isn't for the good of the sport.

Now THIS is funny. Thanks.

I am shocked and stunned at what that mean man Ray Paulick has done!

[Revolution]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Now THIS is funny. Thanks.

I am shocked and stunned at what that mean man Ray Paulick has done!

He is the editor, not a writer. What he did was the correct thing to do. These writers are morons.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Revolution

He is the editor, not a writer. What he did was the correct thing to do. These writers are morons.

When I tell him YOU said that he will put the article right back up!

My first equine hero was Seattle Slew. I was so fortunate, because even though Slew nearly died in the fall of his three-year-old year, the Taylors were sporting enough to bring him back as a healthy four-year-old. At that point, the Triple Crown winner was able to prove his greatness. Darley should have taken an example from Karen and Mickey Taylor who let the fans enjoy a mature Slew. Seattle Slew was a great racehorse and a great stallion who lives on through Bernardini. Slew gave us Slew O' Gold, Landaluce, Swale, and A.P. Indy, but he never gave us another Seattle Slew. Haskin is most likely speaking the truth in terms of the odds. We live in a free country and it is certainly not libel to say what he said.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Bold Reasoning

My first equine hero was Seattle Slew. I was so fortunate, because even though Slew nearly died in the fall of his three-year-old year, the Taylors were sporting enough to bring him back as a healthy four-year-old. At that point, the Triple Crown winner was able to prove his greatness. Darley should have taken an example from Karen and Mickey Taylor who let the fans enjoy a mature Slew. Seattle Slew was a great racehorse and a great stallion who lives on through Bernardini. Slew gave us Slew O' Gold, Landaluce, Swale, and A.P. Indy, but he never gave us another Seattle Slew. Haskin is most likely speaking the truth in terms of the odds. We live in a free country and it is certainly not libel to say what he said.

Thank you! A voice of reason.