Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   Triple Crown Topics/Archive.. (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Another one bites the dust.....Square Eddie (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29293)

King Glorious 04-28-2009 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
It's not an automatic assumption. But every other horse didn't have a broken leg 2 months ago. See the difference?

There's Derby fever and there is being reckless. Running him, in my opinion would have been a little reckless based on what was wrong with him a short while ago, how he looked late in the Lexington, the kind of run he put in and the new surface.

Running him in the Derby probably wouldn't have been in the horse's best interest in the regard of giving him his best chance to win. That much we'll agree on. Whether it was reckless in regards to the horse's safety, we'll disagree on. My concern for his physical safety came in the Lexington. Once he passed that test, I was much less concerned with him making it through the Derby.

Merlinsky 04-28-2009 03:58 PM

Phfew. I have to say, while I enjoy Square Eddie, I was dreading the possibilities. Had another Derby horse broken down and in this case from a known pre-existing situation however healed they thought it was, we would've seen the sky fall down. The Derby's just the right amount of pressure that, if he passed the physical test and hit the board or had somehow ended up having all the cards go his way for the win, they would risk pointing to the Preakness only to wind up with disaster.

I always felt if you don't have a horse sound enough and prepared enough to hit all 3 races (hey nobody says you have to win all 3), hold out of the Derby at the very least. There's less pressure to continue after a Preakness win than a Derby win and if you wait til the Belmont, well you can take all the time you need. Unless you're prepared to press on after a win, you're causing headaches for everyone and it's not in the horse's best interest either. The pressure would drive folks to try to keep going when maybe they wouldn't otherwise.

Danzig 04-28-2009 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious
Running him in the Derby probably wouldn't have been in the horse's best interest in the regard of giving him his best chance to win. That much we'll agree on. Whether it was reckless in regards to the horse's safety, we'll disagree on. My concern for his physical safety came in the Lexington. Once he passed that test, I was much less concerned with him making it through the Derby.

i thought it was reckless. they didn't give the horse time off like most would to recover from a fracture. i laughed a bit every time i read 'minor' fracture.

Riot 04-28-2009 04:50 PM

What am I missing? I thought Square Eddie bucked a left front shin in January, and has now rebucked. That's not it?

Indian Charlie 04-28-2009 04:54 PM

They said said originally, but it really was a fracture.

Riot 04-28-2009 04:58 PM

Got' cha, thanks.

RolloTomasi 04-28-2009 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious
My concern for his physical safety came in the Lexington. Once he passed that test, I was much less concerned with him making it through the Derby.

The Lexington was hardly a "test". Stress injuries like his are cumulative in nature, and every bout of physical exertion (whether it be a race or workout) is another check cashed from his body's account. In fact, apparently the Lexington (and the subsequent 1/2 mile workout) were enough to aggravate the injury.

While it may still have been a longshot that he'd breakdown in the race, certainly his odds of being injured was much lower than a relatively "problem free" runner.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.