Dutrow running one off 2 days rest

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by sumitas

How about Comeonmom.

What about him?

[TheSpyder]

Maybe he was talking about Iwoman who just won at Arlington?

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What about him?

[dalakhani]

I was in Ascot in 2006 and if im not mistaken, they ran Takeover Target on Tuesday and turned around and ran him again on saturday.

I think each horse is different. I dont see why it is such an outrage to have a horse run back if he comes out of a race fine and he is ready to go.

Obviously, Dutrow's wasnt...so im not trying to justify anything. My point is, that we cant blame what happened on the fact that it was two days. We should blame it on the fact that that particular horse wasnt ready.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I was in Ascot in 2006 and if im not mistaken, they ran Takeover Target on Tuesday and turned around and ran him again on saturday.

I think each horse is different. I dont see why it is such an outrage to have a horse run back if he comes out of a race fine and he is ready to go.

Obviously, Dutrow's wasnt...so im not trying to justify anything. My point is, that we cant blame what happened on the fact that it was two days. We should blame it on the fact that that particular horse wasnt ready.

we're talking about a two day turnaround with cheap horses, and you give an example of a top horse that ran back in four days.

how do you know for sure when the horse is ready to go? what is the limit? can they come back the next day? later in the same card? I'm sure some horses could do it, the question is aren't you inviting trouble and exposing them to increased risk at some point?

[Danzig]

well, trainers are supposed to know when a horse is ready to go. a quick turnaround on its own may raise eyebrows, but isn't necessarily a reason to call peta--but if dutrow had indications that the horse shouldn't run, and ran him anway hoping for a claim--well, then he deserves all the grief he can get.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Danzig

well, trainers are supposed to know when a horse is ready to go. a quick turnaround on its own may raise eyebrows, but isn't necessarily a reason to call peta--but if dutrow had indications that the horse shouldn't run, and ran him anway hoping for a claim--well, then he deserves all the grief he can get.

Exactly!

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

we're talking about a two day turnaround with cheap horses, and you give an example of a top horse that ran back in four days.

how do you know for sure when the horse is ready to go? what is the limit? can they come back the next day? later in the same card? I'm sure some horses could do it, the question is aren't you inviting trouble and exposing them to increased risk at some point?

Your points are valid. I just dont think in this age of treating horses like china dolls we should complain about trainers actually wanting to run their horses.

And what does the fact that the horse is "cheap" have to do with his his soundness. Are cheap horses more or less likely to sustain injury on a quick turnaround?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

And what does the fact that the horse is "cheap" have to do with his his soundness.

In some cases, a lot. Unrequited, for example, was a well-meant horse (he was owned by the nationally prominent Jay Em Ess Stable) from the outset, making his debut in 2005 in a maiden special at Del Mar for Ron Ellis. After that race, he was gone for over 6 months before resurfacing at Hollywood and winning a maiden special weight at Hollywood. Despite lining up against future stakes horses such as Sailor's Sunset, he ultimately began dipping into mid-level claiming ranks with some success in 2007 in CA before disappearing again, this time for over a year. He finally resurfaced with the stable's East Coast trainer, Dutrow, who ran him a few times before his fatal injury.

When you consider the fact that this horse had two long layoffs during his career and was steadily dropping in value (where once he butted heads with stakes-calibur horses), certainly, even on paper alone, his soundness (in general--not necessarily at Monmouth on raceday) had to be questioned.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

In some cases, a lot. Unrequited, for example, was a well-meant horse (he was owned by the nationally prominent Jay Em Ess Stable) from the outset, making his debut in 2005 in a maiden special at Del Mar for Ron Ellis. After that race, he was gone for over 6 months before resurfacing at Hollywood and winning a maiden special weight at Hollywood. Despite lining up against future stakes horses such as Sailor's Sunset, he ultimately began dipping into mid-level claiming ranks with some success in 2007 in CA before disappearing again, this time for over a year. He finally resurfaced with the stable's East Coast trainer, Dutrow, who ran him a few times before his fatal injury.

When you consider the fact that this horse had two long layoffs during his career and was steadily dropping in value (where once he butted heads with stakes-calibur horses), certainly, even on paper alone, his soundness (in general--not necessarily at Monmouth on raceday) had to be questioned.

I hear what you are saying. And again, my point was never to defend Dutrow with this particular horse. I dont know enough about the situation to speak to it one way or another.

My point was more in that there are horses that can run back really fast and some of them are stake horses and some of them are cheap. Its the trainer's job to know which ones can and cant.

Obviously, in this situation, Dutrow was wrong in thinking the horse could do it.

[blackthroatedwind]

Dutrow ran The Cuban Hawk in today's 7th race, going 1 1/16th on the turf, off an 11 month layoff. He finished a credible third. He is entered, at 6F on the turf, in Friday's 9th race.