Ravin R10 man Posted June 9, 2014 Report Share Posted June 9, 2014 (edited) I am with Steve as far as bringing in fresh horses to run the races, I agree, you run all three or none. I though he was a bit undiplomatic with his reaction, but made a very good point. Chrome was not on his game due to getting his foot stepped on by the horse to his right, coming out of the gate. It's a wonder he did as well as he did. I commend Steve for apologizing for his comments. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...list/10224725/ It's like a nascar driver winning at the last "race to the chase" even though he only raced in a few races all season, and expect to be in the top ten for the cup. Here is what he was running with, that had to slow him down. http://bostonherald.com/sports/other/horse_racing/2014/06/california_chrome_sustains_gash_to_foot Edited June 9, 2014 by Mathews XT Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorado bob Posted June 9, 2014 Report Share Posted June 9, 2014 I like it the way it is. It's always been this way. It takes a special horse to do it. Don't say it can't be done because it has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierhunter Posted June 9, 2014 Report Share Posted June 9, 2014 If they all had to run all three the triple crown wouldn't be special as many more horses would achieve the feat. While his point is valid about rested horses. It doesn't eliminate the fact that other horses have still navigated the minefield that he couldn't. To me it was a bitter owner who probably lost 50 million on his horses value. I'd be pissed too at that specific point in time. Chrome's pedigree just isn't there without the triple crown to fetch an extreme number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 9, 2014 Report Share Posted June 9, 2014 Yep, could see his point. Dunno that he said it in the best way he could. Takes a real special animal to win against horses that are rested when they have gone all out in two prior races. Part of what makes it so prestigious imo. Now, if someone were to bring in an animal that was rested that did not run either prior race with the sole purpose to be a spoiler, i think that may be unsportsmanlike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin R10 man Posted June 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 what I'd like to know is, how many of the "upsetting" horses were actually a "fresher" horse that had sat out the second race. Many have won the first two, and lost the third. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierhunter Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 what I'd like to know is, how many of the "upsetting" horses were actually a "fresher" horse that had sat out the second race. Many have won the first two, and lost the third. It's very rare for a horse not eligible for the triple crown to run all three races. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin R10 man Posted June 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 Pat, if the horse is NOT eligible, why can they run it? That don't seem right. I also think you should run all three and not sit one out, or if you do chose to sit one out, your done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkeygirl Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 It was a shame he lost...and I understand the guy's point but his behavior was a bit distracting...I feel bad for his wife...he was a bit nasty to her on TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 Called the triple crown for a reason. A horse that is able to win one race is still a champion, one that wins two of the three has done real well. Only the elitist of the elite ever win three. I have a hard time feeling sorry for a guy who does not cash in on his horse winning the final race and not gaining more wealth. Poor guy will probably only get a couple mil in stud fees for that horse since he was unable to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoosierhunter Posted June 10, 2014 Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 There is a clear advantage to a horse that didn't run all three legs. That's what makes the achievement so great. The only change that I would recommend would be to spread the races out to every six weeks. This allows ample recovery time and you get the best of a horse each race. I would then require only horses entered in race one can run the events. Cap it at a 20 horse field and go from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin R10 man Posted June 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 10, 2014 There is a clear advantage to a horse that didn't run all three legs. That's what makes the achievement so great. The only change that I would recommend would be to spread the races out to every six weeks. This allows ample recovery time and you get the best of a horse each race. I would then require only horses entered in race one can run the events. Cap it at a 20 horse field and go from there. cool, I would sure agree to that Pat! YOU BET! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin R10 man Posted June 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2014 That would give them ALL, a level playing field...I doubt it will get changed anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.