North Carolina Tar Heels

[hedge]

My favorite part was when his wife was tugging on his coat, trying to get him to shut up, and he just swatted her hand away and kept talking. Then at the end of the interview, she obviously said something to him and he turned around and angrily said "I don't care, I'm going to speak my mind!" or some such. Reminded me of Archie and Edith Bunker. That was true reality TV. The entire interaction b/w them was the truest slice of Americana (and just husband/wife-acana in general) ever seen at a hoity-toity sporting event, although obviously not the one the producers wanted...

[hedge]

I don't know enough about horse racing to be up on the why's and wherefor's of how they do things, but at first glance, it seems like he has a legitimate argument. Even if it has always been done that way, it doesn't seem fair. He's not asking for any kind of advantage, but at the same time, why should anyone else's horse have an advantage over his? B/c it's always been that way?

[eCat]

lets say you have a horse that specializes in long distances. Does it make sense to run the horse in a short distance race where he is likely to lose, hurt his overall record and potentially hurt himself?

Its not an advantage, each race is an individual race, it was never designed to be like Nascar where the same drivers race each week on a different track. In order to win the triple crown you have to win all 3 races against a potentially different field each time.

He just has the red ass because his horse didn't win.

[aTm]

The horse didn't win the Belmont. End of fucking story. There is no triple crown limited to certain entries, you have to win three races. The guy made himself look like the horse racing rube we all thought he might be when he did his derby interview and acted like nobody saw it coming or believed how his overwhelming favorite won.

[hedge]

"Does it make sense to run the horse in a short distance race where he is likely to lose, hurt his overall record and potentially hurt himself?"

So you'd be OK if the guy had held Chrome out of the Belmont for the reasons you cite?

[hedge]

It does seem like just as legit an argument to hold your horse out of the final race (after you've won the first two) as it is for the other owners to hold their horses out of the earlier race(s). That horse that won the Belmont is going to make a ton of money for its owner just by winning one leg of the TC. I doubt Chrome or any other two leg winner would make any less simply by not running the Belmont. They are already proven winners, with the added advantage of "what if?"...

[eCat]

"Does it make sense to run the horse in a short distance race where he is likely to lose, hurt his overall record and potentially hurt himself?"

So you'd be OK if the guy had held Chrome out of the Belmont for the reasons you cite?

sure - why would I care if he held the horse out if he thought it would hurt the horse or the horse had no chance to win?

[aTm]

In 2012 the neither of the 1st/2nd finishers ran the Belmont. I'll have Another was scratched, and Bodemeister wasn't there. If IHA wasn't injured, would it make a difference that there were fresh horses rather than the clear second best horse in Bodemeister? Should Bodemeister also have been forced to race to make sure IHA had a legit challenger and not a walkover?

[eCat]

It does seem like just as legit an argument to hold your horse out of the final race (after you've won the first two) as it is for the other owners to hold their horses out of the earlier race(s). That horse that won the Belmont is going to make a ton of money for its owner just by winning one leg of the TC. I doubt Chrome or any other two leg winner would make any less simply by not running the Belmont. They are already proven winners, with the added advantage of "what if?"...

perhaps you should be pissed the owners of the horse that won Belmont didn't race him at the other races and eliminated the talk of Chrome being a potential Triple Crown winner early on,

[hedge]

I really don't care either way, I'm not a big horse racing fan, but I bet the network and the Belmont think it's in their best interests to have the winner of the first two legs definitely running in the third. And I guess it's also obvious that most owners of a winner of the first two legs (how many of those have there been?) think it's in their best interest to enter their horse for a chance to win the coveted TC, or else this would've come up before now. I would be interested to here from other owners whose horse won the first two legs and then lost the Belmont to see their opinion of the current set-up. Obviously I've never heard this complaint before (maybe that's only b/c they didn't do it on national TV in such a vociferous manner, I have no idea), so maybe other owners in that same position didn't think it was a big deal...

[crashcourse]

Id schedule the belmont one week later--3 races in 5 weeks --make it 3 races in 6 weeks- you could tell chrome had no extra gear comint out of the corner while the winner just cruised right by

but for an 8k investemtn that owner should just stfu and take his millions and walk away like mama told him to

[Jungle Rat]

I am The Straw.

[hedge]

Mama probably got a beating when they got home. He didn't seem like the type of guy who would brook interference when he's on a sass roll...

[hedge]

A good response to his complaints about it being unfair would've been if somebody had pulled out a tablet with the video of Secretariat at the Belmont and said "Here, watch this"...

[eCat]

Mama probably got a beating when they got home. He didn't seem like the type of guy who would brook interference when he's on a sass roll...

he seems a bit new to the horse racing elite

[sardis]

The owner should be thankful that the Belmont horses didn't compete against him in the Derby or he would have remained a no name.

Not only did Secretariat win all three, he still holds the record for each of the three races.

[Bklyn]

Also, you run all three races, even when it's a rarity to win at the Belmont distance after running the shorter Kentucky and Preakness, because the stud fees are that much more rich if you are TCer.

[crashcourse]

the price of seed whether you win the first two legs of the TC or all three I wouldnt think would vary that much. Nobody has done it in 40 years. California chrome is going to be the mos expensive stud from this generation.

Secretariot will always be the stud of all studs

didnt he win by 20 lengths in the belmont. thats the stud of all time

[aTm]

[youtube]v_i3Lcjli84[/youtube]

[sardis]

I recognized Lebron, the chunky Williams sister, and Stu Scott. Everyone else, I have no clue.