Is anyone paying attention to whether or not there's a new triple crown winner in horse racing? I remember Secretariat winning.. Vaguely.
I don't really follow horse racing, but I am rooting California Chrome today. May even watch the race if I'm home when they run.
I saw him win the second race, so I am moderately curious.
It would be a great shot in the arm for horse racing, which is dying a slow death.
Horse racing needs to die a quick death. There is too much neglect and abuse involved.
Quote from: PopeyesPappy on June 07, 2014, 06:27:40 PM
Horse racing needs to die a quick death. There is too much neglect and abuse involved.
True story. Go to any state fair and see the pony rides, or go to any town that allows carriages on the streets. Horses are not designed to walk on asphalt or concrete. Very hard on them.
That's rich..poor horses, but who gives a fuck about pigs getting unneeded heart surgery then made into alcoholics..
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 07, 2014, 06:39:45 PM
That's rich..poor horses, but who gives a fuck about pigs getting unneeded heart surgery then made into alcoholics..
That's because pigs ain't horses, bro. Aesthetics. Horses are long legged, shapely, muscular and with beautiful flowng manes.
Pigs are short, squat, fat and grunt. You have met women that fit those descriptions. Which one are you going to date?
Yeah, let's kill off short, squat women no doubt..
I didn't even know the race was yesterday, because I don't usually follow. In order to find out if Chrome won, I googled it, and my fist hit was this:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/california-chrome-owner-part-class--part-ass-in-defeat-010645280.html
Oddly, the owner of Chrome expressed something that was being discussed on some talk show the day before the race. They were arguing about racing a horse three times over a short time period. While the races are weeks apart, some think it's too hard on the horses. Enter a "dark horse" in the last race, and it becomes unfair. The last race of the Triple Crown is treated just like another race, but it has become the defacto end of the Triple Crown, and some think the once race should require the prerequisite running in the other races, since the Triple Crown is seen as just part of one single event; Well sort of.
I'm not an expert. I thought the news item was a bit unfair. The owner's reaction might seem like whining, but if his point is legitimate, it's legitimate whining and might be treated with more consideration. I suppose he could have been more graceful about it, but think it's unnecessary to shit on him for being a poor sport. I dunno, maybe he has a point.
http://www.sportingnews.com/sport/story/2014-06-08/belmont-stakes-california-chrome-injury-hoof-matterhorn-triple-crown-near-miss
I think he has a point, but being open about it will only make him look like a sore loser.
Horse racing is brutal on the animals, especially since they ride them way too hard, way too young. A horse isn't done growing until he's about 5, so his bones are still soft. In TB racing, they start them as yearlings. I've had an off-track thoroughbred and his legs were a mess despite being a very well-built fellow. Pinfired, bowed-tendons, splints, striking injury scars, the works. Orthopedic injuries are so much the norm that they do a procedure to almost all of them called pinfiring that is meant to intercept an orthopedic injury that occurs in most or all Thouroughbreds because they start them too young.
I am not sure, really, how I feel about horse racing. It's downright dangerous for the horses and jockeys, but the horses get absolutely royal treatment during their racing careers. A lot of what they do to the horses is hocus pocus though, like giving them lasix (a diuretic) and special vitamin concoctions.
The worst of it is the same for race horses as it is for any other horses: There are way too many of them bred, and virtually all of them end up on the slaughter trucks or neglected after they hit a certain age or are unsound enough to be unservicable riding animals. I have had several horses and honestly never gave it much thought: People don't generally keep their old and lame horses, they trade up for new ones, so the old ones end up at auction.
With the ban on slaughter of horses in the US, horses are neglected on a much larger scale.
Many animals love to run and horses are one. Well, lets step back, horses run, whether they love it or not may be debatable, they do seem to enjoy it. Race horses have pretty good lives. The idea that racing them within a "few" weeks is basic bullshit as the training to a horse is pretty much the same as racing. Just like football players may complain about having to play four days apart as being hard on the body, most practices are far more rugged and hard than a game where they get to sit out half the time and only have a real 12 minutes of actual playing time.
Anyone with dogs will tell you how many times they will walk outside in the back yard, prance a bit and then take off running at top speed in circles around the yard for 2,3 minutes straight. Thats a lot of energy, but they "love" it. So it appears do horses. They would run everyday.
Thoroughbreds are pretty overbred (read: inbred) and are not terribly well-designed as a result. They are actually pretty fragile, orthopedically and digestively speaking.
Sounds like your 8th cousin on dads side who's uncle knew a guy who fucked aunt Jane who had a kids who grew up to marry his sister who gave birth to the fastest kid in 2nd grade who married aunt Jane who had 9 more kids who had a kid who went to the Olympics...or some shit.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 08, 2014, 01:48:45 PM
Sounds like your 8th cousin on dads side who's uncle knew a guy who fucked aunt Jane who had a kids who grew up to marry his sister who gave birth to the fastest kid in 2nd grade who married aunt Jane who had 9 more kids who had a kid who went to the Olympics...or some shit.
:eek:
:eyes:
Quote from: aitm on June 08, 2014, 11:45:03 AM
Many animals love to run and horses are one.... The idea that racing them within a "few" weeks is basic bullshit as the training to a horse is pretty much the same as racing.
That the races came too close together and was hard on the horses was one of the arguments on the talk show, and that seemed like a stretch to me too, but there might be something I don't understand. I'm not sure if that was the central argument used by the owner of Chrome, however. He seemed to think the Triple Crown should be run in a decathlon sort of way, but over a series of weeks. Compete in all segments of the three races or don't compete at all. I could understand an event like that making sense, but that's not the way it's done, and the scoring would have to be changed so a winner could be determined when a horse doesn't win all three races. Should it be like that? I don't think it would make much difference. If most people wanted that, Yeah, OK, sure.
One school of thought, but I don't know how knowledgeable this guy is:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/changing-the-dates--not-the-rules--is-the-best-way-to-fix-horse-racing-s-triple-crown-210620100.html
QuoteRegardless, there is no doubt that the Triple Crown as it currently exists is obsolete. As I've stated (many times), horses simply aren't bred and trained to run three times in five weeks anymore. At most, they tend to run once a month â€" and often with at least one lengthy break from racing per year. California Chrome trainer Art Sherman, a septuagenarian old schooler, said his ideal timing between races is seven weeks.
The analogy I've made is that it's like asking a baseball pitcher to throw three complete games in a week. They may have done that in the early 20th century, but they sure don't now. And the same can be said for thoroughbreds, which once ran far more often than they do today.
Yet the Triple Crown remains the same unrealistic grind.
I've heard this enough times, that there does seem to be a controversy. Legitimate? dunno.
Also, this maybe a reasonable concern:
QuoteIt would give the best horse a fighting chance on a more level playing field, but I'm not sure it would make the task of winning all three races easier. Right now, the Preakness is pretty close to a walkover because so many horses skip it to wait for the Belmont, which has become a trap favoring the well-rested and New York-based horses. Filling all three races with high-level competitors would hardly lessen the task.
The article also includes other points to consider. dunno.
They're horses. Chrome's owner is acting like they're some sort of oppressed minority which if you buy that argument then so are cows, pigs, chickens and any other animals raised for food including fish.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on June 09, 2014, 02:47:18 PM
They're horses. Chrome's owner is acting like they're some sort of oppressed minority which if you buy that argument then so are cows, pigs, chickens and any other animals raised for food including fish.
Actually, I think he is acting like he is oppressed.
Quote from: SGOS on June 09, 2014, 05:02:23 PM
Actually, I think he is acting like he is oppressed.
Stop persecuting the idle rich!
Can't we just grill the damn animal and be done with it? :whistle: :madu: