California Chrome

[aitm]

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.

[SGOS]

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.

[SGOS]

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

Regardless, there is no doubt that the Triple Crown as it currently exists is obsolete.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:

It 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.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

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.

[SGOS]

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.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Actually, I think he is acting like he is oppressed.

Stop persecuting the idle rich!

[DunkleSeele]

Can't we just grill the damn animal and be done with it?