Great Article by Moss

skippy3481 · #1 05-09-2008, 12:17 AM

Seems to be a relatively solid opinion.

blackthroatedwind · #2 05-09-2008, 12:22 AM

This is a very existential thread.

Kasept · #3 05-09-2008, 04:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This is a very existential thread.

OOOOOOOO

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ndy&id=3387061

A more reasoned approach than his ill-timed remarks the other day.

_ed_ · #4 05-09-2008, 04:43 AM

Don't often see articles in which I agree with every single point the author makes - I do on this occasion.

Kasept · #5 05-09-2008, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _ed_

Don't often see articles in which I agree with every single point the author makes - I do on this occasion.

He's still off base about the whip. Asking stewards to enforce excessive use rules is all that you need do. Use the English model of no more than three successive strikes, etc., and sit guys when they flail away. This piece will not negate his comments from the other day which will be used against him and the game down the road.

Dunbar · #6 05-09-2008, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

He's still off base about the whip. Asking stewards to enforce excessive use rules is all that you need do. Use the English model of no more than three successive strikes, etc., and sit guys when they flail away. This piece will not negate his comments from the other day which will be used against him and the game down the road.

Respectfully disagree. I'd be interested in more info about the Jerry Bailey opinion Moss referenced.

"The sentiment that jockeys need whips to control their mounts may be overrated -- Jerry Bailey thinks so -- and nothing contradicts the claim that racehorses love their work more than the sight of them being beaten through the stretch."

I also think the 2nd half of that quote is right on the mark. We talk about the horses loving to run and how competitive they are. Yet what we see is whack-whack-whack with the whip...to remind the horse how much it loves to run?

The first thing my wife, a moderate fan as a result of long association with me, asked when it was announced on TV that Eight Belles was down was, "do you think he whipped her too much?".

Those of us who are long time fans and bettors are so accustomed to the whip that its use has no impact. You need to step back and think what it looks like to a young person first approaching the game to understand what Moss is getting at.

Overall, an excellent piece by Moss.

--Dunbar

The Indomitable DrugS · #7 05-09-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

This piece will not negate his comments from the other day which will be used against him and the game down the road.

Used against him by who?

The Pita bread people that no one takes seriously?

paisjpq · #8 05-09-2008, 08:22 AM

I don't think whips should be banned but don't forget what you saw at Rolex. Horse wasn't going great so rider went to the stick to encourage him. 2 fences later horse falls and is put down. Its a real dilema, knowing when to be aggressive because a horse is lazy and when to back off because something is wrong. Jockeys for the most part are passengers not horsemen, and unfortunately many of todays trainers are not horsemen either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

He's still off base about the whip. Asking stewards to enforce excessive use rules is all that you need do. Use the English model of no more than three successive strikes, etc., and sit guys when they flail away. This piece will not negate his comments from the other day which will be used against him and the game down the road.

pmayjr · #9 05-09-2008, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

He's still off base about the whip. Asking stewards to enforce excessive use rules is all that you need do. Use the English model of no more than three successive strikes, etc., and sit guys when they flail away. This piece will not negate his comments from the other day which will be used against him and the game down the road.

Steve,

What comments? I've been a litte out of the loop lately.

Dunbar · #10 05-09-2008, 09:54 AM

I was also glad to see Moss include this proposal, which I don't remember seeing in any major media before:

"If the world's racing jurisdictions required sires and dams to be at least 5 or 6 years old before producing a registered thoroughbred, would the tide swing toward durability? Or would this simply result in more infirm horses staying in training and breaking down at later ages?"

Moss seems neutral on it, but at least he gets it out on the table.

There was also a nice piece written by Kevin Modesti of the Los Angeles Daily News, in which he turns the table on PETA for its attack on Saez:

http://origin.dailynews.com/sports/ci_9176569

The Harrisburg Patriot-News ran that article in yesterday's Sports Section. The Patriot-News's editorial cartoon from yesterday was also about Eight Belles. It was by Mike Keefe of the Denver Post: You can find it from this link:

http://www.intoon.com/index.cfm (on the left is an index which includes "Eight Belles Dies". I'm afraid I kind of like "The Inbreeder's Cup".

--Dunbar

_ed_ · #11 05-09-2008, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I also think the 2nd half of that quote is right on the mark. We talk about the horses loving to run and how competitive they are. Yet what we see is whack-whack-whack with the whip...to remind the horse how much it loves to run?

Exactly. Well said.

#12 05-09-2008, 10:19 AM

I agree with the people who don't bet. Get rid of whips now!!

Dunbar · #13 05-09-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I agree with the people who don't bet. Get rid of whips now!!

Yet another wrong knee-jerk reaction.

--Dunbar

geeker2 · #14 05-09-2008, 10:39 AM

Pardon my skepticism - just another blah blah blah article that must make Randy feel like he has really accomplished something that makes a difference. One of a hundred articles that span many many years that basically says the same thing - the sky is falling unless..unless... unless...

Unless this Industry can find a leadership voice who's call to action finds non-partisan support from trainers, breeders, owners and patrons alike we will just keep getting more articles that makes us re-realize the sky is falling but so what?

#15 05-09-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Yet another wrong knee-jerk reaction.

--Dunbar

And your wife's question after Eight Belles went down wasn't a knee-jerk reaction?

Spare us your agenda.

The Indomitable DrugS · #16 05-09-2008, 10:40 AM

They don't carry whips in the two furlong baby races at SA ... in fact, I don't even think you're allowed to equip your horse with blinkers in those races.

I think the riders obviously need to carry whips - if they want to regulate excessive whipping, fine ... but it would simply be a change made to improve image.

King Glorious · #17 05-09-2008, 10:54 AM

Requiring a sire or dam to wait until they were five or six wouldn't make sense to me. If a horse is fragile and is going to be passing fragile genes, it will happen as a 5yo just as it would if he was breeding at four. Also, while there are plenty of horses that are retired sound that could have continued racing, there are still those that suffer actual injuries that preclude them from racing. It's unfair to the owners of those horses to make them wait if they have a 2yo or 3yo that can't race and earn any money in any other way. And this doesn't even get into the area of insurance.

SniperSB23 · #18 05-09-2008, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Requiring a sire or dam to wait until they were five or six wouldn't make sense to me. If a horse is fragile and is going to be passing fragile genes, it will happen as a 5yo just as it would if he was breeding at four. Also, while there are plenty of horses that are retired sound that could have continued racing, there are still those that suffer actual injuries that preclude them from racing. It's unfair to the owners of those horses to make them wait if they have a 2yo or 3yo that can't race and earn any money in any other way. And this doesn't even get into the area of insurance.

By requiring the horses to race until five it would provide less incentive to breed any horse that won't likely last until five which will alleviate all the other problems you mentioned. No longer would getting fast 2yos and retiring them early in their 3yo season with an injury be as profitable and demand would fall for the sort of stallions that produce those runners, the exact sort that are weakening the breed.

King Glorious · #19 05-09-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

By requiring the horses to race until five it would provide less incentive to breed any horse that won't likely last until five which will alleviate all the other problems you mentioned. No longer would getting fast 2yos and retiring them early in their 3yo season with an injury be as profitable and demand would fall for the sort of stallions that produce those runners, the exact sort that are weakening the breed.

You can't require a horse to race until five though. There are legit circumstances that will not allow a horse to race. So what does the owner of that horse do? If the owner of Brass Hat had decided after the first injury that he didn't want to take the chance of having something worse happen and retired him, he shouldn't have the right to breed him? So what's he supposed to do? Sit on the horse, pay all the insurance on him, all the money it takes for the care of the horse, and have no way of making any income from the horse until he's five? I don't see how that's fair. By making people wait till their horses are five to breed them, I think we'd end up seeing more horses out there that probably shouldn't be running but are because having them sit around on a farm doing nothing for a year or two isn't going to work.

SniperSB23 · #20 05-09-2008, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

You can't require a horse to race until five though. There are legit circumstances that will not allow a horse to race. So what does the owner of that horse do? If the owner of Brass Hat had decided after the first injury that he didn't want to take the chance of having something worse happen and retired him, he shouldn't have the right to breed him? So what's he supposed to do? Sit on the horse, pay all the insurance on him, all the money it takes for the care of the horse, and have no way of making any income from the horse until he's five? I don't see how that's fair. By making people wait till their horses are five to breed them, I think we'd end up seeing more horses out there that probably shouldn't be running but are because having them sit around on a farm doing nothing for a year or two isn't going to work.

Yes. There's a strong argument that the sort of horse you are bringing up shouldn't go to the breeding shed in the first place.