claimers go 108. at gulf race 5 today
 

lol the track was very fair...foy day..:rolleyes:

yikes!

It seems to me that regardless of whether they are on turf or dirt at GP right now that if you are in the back of the pack you have zero shot to win with the way the track is playing.

Butch working there today? Still envision some of the breakdowns from Derby Day '01 before the 2nd fastest Derby clocking in history. Good work boys.

It was 109 and it was a 50k allowance,but who cares about facts around here?

Seems fair to question the surface if track records are being broken every weekend and barely receiving 100 BSFs.

And is that another error in their joke timing system, or did fillies seriously go 20.28 for the 1st quarter in the turf sprint today?

One horse broke down that day and the track shouldnt be blamed for that one

But as the great PG1985 said, who cares about facts around here

The thread is titled claimers go 108. It was 109 and it was an allowance, just saying....

Are you serious? Do you know how many long term injuries came out of that day. It isn't simply breaking down. Look at those Derby horses. A bunch were finished after that day. What 2 more for Monarchos. A few more for Point Given. Songandaprayer never the same etc etc. The track was a freaking joke. Can't believe for a second you would look the other way at that as a trainer. Disappointed in you.

There were other breakdowns that week by the way.

So you have determined that the track condition that day caused the shortening of various horses careers? Based on what evidence? That Derby horses crashed post race? Yeah that doesnt happen every year. Point Given really seemed affected when he galloped in the Preakness 2 weeks later. Or the Belmont after that. Or the Haskell after that. Or the Travers after that.

Balto Star only managed 26 more career starts.
Congaree was so affected he only wound up with 20 more starts
Keats only had 12 more starts over the next 2 years

I ran one that day right after the Derby. He was so shook up he only made 34 more lifetime starts.

The track all but apologized for the track that day and it hasn't happened again to that degree since. It was obvious they thought Point Given could approach Secretariat's time and figured idiot fans would simply look at the time and not appreciate the paved highway that existed...Sure some horses ran again after it. But let's not have revisionist history here. They took a ton of heat and somehow that type of track hasn't occurred since. What a shock.

Yeah Cecil Borel had one pull up on Tuesday.

Wed, Thursday, and Friday had none.

The track on Derby day hasnt been really fast since 2001?

In the morning too? That's not what I remember....but we are talking 15 years ago. Maybe you have CDI stock. God bless if you want to defend the indefensible.

I'm not defending anything. Just pointing out the inaccuracies in your story.

Let's just say that I'm sure that my experience training over the CD surface for a number of years including those in question give me a pretty comfortable grasp on the topic.

Churchill's track surface was damn good to train and race over.

Right. How many track records that Saturday. 3, 4? More. Weren't like 3 yr old fillies setting track records...I wasn't questioning the surface the rest of your training career, that isn't the point. I'm glad they have never done it again, which shows they sure as hell did it that week.

Fast doesnt mean unsafe. Slow doesnt mean safe.

The point is that you made a statement that the track being extremely fast that day was detrimental to the horses health that ran over it that day which just isnt true.

I'd take that days track surface over what Monmouth had this past Haskell day anytime.

Just a fluke I guess. If pavement is safe, then that is what we should race on Chuck. In the meantime, I've wasted far too much of my evening on this conversation.

"Someone with Churchill Downs management should have a serious sit-down with track superintendent Butch Lehr. I'll take Lehr at his word that nothing was done to purposely speed up the track for Derby Day, but the rapid times of the races were, in a word, ridiculous."

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...#ixzz2uCdYO9O1

Let's recap exactly what you said.
"Still envision some of the breakdowns from Derby Day '01 before the 2nd fastest Derby clocking in history. Good work boys."

You apparently were having visions.

You then backtracked into a post about all the other breakdowns that week. Except there was only one horse pulled up all week and that was on the Tuesday card.

Now you are quoting Ray Paulick who I'm sure was far more worried about the sanctity of tracks records than breakdowns since the rash of breakdowns didnt actually happen.

You make the statement that the track has never been that fast again yet just 2 years ago on Derby Week track records at commonly run distances were set 7f and 1 1/16 on Oaks and Derby day.

Just pointing out the facts. Sorry for wasting everyone's time

I get it Chuck. Butch is in your fantasy football league. He should've been fired, but he wasn't which means the higher ups wanted it which is even worse...Sorry the breakdown numbers were wrong. You played a strong hand tonight. I look forward to PA slot money finding its way to the classroom after this exchange.

Zero question there were other breakdowns that week in the morning by the way, one by a two year old either Sat or Fri....but I'm old and must not remember anymore.

All class

And this would prove that the track was unsafe and caused Point Given to breakdown 4 months later?

Pretty classless thing to say especially since we have several folks on the board who run horses at Philly. Kind of like saying I wish your job goes overseas next week. Wow.

When did Point Given break down? I believe he is still the only horse to win four straight $1,000,000 Grade 1's.
Didnt he come up with some minor injury, early fall and get retired? Someone educate me!!

This isn't a sewing circle. When you defend the indefensible, you get what you get....Subsidies aren't helpful to racing. If in 20 years there are 5 tracks total in the US, then so be it. It needs to stand on its own 2 feet. No sacred cows in my book.

When you give turf sprinters a run up of abt 170 feet, those first quarters get ridiculous. Check Tampa when rail is way out and they go 5f too. Blazing.

:tro:

--Dunbar

Stay classy randall

http://articles.philly.com/2003-04-1...red-racetracks

"Subsidies" ? Since the racetracks own the rights to run the slots and entered into a contract with a gaming company to run that side of the business for a percentage of the rake it is a business relationship. Fact is that the State of PA is acting like an organized crime syndicate in trying to usurp that.

Yes I've read all the articles....If you need slots to have racing, you don't need racing. Where the money goes is of little consequence to me.

to be more exact it was a 25k n2x o/c
and the time was 108.98

Allowance optional isnt a claiming race. The chalk had never run in any claiming race.

For what its worth, I agree with a lot of what your saying in this thread.

This is my final answer

stay classy Chuck.

I rest my case

This belongs in the Hall of Fame of terrible threads on this message board. The whole thread is based on an inaccuracy, which incited inaccurate statements about things that happened 13 years ago, which led to insults and a banning. I'm inclined to close it and let it live on unfettered by additional remarks.