Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Merlinsky
What would you say are ethical considerations for Todd in the event that he wins the race and possibly the Preakness but has other live horses for both the Preakness and Belmont? Especially if you were an owner with a horse you thought could beat his hypothetical dual classic winner and Todd is also his trainer. If I knew my horse could possibly beat the other with the right set up and something so important as the Triple Crown is on the line, what do I do? Should you really feel obligated to switch trainers when you've been with Todd the whole time and he knows your horse's weaknesses anyway?
I'm sure there are plenty of circumstances where a jockey's told to try hard but not bust a gut because they want the other one to win out. In Man o'War's time didn't they even have sort of a call if both horses owned by one person were in a position to win, the owner could semi-officially indicate who they wanted to come in first? This wouldn't be the same scenario if it were different owners, same trainer, but I just thought of that. I think I read it in Dorothy Ours' book.
|
Most of Todd's owners are big time clients. I could not see him exploiting one of their horses to help him win the TC for another owner. Obviously if the horses have the same owner I would expect they would skip the race or use their horse to setup the other but with different owners I can't see Todd risking his stock to help a horse win the Triple Crown.