Quote:
|
Originally Posted by declansharbor
I know many here will not share this sentiment, but isn't it their job to give their horse the best chance of winning the race? Wouldnt doing whats better for the horse to win the 2nd jewel of the Triple Crown trump doing whats best for the sport/spectator? If entering a hopeless horse (Indy Express) to prevent the main threat (Rachel ALexander) from getting to the gate gives the horse the best chance to win the Preakness, they'd be idiots to not at least entertain the thought. Chicken$hit move or not, it certainly lies within the bounds of legality. (entering another horse to prevent another talent-superior horse from getting to the gate)
Is this move that different from entering a rabbit? I understand that rabbits, for the most part, dont prevent other win-eligible horses from entering, that they just throw a curveball into the race via pace scenarios.
The name of the game is to win the big races and to give your horse the best possible chance to win ced big races. If you rob the spectators/fans of the best possible matchup in doing so, so be it. I'm sure the fans would understand the dilemna a whole lot better if they were in Allen's shoes.
disclaimer:: I don't necessarily think that it's the right move from a sportsmanship standpoint, but I certainly would mull the idea over. Being that you have a healthy and talented enough horse to get the job done, the idea is to win the race by any legal means necessary, riiiight?.
|
people enter rabbits to ensure a quick pace, not to keep a horse from even entering a race. apples vs oranges imo. if they think they have the best horse, run him and let's see. but this cowardly crap of entering a horse just to scratch, with no intention of running him? if it works, and RA doesn't run-then i would call a win by MTB not only a second miracle, but a hollow victory. not a sportsmanlike move at all. big difference between helping your own horse run his race and not letting another run at all.