horse owners

it sort of rubs me the wrong way when owners retire their horses early and take the stud money, and scoff at the public in a kind of "let them eat cake" stance, by saying it's their horse they can do what they want...

well, nobody is putting a gun to our heads and telling us we have to follow the sport and bet the sport, which a lot of us do not in these G1 "walkovers"

so owners should consider not biting the hand that feeds, and giving something back to the public and not sending their horses off to the shed after winning a graded stake.

there are some owners who do run, and they are respected, while others... not so much

Originally Posted by BellamyRd.

it sort of rubs me the wrong way when owners retire their horses early and take the stud money, and scoff at the public in a kind of "let them eat cake" stance, by saying it's their horse they can do what they want...
well, nobody is putting a gun to our heads and telling us we have to follow the sport and bet the sport, which a lot of us do not in these G1 "walkovers"
so owners should consider not biting the hand that feeds, and giving something back to the public and not sending their horses to places like a Claiborne or a Darley Stud after winning a graded stake
there are some owners who do run, and they are respected, while others...
not so much

How is the public hurt by this?
And when does the public ever pay part of the owners purchase price or day rate or vet bills or shoe bills?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by oracle80

How is the public hurt by this?
And when does the public ever pay part of the owners purchase price or day rate or vet bills or shoe bills?

Mike.. Come on.. You can't be serious... Every time the public places a bet they are paying into the system that the owners are working toward capitalizing on... From every standpoint..

Yes they (owners) all lose money... But that's not the public's problem..

Originally Posted by Kasept

Mike.. Come on.. You can't be serious... Every time the public places a bet they are paying into the system that the owners are working toward capitalizing on... From every standpoint..

Yes they (owners) all lose money... But that's not the public's problem..

No Steve its not the publics problem, I agree. But it IS the owner's problem, and if he feels he has to do what he has to do to be successful then so be it.
I'm not talking about the Sheikhs retiring Bern, they obviously could do without the money. But why should a guy whose pumped a lotta money into the business who has lost(like most do) resist his or her chance to get even? Or less behind?

but that's what I'm saying, the betting public fuels the purse money
I'd imagine most horse owners are independently weathly
so they have to have other goals than just adding to their wealth
we need more incentives to keep the good horses running

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I'm not talking about the Sheikhs retiring Bern, they obviously could do without the money. But why should a guy whose pumped a lotta money into the business who has lost(like most do) resist his or her chance to get even? Or less behind?

Absolutely.. No argument there at all. For small-medium sized operations especially (Someday Farm.. Cash is King.. etc..), it is perfectly logical and justifiable in fact...

This all gets back to the earlier economic issues which you've talked about before when the tax incentives evaporated in the '80's and the entire structure of the ownership system remorphed into what we have now...

The end of the 'gentleman farmer'.. 'historical family breeder', et al...

[Rupert Pupkin]

Kasept said, "Yes they (owners) all lose money... But that's not the public's problem.."[/quote]

By the same token, if the public wants to see the horse run more, that's not the owner's problem.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Kasept said, "Yes they (owners) all lose money... But that's not the public's problem.."

By the same token, if the public wants to see the horse run more, that's not the owner's problem.[/quote]


Not if the public decided to fight back and stop betting.

Your argument is easy to make but also patently not true.

[Danzig]

lovely thing about the free market system. you can choose to put your pennies elsewhere.
but hopefully everyone will still get a kick out of watching the horses run, as i enjoy the sport and hope to see it continue for many years to come.
but like any business, there will be ebbs and flows, and you must evolve to suit the climate. right now the climate for horse owners seems good, so i don't see any adjustments being made any time soon.
where they need to make more of an effort is with t.v., as the more advertising $ you can command, the higher the purses can go--that's the only way to really compete with stud fees.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

By the same token, if the public wants to see the horse run more, that's not the owner's problem.

Not if the public decided to fight back and stop betting.

Your argument is easy to make but also patently not true.[/quote]

Not if the owners got out of the business. Then there would be no racing. It works both ways. If there were no owners, there would be no racing. By the same token, if there were no fans(bettors), there would be no racing.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

By the same token, if the public wants to see the horse run more, that's not the owner's problem.

Not if the public decided to fight back and stop betting.

Your argument is easy to make but also patently not true.[/quote]

This whole argument reminds me of something that happened to me about 20 years ago. I was in Las Vegas and I decided to take a taxi to a hotel that was about a mile away from my hotel. When the cab driver realized that I was going a short distance, he said, "You better give me a big tip because I had to wait in a long line and I'm not going to make much on your fare." I said something to the effect that I didn't have that much money on me and I was having a bad run at the tables. He answered, "That's not my problem that you're losing at the tables."

I felt like saying to him, "Well it's not my problem that you waited in a long line."

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by oracle80

How is the public hurt by this?
And when does the public ever pay part of the owners purchase price or day rate or vet bills or shoe bills?

I totally agree, sometimes the risk is too great to continue racing. Bernardini had everything to lose if they kept racing and nothing to gain.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by BellamyRd.

it sort of rubs me the wrong way when owners retire their horses early and take the stud money, and scoff at the public in a kind of "let them eat cake" stance, by saying it's their horse they can do what they want...
well, nobody is putting a gun to our heads and telling us we have to follow the sport and bet the sport, which a lot of us do not in these G1 "walkovers"
so owners should consider not biting the hand that feeds, and giving something back to the public and not sending their horses to places like a Claiborne or a Darley Stud after winning a graded stake
there are some owners who do run, and they are respected, while others...
not so much

Bellamy,
I'm no where near being in the same league with the "big guys".
Heck, I'm just trying to recover some of the money and work that I've put into mine.
High hopes are part of what keeps me in this.
One of mine, a son of Mesopotamia (two recent winners...I'm a Mess, Mixed Numbers) will be running at Finger Lakes on Tues in the 2nd. Big Daddy Ray.
He's been scratched from his last three entries. Go figure.
Since he's gelded, I'm going to keep him running as long as I can.
A win for him would also be a win for me, as I own his full little sister, Shot o' Bourbon.
I've been breeding them for the past four years and just have to tell you, if you knew the expenses, you'd think I'm completely insane.
To me...it only takes one. That's the "high hope".
I'll keep them on the track as long as they're sound. It's the only way I stand any chance of getting back some of what I've already put in.
DTS

I certainly can understand the frustration that fans have, myself included, at favorite horses being whisked off to stud at an early age. But I really don't think a successful person in the game gets successful by turning down outrageous sums of money for a horse to go to stud.

Originally Posted by BellamyRd.

it sort of rubs me the wrong way when owners retire their horses early and take the stud money, and scoff at the public in a kind of "let them eat cake" stance, by saying it's their horse they can do what they want...
well, nobody is putting a gun to our heads and telling us we have to follow the sport and bet the sport, which a lot of us do not in these G1 "walkovers"
so owners should consider not biting the hand that feeds, and giving something back to the public and not sending their horses to places like a Claiborne or a Darley Stud after winning a graded stake
there are some owners who do run, and they are respected, while others...
not so much

This is funny. So you are saying that a person who spends millions on horses shouldnt have a say so on when to send the horse to stud?? Come on--that is laughable. If it wasnt for the owner, then us bettors wouldnt have anything to bet on. Come on---think logically.