What's Best for the Horse

[King Glorious]

Is it just me or is anyone else getting tired of hearing that phrase to justify every move anyone makes these days? A horse drops out of the picture for the BC and everyone is quick to say they are glad to see the trainer is doing what's best for the horse. A horse points to a specific race and everyone says they are glad to see he's doing what's best for the horse. Does your agreement come only when u think it's what's best for the horse or do u just automatically assume that they know what's best and even if it's a decision contrary to what u would have made, do u still agree that it's best for the horse?

I was thinking about the situation with Round Pond recently. After the race, they disclosed that she had gone through some issues in training and wasn't 100% for the race. If they had told us about those things BEFORE the race and said they were skipping it because of that, there would have been 1000 post on here with everyone saying they are happy that Matz was doing what's best for the horse. Instead, he ran her anyway. Was that what was best for her? I don't know either way because I'm not around the horse. But then neither are any of u. So how do u know when these trainers are doing what's best for the horse?

Many of u think that Godolphin is doing what's best for Discreet Cat by not throwing him into the BC. I've heard quite a few say that they know the horse and what's best for him and waiting for the Cigar is best. But would u still agree with that if on Monday, when entries are to be taken, Bernardini is injured and they enter Discreet Cat? Unless u are going to be hypocritical, u'd have to continue to say they know the horse and what's best for him right?