Hank hates Jessica?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by pba1817

See, you are pissed just like I said you would be.

said the only guy throwing insulting language around.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pba1817

What planet do you live on?

Hopefully not the one where you have any say in anything.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pba1817

If there was a minimum age for breeding(meaning horses would run through their 5yo season), do you not agree that there would be more opportunities for horses to earn their graded victories through a career? Thus enhancing their stud fees in their retirements?

You guys can sit on your pimple filled, fat asses all day long and knock ideas that people come up with, but you had best start thinking about what else you are going to throw your money away on soon because unless the thoroughbred industry makes some positive changes, they wont be around too much longer.

How about coming up with some ideas of your own to fix the problems the industry faces??

Perhaps if you came up with a feasible or original idea we wouldn't have to knock your 'ideas'.

[TheSpyder]

I think I have a solution...

http://www.jewelbasket.com/purity-rings.html

[odbaxter]

[quote=pba1817]If there was a minimum age for breeding(meaning horses would run through their 5yo season), do you not agree that there would be more opportunities for horses to earn their graded victories through a career? Thus enhancing their stud fees in their retirements?

You guys can sit on your pimple filled, fat asses all day long and knock ideas that people come up with, but you had best start thinking about what else you are going to throw your money away on soon because unless the thoroughbred industry makes some positive changes, they wont be around too much longer.

How about coming up with some ideas of your own to fix the problems the industry faces??[/QUOTE]

I'll give you a few ideas. You've heard them before and they are not going to happen but it would fix the problems. Guaranteed!!! (this is just part of the list, but a good start)

1) We have to reduce the number of races on any given card. Field size average needs to increase dramatically.

2) We have to reduce the number of tracks running per day. Forcing gambling dollars into a few larger pools.

3) There needs to be a major overhaul of the wagering menu. Standard wagers across all markets.

4) Reduced takeout!!!

5) I agree with you PBA1817, No Cheating. Harsh Penalties for any infraction.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Where have all the good trolls gone?

No kidding. Where is AssToDixie when you need a good one??

[Linny]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

The percentage of owners with top horses that actually need money is what? 3 percent? Jokers? Yeah ok, buddy.

How do you define need the money? If you are a billionaire and your stable is bleeding millions a year, you just might "need" the money if you want to keep operating a stable. Just because you are rich doesn't mean you "don't eed the money" for something.

[Linny]

Originally Posted by pba1817

If there was a minimum age for breeding(meaning horses would run through their 5yo season), do you not agree that there would be more opportunities for horses to earn their graded victories through a career? Thus enhancing their stud fees in their retirements?


How about coming up with some ideas of your own to fix the problems the industry faces??

Sure running til 5 would give some horses a shot and graded earnings. Some ar late bloomers or suffered early injuries etc. The problem is that most horses will never be that good. The males should be gelded and raced where they fit. The issue is what to do with a nice filly that gets hurt while training for her 3yo debut. You can't breed her til she's 5 or 6 and meanwhile she needs vet care, board and farriery. She's a very expensive pasture puff and most owners simply cannot carry the costs of unproductive horses. The owner may have paid $100k or $1m for her and now she has no value (in fact she's a liability) for 3 years! This is not the way to encourage new owners to get involved.
Mares are the factories of the game. If you shut down production dramatically you will create havoc. You need to give breeders a chance to get products (horses) out there to the racing owners.

Originally Posted by Linny

How do you define need the money? If you are a billionaire and your stable is bleeding millions a year, you just might "need" the money if you want to keep operating a stable. Just because you are rich doesn't mean you "don't eed the money" for something.

If a billionaire is losing even 20 million a year it shouldn't be enough to let off the panic button unless they and the financial advisor are complete morons. We're talking about 2% of their money at most. In interest alone they should be making 5% minimum.

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i wish i had a dollar for how many times i've seen, heard that over the years. i wouldn't be up right now getting ready for work.

but hey, good luck with that bunch of b.s. you're touting-no doubt owners everywhere would be thrilled with you making arbitrary rules on what they can/can't do with their horses.
and i'd imagine any owner with a decent horse that they felt could win black type would make an honest attempt to do so-and if said horse couldn't do it in a reasonable time frame, he has no business being in the shed-nor would anyone make an effort to get him there.

I stopped reading your post at I wish... I deal in realities not wishes.

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hopefully not the one where you have any say in anything.

In my world, I have all the say, I am king, all of you must read my posts and stew over them.... getting all fired up and anal about what someones opinion is on an internet message board says a lot about you.

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Perhaps if you came up with a feasible or original idea we wouldn't have to knock your 'ideas'.

Lets hear yours??

I am all ears and enjoy the banter of this board, I do get tired of hearing about the poly/synthetic gripes though, that is old hat and here to stay.

[pba1817]

[quote=odbaxter]

Originally Posted by pba1817

If there was a minimum age for breeding(meaning horses would run through their 5yo season), do you not agree that there would be more opportunities for horses to earn their graded victories through a career? Thus enhancing their stud fees in their retirements?

You guys can sit on your pimple filled, fat asses all day long and knock ideas that people come up with, but you had best start thinking about what else you are going to throw your money away on soon because unless the thoroughbred industry makes some positive changes, they wont be around too much longer.

How about coming up with some ideas of your own to fix the problems the industry faces??[/QUOTE]

I'll give you a few ideas. You've heard them before and they are not going to happen but it would fix the problems. Guaranteed!!! (this is just part of the list, but a good start)

1) We have to reduce the number of races on any given card. Field size average needs to increase dramatically.

2) We have to reduce the number of tracks running per day. Forcing gambling dollars into a few larger pools.

3) There needs to be a major overhaul of the wagering menu. Standard wagers across all markets.

4) Reduced takeout!!!

5) I agree with you PBA1817, No Cheating. Harsh Penalties for any infraction.

Very refreshing to see someone who actually has a brain in their head and can think ON THEIR OWN.

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Where have all the good trolls gone?

This reminds me of most of us on this board.... http://tripp.fenderson.net/images/up...lear_thumb.jpg

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by pba1817

I stopped reading your post at I wish... I deal in realities not wishes.

Reality...What would you do here?

You paid $25,000 for 50% of a decent Silver Charm filly. Should eventually clear Allow conditions but probably not until she's 4 and Black Type is a very iffy proposition. Suddenly she get's hurt in Nov of her 3yr old campaign and doesn't look like she can run anymore, or at least without risking serious injury. You might be able to recoup your investment by selling her as a broodmare, but by adding another 14 months of care without return potential, your investment may almost double before you can even try to sell her. Assuming said owner doesn't own half of a winery, that is a difficult position to be in.

I don't disagree that the market is way oversaturated with inferior yearlings and colts that shouldn't be breeding, but creating a minimum breeding age isn't the answer, IMO. In theory, it has merit, but in reality it could create a lot of unwanted 4 yr olds and discourage owner/breeder investments

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by Linny

Sure running til 5 would give some horses a shot and graded earnings. Some ar late bloomers or suffered early injuries etc. The problem is that most horses will never be that good. The males should be gelded and raced where they fit. The issue is what to do with a nice filly that gets hurt while training for her 3yo debut. You can't breed her til she's 5 or 6 and meanwhile she needs vet care, board and farriery. She's a very expensive pasture puff and most owners simply cannot carry the costs of unproductive horses. The owner may have paid $100k or $1m for her and now she has no value (in fact she's a liability) for 3 years! This is not the way to encourage new owners to get involved.
Mares are the factories of the game. If you shut down production dramatically you will create havoc. You need to give breeders a chance to get products (horses) out there to the racing owners.

The positives will far outweigh the negatives IMO, with any change there has to be some sacrifice and some burden met. The few injured horses will have to be cared for until the breeding age is reached.

[Linny]

Having spent alot of time involved with "outplacing" slow, unwanted and retiring race horses I tend to think that the costs outweight the benefits. I hate to say it but unless they were of spectacular breeding and ownerd by the cream of the owners most would be cared for at the feedlots and at places like New Holland and others.
Look at it this way. Lets say they ban racing for 2 and 3yo's. The game will STOP. No one would buy yearlings and 2yo's would still be risky. Three year old sales would be the norm except that as a breeder, I don't want to have a 4 year investment cycle from breeding to sale. I can't afford to support all those animals that are non productive for that long and I don't care to take the risks that they will stay sound. No breeder, not Phipps or Jackson or Magnier and Tabor could do so. The game would cease.
This is an extreme example but it shows what happens when an outside force tells owners that they cannot use their animals to be productive, whether on the track or in the shed.

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Reality...What would you do here?

You paid $25,000 for 50% of a decent Silver Charm filly. Should eventually clear Allow conditions but probably not until she's 4 and Black Type is a very iffy proposition. Suddenly she get's hurt in Nov of her 3yr old campaign and doesn't look like she can run anymore, or at least without risking serious injury. You might be able to recoup your investment by selling her as a broodmare, but by adding another 14 months of care without return potential, your investment may almost double before you can even try to sell her. Assuming said owner doesn't own half of a winery, that is a difficult position to be in.

I don't disagree that the market is way oversaturated with inferior yearlings and colts that shouldn't be breeding, but creating a minimum breeding age isn't the answer, IMO. In theory, it has merit, but in reality it could create a lot of unwanted 4 yr olds and discourage owner/breeder investments

As I said in my previous post, there will be circumstances in which the owner will have to assume some responsibility for injured horses without an immediate sell off when the racing career ends.

Also, why is everyone in such a hurry to breed unsound horses as soon as their racing careers are over due to injury? Do you all recognize the insanity of this proposition and just how it has ruined the breed's stability and soundness?

Is it not impossible to think that by imposing a minimum breeding age would make owners/breeders focus on breeding sound horses instead of brittle and weak speedsters?

[pba1817]

Originally Posted by Linny

Having spent alot of time involved with "outplacing" slow, unwanted and retiring race horses I tend to think that the costs outweight the benefits.

Look at it this way. Lets say they ban racing for 2 and 3yo's. The game will STOP. No one would buy yearlings and 2yo's would still be risky. Three year old sales would be the norm except that as a breeder, I don't want to have a 4 year investment cycle from breeding to sale. I can't afford to support all those animals that are non productive for that long and I don't care to take the risks that they will stay sound. No breeder, not Phipps or Jackson or Magnier and Tabor could do so. The game would cease.
This is an extreme example but it shows what happens when an outside force tells owners that they cannot use their animals to be productive, whether on the track or in the shed.

Your example is way off the chart and not relevant to the issue being discussed.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by pba1817

As I said in my previous post, there will be circumstances in which the owner will have to assume some responsibility for injured horses without an immediate sell off when the racing career ends.

Also, why is everyone in such a hurry to breed unsound horses as soon as their racing careers are over due to injury? Do you all recognize the insanity of this proposition and just how it has ruined the breed's stability and soundness?

Is it not impossible to think that by imposing a minimum breeding age would make owners/breeders focus on breeding sound horses instead of brittle and weak speedsters?

Sound horses get hurt too...

Obviously I'm not a breeder, but limiting the number of foals per stallion would seem to be a place to start. The knee jerk reaction of the breeder might be outrage that they can't maximize their stud fees, but limiting the number of foals and then yearlings might drive up the demand by limiting the supply. Based on the number of reserves not met at the Sep KEE sale and the declining middle and bottom averages, it certainly couldn't hurt.