Triple Crown Winner - a possibility? - Page 4

Danzig · #61 05-05-2009, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaTH716

That would be the final nail in the coffin for the sport.

no it wouldn't....and how many nails does a coffin take anyway??

MaTH716 · #62 05-05-2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

no it wouldn't....and how many nails does a coffin take anyway??

You really think that the sport wouldn't take a tremendous hit? You would have a horse that was juiced up (I'm not saying he was and Im not saying it never has happened) win the derby and pay balloons, be DQ'd and the only money that would change hands is reguarding purse money. What about all the bets, tickets and potential life changing scores for the people that would have cashed if the race was legit. I really believe that any intergrity (or at least what the sport has left) would absolutley vanish. People would look at the sport as a rigged game, kind of the way I look at boxing, jai alai and harness racing at certain tracks. People will think it's a complete sham.

Thinking about it, I guess the die-hards would still wager and watch no matter what. But I'm talking about the novice/on the fence fans that go to the track couple times a year and even just bet the major races type. This sport needs to broaden it's fan base. A DQ here could be the thing that drives people away from racing. It would be more bad press for a sport that doesn't need it. It's a hard enough game to win when it's a level field and now they will realize that the field isn't so level.

gales0678 · #63 05-05-2009, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gales0678

has the purse money offically cleared?

has it - does anyone know?

Danzig · #64 05-05-2009, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaTH716

You really think that the sport wouldn't take a tremendous hit? You would have a horse that was juiced up (I'm not saying he was and Im not saying it never has happened) win the derby and pay balloons, be DQ'd and the only money that would change hands is reguarding purse money. What about all the bets, tickets and potential life changing scores for the people that would have cashed if the race was legit. I really believe that any intergrity (or at least what the sport has left) would absolutley vanish. People would look at the sport as a rigged game, kind of the way I look at boxing, jai alai and harness racing at certain tracks. People will think it's a complete sham.

Thinking about it, I guess the die-hards would still wager and watch no matter what. But I'm talking about the novice/on the fence fans that go to the track couple times a year and even just bet the major races type. This sport needs to broaden it's fan base. A DQ here could be the thing that drives people away from racing. It would be more bad press for a sport that doesn't need it. It's a hard enough game to win when it's a level field and now they will realize that the field isn't so level.

has baseball?

how many bettors say they take the trainer into consideration, and wager accordingly?

did the sport die after dancer's image? or more recently, after eight belles when suddenly steroids were all the rage?

besides, if you keep the die hards, how would the sport die? the once a year or novice cappers aren't the ones fueling the purses.

slotdirt · #65 05-05-2009, 03:19 PM

Let's be honest here, guys, that horse could be hopped up on clenbuterol, some -ain painkiller, steroids, a milkshake, and some good, old-fashioned cocaine and there wouldn't be a DQ even if the blood test came back as 82 percent whiskey.

FATPIANO · #66 05-05-2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Am I the only cynical one still waiting to see the final test come back on the winner's blood sample?

I am still waiting for the blood results too.

Suffolk Shippers · #67 05-05-2009, 04:32 PM

Fact of the matter is, nobody knows anything until after Baltimore. Anything else is just speculation. The Derby proves that essentially no one knew anything about this horse. If he won the Triple Crown it would be the most improbable turn of events in history.

Hell, if he wins the Preakness, it might be the most improbable event in history.
The Triple Crown would be like cataclysmic. He'd be a modern day Seabiscuit.

ezgoerbaby · #68 05-05-2009, 04:42 PM

Yep, the guy who's 1 for 32 this year is a HUGE juicer...obviously.

Not to say though that we shouldn't be looking for reasons the horse ran that way...Beyer was right IMO...perfect storm. I just don't think he was juiced. If he was and it comes out that way...I will admit to being wrong.

MaTH716 · #69 05-05-2009, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

has baseball?

how many bettors say they take the trainer into consideration, and wager accordingly?

did the sport die after dancer's image? or more recently, after eight belles when suddenly steroids were all the rage?

besides, if you keep the die hards, how would the sport die? the once a year or novice cappers aren't the ones fueling the purses.

No, but people don't bet baseball. It seems like people only care about stats.

Dancers Image was a generation ago and as sad as the Eight Bells tradgedy, it didn't affect wagering and payouts. Do you think that there would be no fallout from some of betting public reguarding a possible DQ after the fact?

You are right about the die hards. But I do think it would hurt as far as broadening the fan base.

I asked one of my friends the question. He's a gambler and plays the races once in a while. Unfortunatley the answer I got was, he will continue to play, because he's already on the assumption that the game is rigged anyway. Not exactly a ringing endorsment for the sport.

I guess some people might look at it as I looked at Jai Alai. I thought it was rigged, but I still enjoyed going. There was always a chance that I could be on the right side of the rig. Overall there is nothing good that would come out of a positive test resulting in a DQ of the Kentucky Derby winner.

slotdirt · #70 05-05-2009, 05:13 PM

To think that the only way anybody thought Mine that Bird would be in Baltimore three days ago was to do one of those Homicide: Life on the Streets tours.

Danzig · #71 05-05-2009, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaTH716

No, but people don't bet baseball. It seems like people only care about stats.

Dancers Image was a generation ago and as sad as the Eight Bells tradgedy, it didn't affect wagering and payouts. Do you think that there would be no fallout from some of betting public reguarding a possible DQ after the fact?

You are right about the die hards. But I do think it would hurt as far as broadening the fan base.

I asked one of my friends the question. He's a gambler and plays the races once in a while. Unfortunatley the answer I got was, he will continue to play, because he's already on the assumption that the game is rigged anyway. Not exactly a ringing endorsment for the sport.

I guess some people might look at it as I looked at Jai Alai. I thought it was rigged, but I still enjoyed going. There was always a chance that I could be on the right side of the rig. Overall there is nothing good that would come out of a positive test resulting in a DQ of the Kentucky Derby winner.

sure they do.

as for nothing good coming from it-sure there would. having a drug positive in a big race that gets national exposure would probably provide the impetus for real changes in drug testing and policies-and most importantly, real change on punishment for violators. this sport seems more resistant to change; it tends to be reactionary. am i saying i want a drug positive? no. but i don't think it would be impossible to overcome by any means. sometimes it takes a real hard smack in the face to say 'hey, this isn't working'.

Cannon Shell · #72 05-05-2009, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaTH716

No, but people don't bet baseball. It seems like people only care about stats.

Dancers Image was a generation ago and as sad as the Eight Bells tradgedy, it didn't affect wagering and payouts. Do you think that there would be no fallout from some of betting public reguarding a possible DQ after the fact?

You are right about the die hards. But I do think it would hurt as far as broadening the fan base.

I asked one of my friends the question. He's a gambler and plays the races once in a while. Unfortunatley the answer I got was, he will continue to play, because he's already on the assumption that the game is rigged anyway. Not exactly a ringing endorsment for the sport.

I guess some people might look at it as I looked at Jai Alai. I thought it was rigged, but I still enjoyed going. There was always a chance that I could be on the right side of the rig. Overall there is nothing good that would come out of a positive test resulting in a DQ of the Kentucky Derby winner.

People dont bet baseball?

MaTH716 · #73 05-05-2009, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

People dont bet baseball?

Obviously people bet baseball. But for instance tonights Yankees Red Sox game. What percentage of people either at the game or watching it at home have wagered on it. Versus, How many people on Saturday wagered on the race. Percentage wise I don't think it's close.
Sure there have been times where players that have supposedly cheated have affected the outcome of games, but it's also a team sport and so many things happen is the course of a game. Plus it seems that there were many guys not playing by the rules, so sometimes it probably evened out. I have to admit that I really never gave the betting side of baseball any thought. Just because I thought that the betting intrest/action in baseball wasn't that great.
The point I was trying to get across was, if a positive test came back and the horse was DQ'd. Then some of the betting public would cry foul that they were cheated and the wrong people got paid. It wasn't a team they bet, it was a horse. Who got duped out of a win and a payout for them by a horse who won illegally. Not good for the sport on the smallest of stages (i.e. 5k claiming race at Philly park on a Monday), but possibly devestating for a sport on their biggest day of the year when the whole world is watching.

Riot · #74 05-05-2009, 10:05 PM

Positive drug tests are a very small part of this sport. There's very, very few of them. And they are nearly all for miniscule legal medication overages that couldn't possibly affect a race outcome.

Do they catch all of it? No, we know of some things that still need tests developed, and we know some things we can't find.

There is a bigger, and I think more important question of how often some tracks really test, how many horses they test, the completeness of what they test for, etc. That national racing czar, uniform rules, is what is needed.

But thinking that the majority of horses are not running clean, are running on some magic secret hop-up juice made by mad chemists that know more than every other chemist in the world (the ones making up the tests) is ridiculous.

I say the vast majority of horses in racing are running clean.