Zenyatta Has Earned Horse of the Year

Duvalier · #1 11-15-2010, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why? Surely BB was exposed to a much wider audience than Zenyatta. I would think all of Big Browns 3 year old races were nationally televised and winning the Derby and going for a TC creates far more exposure than a single BC race even with the 60 minutes/Oprah lead in.

The use of steroids in racehorses was also exposed to a much wider audience. Big Brown brought out alot of negative attention to the sport between his connections, drug suspensions, steroids etc. Do you think things like equipoise or winstrol should still be allowed universally in racing?

slotdirt · #2 11-15-2010, 01:46 PM

Your memory serves you incorrectly. It was a high of about 65 and semi-drizzly/misty for the day of the 2004 Belmont. One could transport one's own beer onto the Belmont grounds in those days though, that is true.

Antitrust32 · #3 11-15-2010, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Your memory serves you incorrectly. It was a high of about 65 and semi-drizzly/misty for the day of the 2004 Belmont. One could transport one's own beer onto the Belmont grounds in those days though, that is true.

One of those years right around that time was the most perfect day imaginable... guess my foggy memory served me foggy memories

slotdirt · #4 11-15-2010, 03:09 PM

2005 was cloudy. 2008 was about 1,832 degrees. 2006 was as nice a day as they come, and we got to see Jazil win the Belmont to boot! What a pretty horsey! Ahem...

Antitrust32 · #5 11-15-2010, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

2005 was cloudy. 2008 was about 1,832 degrees. 2006 was as nice a day as they come, and we got to see Jazil win the Belmont to boot! What a pretty horsey! Ahem...

what about 2003?

Hey I picked Jazil that day!! (cough, redboard)

slotdirt · #6 11-15-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

what about 2003?

Hey I picked Jazil that day!! (cough, redboard)

I think you're past the redboard statute of limitations. Like I can now safely say that I did, indeed, bet on Giacomo in 2005.

In any event, total aside, but I'm going to the Birds game tonight and next Sunday - and I'm not even an Eagles fan.

Antitrust32 · #7 11-15-2010, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I think you're past the redboard statute of limitations. Like I can now safely say that I did, indeed, bet on Giacomo in 2005.

In any event, total aside, but I'm going to the Birds game tonight and next Sunday - and I'm not even an Eagles fan.

thats awesome!! two huge games also! I'll be at the Eagles / Viqueens & Eagles / Cowgirls at the end of the season

PeteMugg · #8 11-15-2010, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

One of those years right around that time was the most perfect day imaginable... guess my foggy memory served me foggy memories

I can't even remember what I had for lunch yesterday.

Cannon Shell · #9 11-15-2010, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvalier

The use of steroids in racehorses was also exposed to a much wider audience. Big Brown brought out alot of negative attention to the sport between his connections, drug suspensions, steroids etc. Do you think things like equipoise or winstrol should still be allowed universally in racing?

What is the point?

Should equipoise and winstrol still be allowed?
Of course they should. They are horse medications with valid uses. The fact that there was no regulation of them was really the issue. Overreacting and banning them has not seemingly helped horseracing in the least. Of course we can now brag that we banned steroids knowing full well that the people who dont believe the sport is on the up and up still dont believe it. And when your horse is in need of a treatment program, you can now waste money trying substitutes that dont work nearly as effectively, if at all.

Duvalier · #10 11-15-2010, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What is the point?

Should equipoise and winstrol still be allowed?
Of course they should. They are horse medications with valid uses. The fact that there was no regulation of them was really the issue. Overreacting and banning them has not seemingly helped horseracing in the least. Of course we can now brag that we banned steroids knowing full well that the people who dont believe the sport is on the up and up still dont believe it. And when your horse is in need of a treatment program, you can now waste money trying substitutes that dont work nearly as effectively, if at all.

Well maybe next time they can expose medications that have no valid uses...the use of perftoran and the like in race horses.

Cannon Shell · #11 11-15-2010, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Well maybe next time they can expose medications that have no valid uses...the use of perftoran and the like in race horses.

The difference being that was was legal and one is illegal

Duvalier · #12 11-15-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The difference being that was was legal and one is illegal

The problem is whether legal or not some people use whatever they can get their hands on to improve performance...and think that as long as it doesn't test, they are doing nothing wrong. You're a trainer and a smart one...I'm sure you know others who use stuff on their horses and have absolutely no clue as to what it does. Kind of like going back to Dutrow when asked why he gives his horses steroids...he didn't have an answer for the interviewer.

Riot · #13 11-15-2010, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvalier

The problem is whether legal or not some people use whatever they can get their hands on to improve performance...and think that as long as it doesn't test, they are doing nothing wrong. You're a trainer and a smart one...I'm sure you know others who use stuff on their horses and have absolutely no clue as to what it does. Kind of like going back to Dutrow when asked why he gives his horses steroids...he didn't have an answer for the interviewer.

I'm sure Dutrow knows exactly why his horses got monthly steroid shots.

The problem is rather that horse racing is generally run by a bunch of guys in charge of their individual fifdoms, that only react when forced into a corner, and then often react inadequately or oddly inappropriately (Life at Ten and the KHRC a good example of what they view to be the "problems" in the sport)

Horse racing in America is a group of cliques, where professionalism varies widely.

Cannon Shell · #14 11-15-2010, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvalier

The problem is whether legal or not some people use whatever they can get their hands on to improve performance...and think that as long as it doesn't test, they are doing nothing wrong. You're a trainer and a smart one...I'm sure you know others who use stuff on their horses and have absolutely no clue as to what it does. Kind of like going back to Dutrow when asked why he gives his horses steroids...he didn't have an answer for the interviewer.

Human nature makes people cheat, not lax rules. While it is entirely far too easy to cheat the system now, there will always be those who will do whatever they can to make money regardless of how that is accomplished. People make the mistake and say they will do whatever they can to win. That isnt entirely true. If they could make more money losing, they would do that too. Which is one of the reasons that I skoff at the RMTC's assertion that it is making all this headway.

Dutrow is smarter than he looks or talks in interviews.

Duvalier · #15 11-15-2010, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Dutrow is smarter than he looks or talks in interviews.

I agree...the guy is a great horseman. It's just the perception his clueless response to administering steroids had on the general public leading up to the Belmont. Anyway I just can't agree that Big Brown bought as much good attention to horse racing as Zenyatta. Whether or not that translates into lifelong fans and new bettors who knows.

parsixfarms · #16 11-15-2010, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

Zenyatta fans want to talk about how "historic" her quest was (which I understand), but goodness forbid if others want to talk about Zenyatta and "racing history."

Since you are so into history, can you please name for me those performances, since Lady's Secret, by an older female on dirt against males that were superior to Zenyatta's Breeders' Cup Classic?

Indian Charlie · #17 11-15-2010, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Since you are so into history, can you please name for me those performances, since Lady's Secret, by an older female on dirt against males that were superior to Zenyatta's Breeders' Cup Classic?

Jolypha.

Indian Charlie · #18 11-15-2010, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Jolypha.

Oops. It was supposed to be an older female. Jolypha was a 3yo filly going against older males.

And everyone knows that 3yo fillies are much more advanced than 4 or 5 or 6 year old fillies/mares!

At least according to ass handicapper.

10 pnt move up · #19 11-15-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Jolypha.

she sure franked that form the next season when she kept running into a great horse in Flawlessly.

Indian Charlie · #20 11-15-2010, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

she sure franked that form the next season when she kept running into a great horse in Flawlessly.

What do you mean by 'franked'?