Re: Where's the outrage??? (1140 Views)
Posted by:
richiebee (IP Logged)
Date: June 21, 2017 04:02AM
bellsbendboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Richie will take a different view on ASCEND. Some
> ammunition may include undefeated on Lasix, late
> pace figures a pole better than his field, last
> half in last, on very soft ground sub 46,
> something this horse has done before. Very solid
> bullets coming in, extremely favorable weight
> differential and this gelded homer always shows up
> for work. bbb
All fair Triple B, but would it be facetious (gotta love a word which contains
all the vowels in alphabetical order) of me to accuse you of a "Chart Read"?
Chart reads are great. With modern technology you can get a hold of a DRF chart
or an Equibase chart almost immediately after the race. The chart of a race
makes it very easy to identify the winner.
To put it another way, give me the most unlikely winner on any given day of
racing, and after the race, I will be able to find something in the TGs or the
past performances that pointed towards a win, even if it means I have to go back
a few generations in the pedigree or look for an isolated TG# from three years
ago.
While I do not rely wholly on TG figures to handicap, it appears that in your
blurb you mentioned them not at all, which is fine. It might also mean that you
are not aware of the following: Time Test (7/5): OFF; Beach Patrol (6.8/1):
PAIR; World Approval (3.9/1): OFF; Divisidero (7.8/1): OFF; Potemkin (8/1):
PAIR; Applicator (69/1): PAIR; and Wake Forest (17): OFF. Third place finisher
Sadler's Joy established a 3 point new top, but since he did not win, and was
not trained by Baffert, it was hardly worthy of mention.
SO, not only did the "gelded homer" with the significant weight differential and
the pace figures which were a pole better than his competition need to run a new
top, many of the contenders in the race had to tank, which they did. And, kind
of like the "Chart Read", the post race review of the TGs brings everything into
focus.
I do not want to belabor this, but the original reason I even mentioned Ascend
is to bring up the point that while many posters were outraged about (for lack
of a better word) juicing, there are many things going on on the backside that
95% of the horseplayers are not aware of, and that might lead to improved
performances. Subtle equipment changes (bit changes, blinker type changes) which
are not (but could be) reported. A horse reacting positively to a new groom, to
a new feed regimen, to different bedding. Change in exercise rider, moving to a
new stall in the barn, moving from the track to a Fair Hill type environment,
etc, etc, etc. Most of us will never know how much we do not know.
My own personal opinion is that subjecting equines to numerous invasive
procedures such as intravenous and intramuscular injections, tapping and
injecting joints etc is harmful to the equine in the long run. If it were not
for that opinion, I might say lets go to the modified "Amsterdam" approach, ie
make everything legal, and may the best vet win, which might be where we are at
today, anyway.