Re: bc question (981 Views)
Posted by: Rich Curtis (IP Logged)
Date: June 25, 2019 12:34PM

"The NFL made a dramatic turn in the right direction when they acknowledged the damage to players that concussions were causing."

The NFL does the right thing only after it has exhausted the alternatives. Then it demands credit and expects people not to laugh. Take a look at the Steelers' offensive line in the mid-1970s. You've got these guys (Clack, Kolb, Webster) bench pressing over 500 pounds and they aren't even weightlifters. They are football players whose bodies get beaten to a pulp. This was at the same time that the Arnold Schwarzenegger documentary Pumping Iron came out. The book of the same name discusses steroids in detail. Any idiot could see what was going on there. And it is still going on in the NFL today--in modified form. Anybody who doubts this should Google the "drug-tested" 1990 Mr Olympia contest and watch a Youtube video of these "clean" athletes.

"I wish there was one national authority to rule the sport of horse racing"

What if the "one national authority" sucks?

"Dr. Sue Stover, a professor and veterinarian from UC Davis, says that more than 85% of horses that break down on the track had a pre-existing issue that was exacerbated."

What percentage of horses who did not break down on the track had pre-existing issues?

"I hope I don't come off as speaking from a soapbox."

Not in the least. I appreciate your post. My point is that anybody who looks at a day's worth of results will see performances from a lot of horses whose trainers have precisely one excuse: They did NOT know everything.

And finally: Some trainers are extremely smart and caring. They are great people. And some trainers are scumbags. And some trainers are idiots. In total, when trainers start to talk about their horses before a race, all of my instincts are to run away. As a group, what these guys know is much closer to nothing than to everything.



Subject Written By Posted
bc question (1572 Views) vired 06/24/2019 01:36PM
Re: bc question (1099 Views) twoshoes 06/24/2019 06:48PM
Re: bc question (1028 Views) BitPlayer 06/24/2019 06:48PM
Re: bc question (1029 Views) Bet Twice 06/24/2019 10:49PM
Re: bc question (955 Views) Strike 06/24/2019 09:20PM
Re: bc question (947 Views) vired 06/24/2019 10:02PM
Re: bc question (966 Views) Strike 06/24/2019 10:26PM
Re: Racing economics (1049 Views) BitPlayer 06/25/2019 10:04AM
Re: Racing economics (972 Views) jerry 06/30/2019 09:36AM
Re: Racing economics (959 Views) Rich Curtis 06/30/2019 01:58PM
Re: Racing economics (845 Views) Bet Twice 07/01/2019 11:09PM
Re: Racing economics (915 Views) jerry 07/01/2019 11:38PM
Re: Racing economics (1036 Views) Rich Curtis 07/02/2019 09:51AM
Re: Racing economics (874 Views) Strike 07/02/2019 05:49PM
Re: bc question (1008 Views) Tavasco 06/24/2019 10:33PM
Re: bc question (973 Views) vired 06/24/2019 10:50PM
Re: bc question (908 Views) rezlegal 06/24/2019 10:17PM
Re: bc question (934 Views) Strike 06/24/2019 10:37PM
Re: bc question (878 Views) Edgorman 06/25/2019 07:00AM
Re: bc question (920 Views) Rich Curtis 06/25/2019 09:02AM
Re: bc question (876 Views) Strike 06/25/2019 11:41AM
Re: bc question (981 Views) Rich Curtis 06/25/2019 12:34PM
Re: bc question (955 Views) FrankD. 06/26/2019 06:06AM
Re: bc question (978 Views) FrankD. 06/26/2019 06:38AM
Re: bc question (935 Views) rezlegal 06/26/2019 07:43AM
Re: bc question (1078 Views) rezlegal 06/26/2019 07:45AM
Re: bc question (825 Views) rezlegal 06/26/2019 08:11AM
Re: bc question (749 Views) Strike 06/26/2019 11:56AM
Re: bc question (853 Views) Rich Curtis 06/26/2019 12:51PM
Re: bc question (866 Views) Strike 06/26/2019 11:46AM
Re: bc question (919 Views) FrankD. 06/26/2019 06:15PM
Re: bc question (799 Views) albatross 06/26/2019 07:16PM
Re: bc question (764 Views) johnnym 06/27/2019 03:41PM
Re: bc question (724 Views) albatross 06/27/2019 03:56PM
Re: bc question (787 Views) Fairmount1 06/27/2019 05:10PM
Re: bc question (788 Views) richiebee 06/27/2019 05:27PM
Re: bc question (783 Views) Rich Curtis 06/27/2019 06:29PM
Re: bc question (817 Views) johnnym 06/27/2019 07:49PM
Re: bc question (730 Views) richiebee 06/27/2019 08:48PM
Re: bc question (839 Views) johnnym 06/27/2019 09:22PM
Re: bc question (816 Views) richiebee 06/27/2019 09:33PM
Re: bc question (861 Views) johnnym 06/27/2019 09:37PM
Re: bc question (740 Views) Rich Curtis 06/28/2019 06:33PM
Re: bc question (779 Views) albatross 06/27/2019 11:12PM
Re: bc question (802 Views) Fairmount1 06/27/2019 10:06PM
Re: bc question (779 Views) JimP 06/28/2019 07:30AM
Re: bc question (728 Views) Rich Curtis 06/28/2019 04:55PM
Re: bc question (731 Views) kencbs 06/28/2019 10:29PM
Re: bc question (768 Views) johnnym 06/29/2019 09:27AM
Re: bc question (811 Views) richiebee 06/29/2019 10:51AM
Re: bc question (847 Views) johnnym 06/29/2019 02:42PM
Re: bc question (823 Views) Rich Curtis 06/29/2019 03:21PM
Re: bc question (835 Views) Strike 06/29/2019 01:18PM
betting opportunity! (954 Views) skitimber 06/29/2019 09:50AM
Re: betting opportunity! (876 Views) johnnym 06/29/2019 10:40AM
Re: betting opportunity! (995 Views) Fairmount1 06/29/2019 11:46AM
Re: betting opportunity! (1025 Views) skitimber 06/29/2019 01:57PM
Kentucky isn't getting earthquakes (938 Views) toppled 07/06/2019 01:07AM
Think 1989 World Series (905 Views) skitimber 07/06/2019 06:54AM
Re: Think 1989 World Series (842 Views) P-Dub 07/06/2019 04:46PM
Re: Think 1989 World Series (757 Views) P-Dub 07/06/2019 04:47PM
Re: Kentucky isn't getting earthquakes (793 Views) bluechip21 07/06/2019 08:18PM
Re: Kentucky isn't getting earthquakes (698 Views) toppled 07/06/2019 10:33PM
Re: Kentucky isn't getting earthquakes (789 Views) P-Dub 07/07/2019 02:11AM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Thoro-Graph 180 Varick Street New York, NY 10014 ---- Click here for the Ask The Experts Archives.