This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest 5/15/19 by RAESFAN
Latest 5:07 PM by princeofdoc
Latest Jul-7 by DogsUp
Latest Jul-5 by smartyslew
Latest Jul-4 by Plus2lbs
Latest Jul-1 by RAESFAN
Latest Jun-30 by DogsUp
Latest Jun-29 by zowcownow
Latest Jun-24 by DogsUp
Latest Jun-20 by Plus2lbs
Latest Jun-20 by Plus2lbs
Latest Jun-10 by RAESFAN
I’m sure this has been debated and discussed here before, but does yesterday’s KY Derby outcome make the argument for limiting the race to 14 runners more propitious?
We can debate this until the cows come home, but my observation is the number of racers HAS to be controlled. 20 of these "teenager" (3 year-old) colts, an off track, and a lot of huge egos (owners and trainers), are making the Triple Crown (and in particular, the KY Derby) dangerous to the sport. 14 runners should be the limit. That's the limit for all of the Breeder's Cup Races (Horse Racing's "World Series"). Why not the Derby?
I certainly think the point system has had a positive impact, but 20 is too many ...
I guess y'all think that 20 horses running in the Derby is just fine. Sad.
What happened with MS and Wow can happen in a 5 horse field. Now if they went down, that is something different. Thankfully, that did not happen. Some of these horses are amazing, makes me think of Afleet Alex.
You said: We can debate this until the cows come home,
Thanks for the input and time to share! You don't know this but THE cows have come home
on here many times, sometimes its the same cows and other times its new cows
Since the race yesterday in some threads its been mentioned 20 horse field, slop tracks.
For me its a given and its obvious and there is nothing left to debate and many are emotionally
drained on here, many had the 7 in their bets. it is an important subject no doubt about it.
Many take a break on here on Sundays after a big race.
14 would be just fine with me.
I get it, that even in a smaller field, an interference could occur on the turn, heading for home. But far less likely. As I mentioned in the OP, my humble opinion is that 20 is just too many. I know it’s “about the Benjamin’s”, but there were several horses running that had no business being in the race ...
I don’t visit this site as much as I’d like to, so if the topic had been discussed, ad nauseam, mea culpa. And you’re correct; taking a day off / break was probably what I needed.
I’ve been following the Derby on and off since Proud Clarion won, back in the ‘60’s. I’m certainly no expert, nor do I have a perfect remedy. But logic tells me, that if every other major horse race (in the US, at least) restricts the entrants to 14, why not the Derby? If you think of another sport whose participants race around an oval track (NASCAR), it does not invite more cars to run in a big race; the Daytona 500, e.g.
If the KY Racehorse Commission (and all other states where thoroughbreds are ran) really wants to promote safety, then reduce the field ...
GoForGin said...If the KY Racehorse Commission (and all other states where thoroughbreds are ran) really wants to promote safety, then reduce the field ...
U.S. racing will always be a bit of a clown show, because they need to quit stacking NSAIDs with Lasix.
Honorable racing is all about putting the horse first, and Stoute, Waller, Gosden and many others do that.
Horses of this class do not need drugs to compete. If they do, they aren't the class and we certainly have no class by doing it to them.
Winx, Ulysses, Mongolian Saturday, etc. and horses all over the world run w/out lasix. Compare the amount of times Winx raced on 3 weeks rest and how many times Justify was able to do it.
Well,after Saturday,we know that 19 is too many