"Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Catalina » Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:54 pm

BlindLucky wrote:Another Jacobson, Grade 2 placed 5-yr-old horse Vegas No Show (half to Bullsbay), was claimed by him for $35k last November. I can only guess he's got some issues, because he only has 1 posted work in the interim and Jacobson dropped him directly down for a $10k tag today, where he ran 2nd in a 3 horse field at Aqueduct. He was claimed today by Joseph Mazza, who seems like a really small-time trainer.

Anyway, I liked the horse and had wondered where he disappeared to.


Wasn't there some new rule about number of posted works since a long absence, or was last November simply not long enough ago?
Catalina
 
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby dustino140 » Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:58 pm

Of everything NYRA has done (and I think it's mostly good in this case) , the 14 days rule is, IMO, silly. It'd be great if that was a protest by the trainers. I see horses run back on 'short' rest (7-14 days), and sometimes wi, at tracks big and small every week. It all goes back on the trainers and their inherent responsibility to only run horses when they're right and ready. And this brings me back to my assertion that trainers should be punished for on-track breakdowns and DNFs.
User avatar
dustino140
 
Posts: 5206
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Somnambulist » Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:12 pm

dustino140 wrote:Of everything NYRA has done (and I think it's mostly good in this case) , the 14 days rule is, IMO, silly. It'd be great if that was a protest by the trainers. I see horses run back on 'short' rest (7-14 days), and sometimes wi, at tracks big and small every week. It all goes back on the trainers and their inherent responsibility to only run horses when they're right and ready. And this brings me back to my assertion that trainers should be punished for on-track breakdowns and DNFs.


IMO, NYRA is damned if they do or don't in this situation. I don't think this is that silly.
"Life's no piece of cake, mind you, but the recipe's my own to fool with."
Somnambulist
 
Posts: 7389
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:59 pm

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby BlindLucky » Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:43 pm

Catalina wrote:
BlindLucky wrote:Another Jacobson, Grade 2 placed 5-yr-old horse Vegas No Show (half to Bullsbay), was claimed by him for $35k last November. I can only guess he's got some issues, because he only has 1 posted work in the interim and Jacobson dropped him directly down for a $10k tag today, where he ran 2nd in a 3 horse field at Aqueduct. He was claimed today by Joseph Mazza, who seems like a really small-time trainer.

Anyway, I liked the horse and had wondered where he disappeared to.


Wasn't there some new rule about number of posted works since a long absence, or was last November simply not long enough ago?

If a horse hasn't started in 60 days, they require 2 workouts. However, today's start was on the 56th day (give or take one or two, depending on how they count them). If he'd waited until next weekend, he'd be technically required to have a second work.
Photos from my racing travels: ThoroughbredJourney.com
BlindLucky
 
Posts: 3314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:22 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Sparrow Castle » Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:02 am

Sparrow Castle wrote:Not defending anyone, but a number of the Stewards scratches today last raced 1/11/15, exactly 14 days ago. Might there have been some confusion over when the clock starts ticking?

New entry rule at Aqueduct causes multiple scratches
The stewards were forced to scratch eight horses from Sunday’s card at Aqueduct after the racing office erroneously allowed them to be entered in violation of a rule the New York Racing Association put in place just nine days ago.

The scratches resulted into NYRA having to offer two fields of three horses and one of four.

On Jan. 16, in a press release announcing steps it was undertaking to address the spate of equine fatalities at the Aqueduct winter meet, NYRA announced “entries will no longer be accepted at Aqueduct on any horse that has participated in a recognized race within 14 days of that start. Horses will be permitted to start on the 15th day following said race.”

http://www.drf.com/news/new-entry-rule-aqueduct-causes-multiple-scratches
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
 
Posts: 4661
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Catalina » Mon Jan 26, 2015 10:47 am

BlindLucky wrote:
Catalina wrote:
BlindLucky wrote:Another Jacobson, Grade 2 placed 5-yr-old horse Vegas No Show (half to Bullsbay), was claimed by him for $35k last November. I can only guess he's got some issues, because he only has 1 posted work in the interim and Jacobson dropped him directly down for a $10k tag today, where he ran 2nd in a 3 horse field at Aqueduct. He was claimed today by Joseph Mazza, who seems like a really small-time trainer.

Anyway, I liked the horse and had wondered where he disappeared to.


Wasn't there some new rule about number of posted works since a long absence, or was last November simply not long enough ago?

If a horse hasn't started in 60 days, they require 2 workouts. However, today's start was on the 56th day (give or take one or two, depending on how they count them). If he'd waited until next weekend, he'd be technically required to have a second work.


Hope that horse is OK. He's been steeply dropping in the ranks, and not just the last two races.
Catalina
 
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby dustino140 » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:27 am

Somnambulist wrote:
dustino140 wrote:Of everything NYRA has done (and I think it's mostly good in this case) , the 14 days rule is, IMO, silly. It'd be great if that was a protest by the trainers. I see horses run back on 'short' rest (7-14 days), and sometimes wi, at tracks big and small every week. It all goes back on the trainers and their inherent responsibility to only run horses when they're right and ready. And this brings me back to my assertion that trainers should be punished for on-track breakdowns and DNFs.


IMO, NYRA is damned if they do or don't in this situation. I don't think this is that silly.


Is there proof that a horse running back in 2 weeks (or less) is at a significantly higher risk of breakdown than a horse with a longer layoff? I guess my point is that there are already nearly 100 horses in the US that have started 3 times in 2015, some on top circuits like Santa Anita, Tampa, etc., and we're only 3 1/2 weeks into the year. If they can handle that, why shouldn't they be allowed to?
User avatar
dustino140
 
Posts: 5206
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Catalina » Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:06 pm

dustino140 wrote:
Somnambulist wrote:
dustino140 wrote:Of everything NYRA has done (and I think it's mostly good in this case) , the 14 days rule is, IMO, silly. It'd be great if that was a protest by the trainers. I see horses run back on 'short' rest (7-14 days), and sometimes wi, at tracks big and small every week. It all goes back on the trainers and their inherent responsibility to only run horses when they're right and ready. And this brings me back to my assertion that trainers should be punished for on-track breakdowns and DNFs.


IMO, NYRA is damned if they do or don't in this situation. I don't think this is that silly.


Is there proof that a horse running back in 2 weeks (or less) is at a significantly higher risk of breakdown than a horse with a longer layoff? I guess my point is that there are already nearly 100 horses in the US that have started 3 times in 2015, some on top circuits like Santa Anita, Tampa, etc., and we're only 3 1/2 weeks into the year. If they can handle that, why shouldn't they be allowed to?


Because they can handle it until they break down? I think at some point you run into a deficit in bone remodeling. Plus, of course, NYRA doesn't want to include the inner track as a significant contributor to the problem.
Catalina
 
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby dustino140 » Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:21 pm

Catalina wrote:Because they can handle it until they break down? I think at some point you run into a deficit in bone remodeling. Plus, of course, NYRA doesn't want to include the inner track as a significant contributor to the problem.


If you were to get rid of horses that run back frequently, you'd be putting a lot of smaller tracks out of business. Look at the PPs for a Mountaineer, Finger Lakes, Belterra, Mahoning Valley, any of the fair circuits, etc. and you'll see horses every single day that are running back on short rest. And until anybody can prove that such action is a contributor to breakdown, which I do not believe, saying things like "because they can handle it until they breakdown" is sensationalist talk that has absolutely no basis and could be applied to any subgroup of racehorses. I'd argue that running those horses with that frequency, and training through racing (not fast 4-5f workouts) may actually be beneficial to their health, instead of a detriment to it.
User avatar
dustino140
 
Posts: 5206
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: "Bubble" and "Watch" horse thread

Postby Catalina » Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:41 pm

dustino140 wrote:
Catalina wrote:Because they can handle it until they break down? I think at some point you run into a deficit in bone remodeling. Plus, of course, NYRA doesn't want to include the inner track as a significant contributor to the problem.


If you were to get rid of horses that run back frequently, you'd be putting a lot of smaller tracks out of business. Look at the PPs for a Mountaineer, Finger Lakes, Belterra, Mahoning Valley, any of the fair circuits, etc. and you'll see horses every single day that are running back on short rest. And until anybody can prove that such action is a contributor to breakdown, which I do not believe, saying things like "because they can handle it until they breakdown" is sensationalist talk that has absolutely no basis and could be applied to any subgroup of racehorses. I'd argue that running those horses with that frequency, and training through racing (not fast 4-5f workouts) may actually be beneficial to their health, instead of a detriment to it.


So make a list of those horses and keep checking on them through 12/31/2015.

Edited to add: If those races are no more strenuous than what would amount to a "paid workout", yes they can get by with that for a while. But even then, IMO, not indefinitely.
Catalina
 
Posts: 3158
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

PreviousNext

Return to Racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests