Steve Coburn..Worst Person In The World List

EquineAnne
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:22 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:10 pm

Rick1323 wrote:Maybe this will sink in this time. The last 3 TC winners were Secretariat, Slew and Affirmed. Does Chrome belong in that group even if he did win the Belmont? The TC is HARD.....is it supposed to be hard.........
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
Bookman
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:16 am

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:19 pm

EquineAnne wrote:
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
..... And your book is pure fiction.

Let's give them all participation trophies.
“I wish you could run the races with no jocks and just put chickens on ’em.” - Billy Gowan
EquineAnne
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:22 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:20 pm

Wando wrote: I haven't read the entire thread so I apologize if this was mentioned.

But I'm pretty sure there were many back in 1977 that felt Seattle Slew didn't belong even after he won the triple crown. It wasn't until he beat Affirmed the next year that he got some respect. But before that he was considered the best of an ordinary bunch, kind of like how you are referring to Chrome. :D
Yes, and one of them was Arcaro. Many thought he was a lowly born, flash in the pan. He certainly showed them. In all areas.
EquineAnne
Posts: 686
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:22 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:22 pm

Bookman wrote:
EquineAnne wrote:
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
..... And your book is pure fiction.

Let's give them all participation trophies.
Never said to give them all trophies.

Tell me, what part of Chrome's run, was not good enough to win a TC? What didn't he do, in your book, man?
Apollo
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:34 pm

Wando wrote: I haven't read the entire thread so I apologize if this was mentioned.

But I'm pretty sure there were many back in 1977 that felt Seattle Slew didn't belong even after he won the triple crown. It wasn't until he beat Affirmed the next year that he got some respect. But before that he was considered the best of an ordinary bunch, kind of like how you are referring to Chrome. :D
The idiots thought that. You had to be an idiot to think that, based on Slew's freakish performances in the Champagne and at Hialeah. But the idiots had some idiotic backing in Andrew Beyer's rants in the Post, and Eddie Arcaro on ABC.

Other than the burst through the hole at the Derby, and putting away underrated speedball Cormorant in the Preakness, Slew wasn't forced to be dominant in the classics. That hardly meant the dominance wasn't available.

It would have been absolutely criminal if Slew had died as a result of the virus the next winter, or never run again after the Swaps. The idiotic theme that you referred to would have lingered. I wrote a column in my college paper predicting the Marlboro Cup in 1978. I wrote that Slew was simply better than either Affirmed or Alydar, and the race would be over as soon as Slew fired at the top of the stretch. That was published many days before the race. The reaction I received was fascinating. Lots of letters to the editor. Big divide. Many called me an outright fool, saying Slew was nothing but ordinary. The ones written in reasonable terms backed me. I remember one in particular. It said (paraphrased), "you called Slew right on the nose. It will be fun to witness the stunned reaction on Saturday."

That horse is still underrated in historical terms. I have to laugh, for example, when he's slotted behind Dr. Fager on many all time lists. Lots of people who fixate on final time still simply don't get it. I guess Monarchos is the third best horse ever to run in the Derby. But it doesn't bother me so much because a spot on that legendary list earns more and more respect and aura as time goes on. The idiots drift away.
BlindLucky
Posts: 3314
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:22 am
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:47 pm

Last Week Tonight (the new John Oliver show on HBO) was on last night, and the very first story he covered was California Chrome. It was tongue-in-cheek the whole way through, but I did laugh when he called Coburn "the Secretariat of sore losers" :lol:
Photos from my racing travels: ThoroughbredJourney.com
Bookman
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:16 am

Mon Jun 09, 2014 1:51 pm

EquineAnne wrote:
Bookman wrote:
EquineAnne wrote:
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
..... And your book is pure fiction.

Let's give them all participation trophies.
Never said to give them all trophies.

Tell me, what part of Chrome's run, was not good enough to win a TC? What didn't he do, in your book, man?
I didn't say you did.

He had a decent run, all things considered, but he didn't win.
YOUR book is fiction.
“I wish you could run the races with no jocks and just put chickens on ’em.” - Billy Gowan
User avatar
Curtis
Posts: 1411
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 am
Location: Monroe, WA
Contact:

Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:07 pm

EquineAnne wrote:
Bookman wrote:
EquineAnne wrote:
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
..... And your book is pure fiction.

Let's give them all participation trophies.
Never said to give them all trophies.

Tell me, what part of Chrome's run, was not good enough to win a TC? What didn't he do, in your book, man?
Oh I'll go. Obvious observations for $200 Alex; What is the stretch run of the 2014 Belmont Stakes? But seriously, do you consider Silver Charm, Real Quiet and Smarty Jones to be Triple Crown winners?
User avatar
Katewerk
Posts: 728
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 11:30 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:09 pm

I'm starting to wish that Tapiture had won the TC, just to give people something better to bitch about.
harvestmoon
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:19 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:19 pm

EquineAnne wrote:
Bookman wrote:
EquineAnne wrote:
and yet, had things been just a smidge different, he would have won. He's a TC winner in my book.
..... And your book is pure fiction.

Let's give them all participation trophies.
Never said to give them all trophies.

Tell me, what part of Chrome's run, was not good enough to win a TC? What didn't he do, in your book, man?
Hmmm, well, perhaps the part where Chrome didn't win the Belmont? Just a thought.

If we're making TC winners out of horses who aren't, I'd say Spectacular Bid is probably the most deserving. :P He had a pretty valid excuse, too. Chrome needs to get in line.
User avatar
Curtis
Posts: 1411
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 am
Location: Monroe, WA
Contact:

Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:28 pm

Admin wrote:
Secretariat4ever wrote:Coburn is just telling the truth. The truth hurts sometimes. Racing should listen as the decline continues and I don't see the end. Less venues,less races,smaller foal crops and no interest in younger people. A real TC. Series will attract more people.
He was partly right. There is no need to change the spacing or do anything else that significantly changes the series. The problem we have is the trend for skipping the Preakness. We do need to encourage owners and trainers to NOT skip the Preakness. I think the solution is to bring back the bonus.

Wasn't the TC far better in 2007 when Hard Spun and Curlin didn't skip the Preakness? And the Belmont was better for those two continuing on (do wish Street Sense didn't opt out). Top horses need to continue on the trail if they're healthy. The top horses who didn't make the Derby but can show up for the Preakness need to show up there.

While Wicked Strong is the horse I wanted to win if CC didn't, Wicked Strong is one of the horses who SHOULD have raced in the Preakness. I could also make the case that if Tonalist was in good enough shape to run in the Peter Pan, then he could've run in the Preakness.

It IS a problem that we should talk about. The owner was wrong in his idea of how to fix it, and was wrong to use the word "cowardly", but there is merit to having the discussion. Churchill, Pimlico and NYRA need to work on getting a sponsor for the bonus.
The bonus was instituted to supersede outside bonuses. Spend A Buck skipped the 1985 Preakness and Belmont because he was in for a huge payday if he could win the Jersey Derby. Though not driven by any outside bonus, in 1982 Gato Del Sol skipped the Preakness because the late Eddie Gregson believed he had a much better chance in the Belmont. I don't remember the exact rules pertaining to the bonus, whether it was just based on accumulated points or if you had to run in all three to collect. I do remember some glitches, in my opinion, with it. In 1987 it rewarded a horse that won one leg over another that won two legs. Two years later because P Val had the foresight to save second, Sunday Silence outpointed Easy Goer. The 1989 bonus I thought was fairly distributed but really Alysheba's Belmont as opposed to Sunday Silences's were really similar efforts as neither horse was close.

This is not directed at you personally but in 1968 was Greentree Stable and Stage Door Johnny held in the same negative light that Tonalist and his crew is for thwarting Forward Pass both then and now? And if not why not?
User avatar
Insane Crazy
Posts: 3042
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:26 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 2:45 pm

This was nice to watch/read. Reflecting on his plea to not let it get in the way of the horse, this story gave me, at least, so much joy over the past few months. One hotheaded outburst isn't going to ruin it for me. Hope it doesn't for too many others, either.

I agree this is a "learning process". He had probably never so much as been on the local radio before the San Felipe, much less national TV in an emotional moment. It's like an actor in a community theatre suddenly being a movie star. They're going to make (sometimes huge) mistakes. He was totally ridiculous and he definitely needed to apologize, but if he doesn't do something too over the top again, I'm happy to give him some room.

Love that his wife was there to pat his head and commend him, lol. She seems like a down to earth lady.
Not a wholesome trottin' race, no, but a race where they sit down right on the horse!
Like to see some stuck-up jockey boy sittin' on Dan Patch? Make your blood boil? Well, I should say!
Barnfour
Posts: 631
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:15 pm
Location: Red Bank,NJ

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:06 pm

Admin wrote:
Barnfour wrote:
Admin wrote:
They should run in all 3 if possible because it's the sporting thing to do, and it makes the races far better.

Hard Spun and Curlin weren't "crippled" for running in all three. In fact, I can't think of a horse who WAS crippled for running in all three. You are buying into the idea that we should sparsely run our horses.


I agree with Som.It has nothing to do with the "sporting" thing to do.If you force a trainer to run a horse in the Preakness who has to have the extra time between racing you are doing the horse and the game a disservice.How who you feel V if a horse that ran well in the Derby and was forced to race in the Preakness to be eligible to race in the Belmont now breaks down and is done for the year? Not fair to place that burden on the owners or trainers of a three year old.And the game will suck with horses forced to race in all three.I don't want a bigger field with horses in a race that don't belong there.
Who on earth said anything about being "forced"?

My entire post was about how the BEST horses who are healthy should continue on? What part of that hints at me wanting to see undeserving and/or unwell horses being "forced" on?
If you have a horse that can run all day and wants to run 1 1/2, if they change the rules and make it where the only way to get into the starting gate Belmont day is to race the other two legs, how do you get into the Belmont without being forced to race the other two legs?
“The heaviest penalty for declining to the rule is to be ruled by someone inferior to yourself.”
― Plato, The Republic
User avatar
Raven
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:56 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:12 pm

B4= Spot On!!!
You will soon break the bow if you keep it always stretched ~Faedus~
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:23 pm

User avatar
Raven
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:56 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:25 pm

His overall comment was SPOT ON!!

It has nothing to do with your comments!
You will soon break the bow if you keep it always stretched ~Faedus~
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:48 pm

Raven wrote:His overall comment was SPOT ON!!

It has nothing to do with your comments!
Whose comments???
User avatar
Raven
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:56 pm

Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:54 pm

V's !
You will soon break the bow if you keep it always stretched ~Faedus~
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:02 pm

Raven wrote:V's !
Didn't know which thread to post Steve Haskin's article on Coburn's rant and eventual apology. Just thought this was the best thread to post it in. I wasn't posting it as a rebuttal to what anyone has written here - just an FYI. But, for what it's worth, I agree with Admin.
User avatar
Curtis
Posts: 1411
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 am
Location: Monroe, WA
Contact:

Mon Jun 09, 2014 5:20 pm

Ballerina wrote:
Raven wrote:V's !
Didn't know which thread to post Steve Haskin's article on Coburn's rant and eventual apology. Just thought this was the best thread to post it in. I wasn't posting it as a rebuttal to what anyone has written here - just an FYI. But, for what it's worth, I agree with Admin.
So you agree with creating an incentive to compete in the Triple Crown races as opposed to making entrance in the Belmont contingent on having entered one or both?
Post Reply