Says it’s not fair for horses to sit out the Derby and/or the Preakness and then challenge a horse in the Belmont Stakes that has been worn down by running in both prior races
California Chrome disappointed his fans by failing to win the Triple Crown. Co-owner Steve Coburn was thoroughly pissed off because many trainers will hold their horses out of the Preakness if they don’t win the Derby, thereby giving them an extra period of rest.
Coburn said: "It's not fair to these horses that have been in the game since Day 1... This is a coward's way out in my opinion ... Our horse had a target on his back. Everybody else lays out one, or they won't run in the Kentucky Derby or the Preakness. They'll wait until the Belmont. You know what, if you've got a horse, run him in all three."
Only three of the 11 horses that were entered in the Belmont Stakes race ran in both the Derby and the Preakness.
Now many people will accuse Coburn of sour grapes. Not me! I think his bitterness is well justified. If you want your horse to keep the winner of the Derby and Preakness from winning the Triple Crown, enter it in all three races.
Entries in the Belmont Stakes race should be restricted to horses that ran in both the Derby and the Preakness, otherwise it’s unfair to the horse that won both.
However, Bob Walsh says:
“I think it is unfair to call them cowards. Everybody knows what the rules are going in. If you think the rules should be changed, that’s cool, I have no problem with that. Sniveling about them and complaining that the other guy is a coward for using them to his advantage seems kind of whiny to me.”
And ‘Bulldogger’ says:
“While the rules are clear it doesn’t mean California Chrome got a fair deal. The winner Tonalist didn’t even have enough points under the current system to even race in the Kentucky Derby, and neither did Commissioner and Medal Count. Tonalist hadn’t even raced since Feb. The rules are clear but need to be changed as this system is flawed.”
No comments:
Post a Comment