In a way, i agree with you.. Its very sensible to say lets give him the benefit of the doubt. But also, there will always be a public (including myself) that questions the abilities of this jockey, and of this race as tainted. In such a high stakes race, it is the jockeys fault that he carried (even possibly LEGAL) an object that no one else was that left his ethics into question. Why would a jockey do something that could be construed as cheating unless he greatly needed help from a foreign object to compete? In my opinion, its too bad that he is credited, and will probably continue to be credited with a victory. For argument sake, i would still say Vegas lists him as a realtive underdog since this jockey will never again carry a foreign object to help him win.
Gelding Wins Kentucky Derby
- Thread starter Point Man
- Start date
In a way, i agree with you.. Its very sensible to say lets give him the benefit of the doubt. But also, there will always be a public (including myself) that questions the abilities of this jockey, and of this race as tainted. In such a high stakes race, it is the jockeys fault that he carried (even possibly LEGAL) an object that no one else was that left his ethics into question. Why would a jockey do something that could be construed as cheating unless he greatly needed help from a foreign object to compete? In my opinion, its too bad that he is credited, and will probably continue to be credited with a victory. For argument sake, i would still say Vegas lists him as a realtive underdog since this jockey will never again carry a foreign object to help him win.
:eek: 
>>In a way, I agree with you.. but [I still want to continue my gripe] <<
And if someone's reputation gets dirtied in the process Sammy, who cares ? I just cannot help myself, I am a blabbermouth I know.
What is wrong with admitting that your words were perhaps a little unfair Sammy ?
If I were the jockey I would sue the shit out of you because of the aspersions you appear to cast over his character.
freealways
And if someone's reputation gets dirtied in the process Sammy, who cares ? I just cannot help myself, I am a blabbermouth I know.
What is wrong with admitting that your words were perhaps a little unfair Sammy ?
If I were the jockey I would sue the shit out of you because of the aspersions you appear to cast over his character.
freealways
The problem is that you really don't understand the law.. Its not nice to threaten other members in lawsuits for expressing their views. Why don't you sue the Kentucky Derby? Or better yet, why don't you step out of the bubble that you are in. Its your type of irrational thinking that really makes me believe that we live in a unsafe world. U support people who bend the law and impugn people who question. If you attempt to contact me in any way, i will call the police. This is not fiction. There is an actual investigation into the race.
Sammy, how old are you ? Is it 12 or are you 13 already ?
freealways
freealways
and is a disgruntled, sore loser. Yes, a sore loser.
I must say, freealways is so correct, and it's amazing no one else on this board blasts sammie vereal for slandering a great jockey Jose Santos. I have followed Santos for a long time, and he's the LAST person who would do anything but try hard.
There was nothing found on the racetrack, or in his hand. And a photo is EASILY doctored. It's incredible the type of idiots that run with the ball with nothing but a photo. Lots of losers in the world.
Did Santos "cheat" when he won the upset in last years breeders cup classic on Volponi at 43 to 1? And Volponi winning exposed the pick six scam! Volponi winning was a blessing for racing.
ET is by no means a real publication, so I guess people can say whatever they want. But to here such ignorance, makes you wonder about the veracity of the comment on actual "stock trading".
JJ
I must say, freealways is so correct, and it's amazing no one else on this board blasts sammie vereal for slandering a great jockey Jose Santos. I have followed Santos for a long time, and he's the LAST person who would do anything but try hard.
There was nothing found on the racetrack, or in his hand. And a photo is EASILY doctored. It's incredible the type of idiots that run with the ball with nothing but a photo. Lots of losers in the world.
Did Santos "cheat" when he won the upset in last years breeders cup classic on Volponi at 43 to 1? And Volponi winning exposed the pick six scam! Volponi winning was a blessing for racing.
ET is by no means a real publication, so I guess people can say whatever they want. But to here such ignorance, makes you wonder about the veracity of the comment on actual "stock trading".
JJ
Imagine if they had actually saved and froze some semen before neutering the fellow. Of course, the rules state that to race, a thoroughbred has to be conceived the old fashioned way-they've got to do it*. But imagine the fuss that would be made if a gelding became a triple crown winner... and there was a possibility that he could spawn?
If a son or daughter of his that was conceived through science... would they allow naturally conceived offspring from that horse to race?
André
*I only know this factoid on natural conception rules in horse racing because it's covered in the latest National Geographic on the Kentucky horse country and culture.
If a son or daughter of his that was conceived through science... would they allow naturally conceived offspring from that horse to race?
André
*I only know this factoid on natural conception rules in horse racing because it's covered in the latest National Geographic on the Kentucky horse country and culture.
The owner wouldn't be able to obtain registration because the breeders (a large and influential industry group) would feel under threat and block any such move. Their reasoning would be that their multi million dollar investment would become worth less and less.
A horse is able to cover only a small number of females
whilst with artificial insemination the same quantity of sperm could be spread out over a much larger number of mares.
It means that if sperm from a champion horse is available to more breeders AND at a lower cost it would all but eliminate demand for the second class horses.
There is a another problem of course i.e. one needs to rely on the studmaster's honesty that you indeed receive what you are are led to believe you are getting.
freealways
A horse is able to cover only a small number of females
whilst with artificial insemination the same quantity of sperm could be spread out over a much larger number of mares.
It means that if sperm from a champion horse is available to more breeders AND at a lower cost it would all but eliminate demand for the second class horses.
There is a another problem of course i.e. one needs to rely on the studmaster's honesty that you indeed receive what you are are led to believe you are getting.
freealways
Freealways is correct, can't a.i. a Thoroughbred.
I think they do allow it in trotting though.
PS. Santos is innocent of holding anything, I've seen the other pics and this whole thing is as bogus as shares of BREX . He was really stupid to talk to the reporter and mention that bracelet though.
I think they do allow it in trotting though.
PS. Santos is innocent of holding anything, I've seen the other pics and this whole thing is as bogus as shares of BREX . He was really stupid to talk to the reporter and mention that bracelet though.