Irish Derby Weekend

Originally posted by Galileo@Jun 29 2008, 07:52 PM
Yeah, Murtagh saw Frozen Fire out the back and knew he should plough through the opposition...putting his mount and the other horses at risk and possibly killing his friends in the weight room.

I am not usually one to rubbish someone's views but after reading this and some of the trash on TRF about Murtaghs ride I have to. If your suggesting Murtagh deliberately ran into the other horses then your talking absolute crap Merlin.
Click to expand...
:eek: GAL lets put the boot on the other foot then! and its purely hypothetical but the answer I would ask WOULD YOU THEN GET THE SAME RESULT NO BANS ETC AS TODAY"?

Lets say HANNON sent over 6 horses to contest a grade one IRISH Derby, the jockeys all having a chin wag in the ring prior to mounting their horses, the pacemaker runs two horse widths off the rail and allows a stable horse to come inside him and take the ground along the rail (tactics?) nowt wrong with this up to now, their quite entitled to do this and have not transgressed one iota.

Now the horse who as never shown any traits of ever running away from the whip before, after 5 runs mind and his given one slap and careers across the rest of the field and takes out two or lets call it one, of the Irish contenders who just happens to be the fav, who was challenging at the time and going to pass the horse (with no whip traits ever before recorded) running on the rail.

Do YOU think that the outcome of the above would be the same as today's race... answer truthfully.....

And I can certainly read a race being involved in the game for the number of years that I have. :P
 
Originally posted by Galileo@Jun 29 2008, 10:25 PM
Merlin I think you should look at the Lingfield Derby trial....the horse ran all over the place.
Click to expand...
Don't let the facts interfere with Merlins arguement.
 
I agree with all those who think the horse - AV - was pretty much out of control. Murtagh - as in the Irish guineas - got his knitting in a twist trying to change whip hands. But AV unlike Henry was not an honest horse on a straight line, and cannoned into the others; he was going almost sideways at the time, and had so much momentum to his left that Murtagh had a helluva job getting him going I guess I'm saying forward again. There is NO WAY any jockey would risk that deliberately - even if you could engineer it. He had no idea where Frozen Fire was!

SL - re the betting post you put up: I do understand all that, and why there is a Rule 4!

I'm simply saying, I don't agree with it! I strike a bet at the odds I strike it, given the field as 'published' at the time I strike the bet. I *personally* would prefer that bet to stand in ALL circumstances, ie no Rule 4, and no returned stakes - if the horse you backed won't load, you lose your money. That's my preference. There's no point saying, 'but without the even money favourite the 16/1 wouldn't be on offer' - the point is, when I struck the bet, there WAS an even money favourite. I guess I'm saying I'd prefer antepost rules to apply to all bets :what: and I'd take the longer odds along with the risk of losing my stake on a NR in the 48 hours following decs.

But hey - it ain't gonna happen so it's not worth arguing the toss :laughing:
 
Swain in the breeders cup comes to mind (without the carnage)
I think Murtagh should have got a ban for not taking seriously evasive action when he started to bulldoze dangerously through the others.
Somehow I think the best horse won, unless someone can say Murtagh knocked his stablemate onto a strip of super fast ground. :what:
It didn't make pleasant viewing. :(
 
Originally posted by davidjohnson@Jun 29 2008, 04:16 PM
Well done to Frozen Fire backers, he's clearly a talented horse, as I thought on his debut when I stuck a large P on him. I've got to find some positive to take from the race!! I'd maintain he's not an easy or straightforward ride and think he will test the skills of O'Brien to the limit as he walks on a tightrope with regards his temperament, but as he's shown with George Washington, he couldn't be in better hands.

The best horse won at the end of the day.
Click to expand...
I'm not seeing this dodgepot horse David


Maybe our lass is right and i do need to go get my eyes tested
 
"If we dont have them in the race we will instead have slowly run French like races with lots of unlucky horses."

..............and there weren't any unlucky horses yesterday, were there?!
 
"Anyway, come off it Colin - you know full well all about what horses are and are not capable of. Do you seriously advocate the banning of the whip? Somehow I think not - you know better than to come out with tree hugging, clueless, poncy tripe like that!"

Shads, by the time you posted this last night I was 'in my cups' or inebriated, if you prefer.

In my head, whilst walking the dog, I composed a long and rambling answer, going on to equate horses with children and teenagers but I find I am so depressed this morning I can't be arsed to write it.

I haven't been one of those who supported a total whip ban but I am very much against 'whip abuse'.

The arguments of the proponents of keeping the whip are becoming more and more self-contradictory and I am becoming weary of their arguments.

.................and that's just the short version!!!!

I will leave it at that for now, but will expand, if, unbelievably, anyone should want me to. :shy:
 
Originally posted by Colin Phillips@Jun 30 2008, 06:08 AM
"If we dont have them in the race we will instead have slowly run French like races with lots of unlucky horses."

..............and there weren't any unlucky horses yesterday, were there?!
Click to expand...
What exactly did the pacemaker have anything to do with yesterdays events?

On fast ground it is possible FF might not put it all in, but like yesterday when there is an ease in the ground he should be fine.
 
The sentence in your post suggests that with pacemakers you don't get unlucky horses.

There were pacemakers in yesterday's race and I have read that some horses were unlucky, I still haven't seen the race but I feel from the amount I've read that I was actually riding in the race!
 
Watched it again this morning.The winner wasn't lucky. It was inevitable that he would win when he started to accelerate. The others looked one paced beside him , only the margin was affected.
 
Originally posted by Colin Phillips@Jun 30 2008, 08:16 AM
The sentence in your post suggests that with pacemakers you don't get unlucky horses.

There were pacemakers in yesterday's race and I have read that some horses were unlucky, I still haven't seen the race but I feel from the amount I've read that I was actually riding in the race!
Click to expand...
Colin what is wrong with you? You keep picking at everything everyone is saying. Yes that was my line but for God sake in the context of the debate and in the context of this being a racing forum, surely it was clear that a pacemaker (producing a fair and honest pace) is likely to have the field better strung out making unlucky in running cases less likely.

Its obvious unlucky instances can happen in races with pacemakers, much in the same way not all horses respond to correction with the whip as generally most do. Thats not to say get rid of the pacemakers (because horses can still be unlucky) and get rid of the whips (because the odd few dont respond to them).
 
"Colin what is wrong with you?"

It would take too long to explain, Gal, and I'm probably not the best one to do it!! :shy:

To try to answer your points.

You accuse me of picking at what people are saying, on an open forum I can't be the only one doing that.......believe it's called debate.

I pick on what I see as contradictory and in some cases plain wrong.

"Thats not to say get rid of the pacemakers (because horses can still be unlucky) and get rid of the whips (because the odd few dont respond to them)."

Here again, I see a contradiction in your post, the problem yesterday was caused by Alessandro Volta's reaction to the whip.

I could go on and question your blind championing of Ballydoyle, and and your unshakable inability to admit that they are ever at fault............but I won't do that. :shy: :P

Gal, if it makes you happier I will stay away from the subject of the whip and all things Ballydoyle. OK?
 
Colin I have absolutely no problems regarding debate…

But clearly I was not suggesting pacemakers make it impossible for there to be an unlucky horse – that’s a given. You know I was not suggesting that (or at least I hope you think more of me than to think I was) yet you asked the question.

So please don’t refrain from commenting on pacemakers, whips or my obsession with Coolmore….but don’t be looking for an argument when it is not there!
 
Back
Top