Postby bcassidy » Fri Jun 10, 2005 6:21 am
marg--great post ---you raise two points I would like to explore more with the other minds on this forum. I wonder whether I should do it under this post or start another. Let's try them here and we will see how it goes.
First---Why not move all the racing conditions for thoroughbreds back one year?---in other words--rather than have age restricted races at 2 and 3----make it 3 and 4, etc. As an example, the triple crown series would then be a series of 4 yr olds instead of 3 yr olds--how bad would that be for the industry? Breeder, Owner, Trainer and Fan? Why the need to rush the horse to be great 2 yr olds and great early at 3? Demonstrating precocity has its limitations and problems---two that come to mind are peaking early but not developing later and unsoundness due to too much pressure too soon. I can quickly think of some of the arguments against this move--tradition, training costs, etc but if you really stop to think about it, it probably has a lot of merit. What do others think?
Second----When is the time to switch from a loyal good and solid trainer or jockey to another more experienced trainer or jockey? Is it when your horse moves beyond the experience level of the original trainer or jockey? This is a really difficult decision and I am sure it could work out either way -----as it has in the past but I have learned to lean more toward the make the change when the horse outgrows the experience level of the trainer. I am specifically not referring to the trainers horsemanship or conditioning experience (racerx please take note of this point) but rather to their experience in other areas of the racing environment. I can give you a few off the top of my head but I could probably reel off a significant amount of additional factors that I think would be relevent to making the switch with a little more time but nowhere would this switch be more appropriate than a horse good enough to compete in the Triple Crown series. I will cite a few to get the ball rolling---having the courage and experience to know when a jockey change is required; selecting the best training and prep race schedule for the young animal; the experience to handle the multitude of tracks involved--hopefully with real and significant experience at each track and it's jockey colony; There is also a long list of much more mundane considerations like having a 24 hour crew complete with night watchman, etc; staff equiped to handle the travel schedule and all the things that go on around this kind of animal; having a network of exercise riders, blacksmiths and vets that can accomodate the extensive travel plans. These are just the tip of the iceberg as far as things that a trainer playing at this level must be prepared to handle. I would certainly want the most experience in my court as I could possibly have. As a case in point----who would you rather have operate on your heart??? the first time surgeon or the surgeon who has performed 1,000 successful heart operations already----no contest right? Well that is how I feel about the trainer and jockey situation. I want the best experience I can buy for that once in a lifetime horse. Just my opinions---what do others think? By the way, no one says you can't pay the original trainer and jockey in addition to the new players.
Last edited by
bcassidy on Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:27 am, edited 4 times in total.
best regards Brendan
