This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Breeders' Cup

edited November 2010 in Everything Else
It's the Breeder's Cup today/this weekend, and I have to say that I am stoked.
Anyone have money on the Zenyatta to go 20-0?
«1

Comments

  • My wife likes her, but is not sure about betting on her.
  • Yeah, I heard about this horse that might be 20-0. But seriously, unless a horse wins the Triple Crown, it doesn't mean shit. It's like the difference between MLS and Champions League.
  • edited November 2010
    Did you see the jockey-fight?
    Yeah, I heard about this horse that might be 20-0. But seriously, unless a horse wins the Triple Crown, it doesn't mean shit. It's like the difference between MLS and Champions League.
    Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    For people who are into it. Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it. The general populace only cares about the triple crown.
  • Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it
    MLS shouldn't be a big deal for anyone. It's a retirement home for old footballers who can't give up their addiction to the sport.
  • edited November 2010
    Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    For people who are into it. Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it. The general populace only cares about the triple crown.
    Fuck the general polulace. Are you saying that you have only the interest/knowkedge of the general polulace?

    If you only care about what the general populace cares about, here's some news: the general poplulace doesn't care about Formula One, Anime, IT, Science, Comics, or any of the other things we care about.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • If you only care about the general populace, here's some news: the general poplulace doesn't care about Formula One, Anime, IT, Science, Comics, or any of the other things we care about.
    Breeding animals for sport, and a sport which primarily only exists for gambling purposes, yeah I'm kinda glad the general populace doesn't care about it that much. At least Formula 1 is useful. Many of the awesome new technologies you find in your every day car were developed due to F1.

    F1 is basically a way to take hundreds of millions from insanely rich people and get them to invest it in engineering research for everyone's benefit. Horse racing is a way to take money from the hobos at the OTB and give it to rich people so they can ride the pretty ponies. Oddly enough, OTB is losing money due to mismanagement.
  • edited November 2010
    If you only care about the general populace, here's some news: the general poplulace doesn't care about Formula One, Anime, IT, Science, Comics, or any of the other things we care about.
    Breeding animals for sport, and a sport which primarily only exists for gambling purposes, yeah I'm kinda glad the general populace doesn't care about it that much. At least Formula 1 is useful. Many of the awesome new technologies you find in your every day car were developed due to F1.

    F1 is basically a way to take hundreds of millions from insanely rich people and get them to invest it in engineering research for everyone's benefit. Horse racing is a way to take money from the hobos at the OTB and give it to rich people so they can ride the pretty ponies. Oddly enough, OTB is losing money due to mismanagement.
    So, if my wife likes racing, she's a hobo? She must be because we're not rich and she like racing and, according to you, she must be either rich or a hobo. Why don't you be quiet before you embarrass yourself further? Seriously. You obviously don't know much about this - and that's not necessarily a bad thing. But, when you start being a blowhard about shit you don't know anything about, you tend to start sounding like Steve.

    Never disparage something someone else truly likes. My wife LOVES wedding shit. I don't understand why, but I never give her a hard time about it. I don't like Hockey or Formula One, but I never give YOU a hard time about it. We like racing. Most of the people I know in real life like racing, and many of them are employed in the horse industry in one form or another. My wife actually was an exercise rider at Churchill Downs for a number of years. I was a groom at a horse farm in KY for a couple of years. My father was a farrier. If you don't like racing, that's shiny, but don't give us any shit about it. Just back the fuck off and make doe eyes at Rym or whatever you do in your spare time. NYC is only a couple of hours away, and I WILL come up there and kick your little pansy ass for insulting my wife, my family, and my friends.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • But, when you start being a blowhard about shit you don't know anything about, you tend to start sounding like Steve.
  • edited November 2010
    I don't like Hockey or Formula One, but I never give YOU a hard time about it.
    If you don't like hockey or formula one, and you have legitimate criticisms of them, speak up. I'm not going to be insulted. I'm impossible to insult. I have legitimate criticisms of horse racing. I'm not going to be quiet because of anyone's feelings on any matter, nor would I expect that of anyone else.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • If you don't like hockey or formula one, and you have legitimate criticisms of them, speak up.
    F1 is boring as fuck to watch outside of the first and last two laps, with the possible exception of when the top contenders pit.

    Hockey has too many commercials, but is otherwise perfect.
  • edited November 2010
    F1 is boring as fuck to watch outside of the first and last two laps, with the possible exception of when the top contenders pit.
    I think it's exciting even when just one car is driving alone. The marvel of the engineering prowess alone amazes me. Also, I like the sound. It's easy to understand how it's boring. It only excites me because I look at it and imagine all the work that went into it. I'm bringing that to the table, not the broadcast. Also television does a very poor job of really showing the sheer speed of the vehicles, and it's not HD, which is more fail.
    Hockey has too many commercials, but is otherwise perfect.
    Everything has too many commercials. At least with the NY Rangers, MSG has a program called Rangers in 60. The day after every Ranger game you can rewatch the game cut down to just 60 minutes with less commercials and such. That works well if you don't know the result, or if you can enjoy it even though you already know the result.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • edited November 2010
    I don't like Hockey or Formula One, but I never give YOU a hard time about it.
    If you don't like hockey or formula one, and you have legitimate criticisms of them, speak up. I'm not going to be insulted. I'm impossible to insult. I have legitimate criticisms of horse racing. I'm not going to be quiet because of anyone's feelings on any matter, nor would I expect that of anyone else.
    See, you didn't express a legitimate criticism. You said:
    If you only care about the general populace, here's some news: the general poplulace doesn't care about Formula One, Anime, IT, Science, Comics, or any of the other things we care about.
    Breeding animals for sport, and a sport which primarily only exists for gambling purposes, yeah I'm kinda glad the general populace doesn't care about it that much. At least Formula 1 is useful. Many of the awesome new technologies you find in your every day car were developed due to F1.

    F1 is basically a way to take hundreds of millions from insanely rich people and get them to invest it in engineering research for everyone's benefit. Horse racing is a way to take money from the hobos at the OTB and give it to rich people so they can ride the pretty ponies. Oddly enough, OTB is losing money due to mismanagement.
    For ease of argument, I've bolded the only things you said about horse racing. Now, let's parse out what you said:
    1. Breeding animals for sport is apparently somehow objectionable to you. Of course, you don't say why and you don't really say that it's objectionable in any way. You just let it hang out there as if it's somehow self evident that you've made some sort of devastating point.

    This is not a legitimate criticism, You haven't enunciated an actual criticism one way or the other. Just for kicks, I'll assume that you somehow have an objection to raising animals for sport. I can tell you FIRST-FUCKING-HAND that those animals have better, more carefree lives than most people. Their every need is met, and met with the highest quality that their owners can afford. If this is a "legitimate criticism", it fails. If you have some other criticism along these lines, it fails because of very poor writing. Maybe you think the horses are treated too well. We don't know because your writing is so poor.

    2. Gambling is somehow objectionable to you. Again, you don't actually say this, you just let the implication hang out there. If gambling is your problem, I have to wonder why you think Formula One and Hockey exist. The purity of the competition? "Legitimate criticism" number 2 fails.

    3. This is what pisses me off. Look what you wrote. You wrote, "Horse racing is a way to take money from the hobos at the OTB and give it to rich people so they can ride the pretty ponies" This is not a legitimate criticism. This is an opinion formed from ignorance. It also characterizes the people who like racing as either (a) rich, or (b) hobos (sic - you spelled "hoboes" wrong, you idiot). That is what's insulting. It's not a legitimate criticism at all. It's a characterization of the people who like horse racing, and nothing more. "Legitimate criticism" number 3 fails.

    4. Why would you care, and why would anyone care for purposes of whether horse racing is enjoyable, that OTB is losing money? It's irrelevant. Furthermore, OTB may be losing money in NY, but that's NY's problem, not racing's. Racing is not just about OTB. Churchill Downs and Keeneland are running WAY in the black. OTB in Maryland is doing just fine. "Legitimate criticism" number 4 fails.

    See? You had no "legitimate criticisms" at all. What you did have was a couple of opinions formed from ignorance and a mischaracterization of a group of people who enjoy an activity. It's like if I said, "Only eurotrash fags like Formula One". That's not a legitimate criticism. That's just an insulting opinion. See how that works?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Well, I'd say a legitimate criticism of gambling could be fleshed out, but indeed Scott has not bothered to do so.
  • edited November 2010
    It's not about how the horses are treated. I know they are treated extremely well, because they are worth so much money. It's mostly that I'm just opposed to selective breeding for aesthetic purposes in general. It's one thing to selectively breed away genetic disorders. It's another thing entirely to breed a really tiny species of dog just so ladies can carry it in their purse. Selectively breeding the fastest horses just for the amusement and profit of people, I'm not a fan.

    As for gambling, I actually don't have a problem with gambling itself. If people want to gamble their money, they can do so. My problem is that gambling on a sport that is endorsed by the sport makes that sport completely illegitimate. One thing that professional sports in the US have right is a harsh stance against gambling. When people have a lot of money at stake on the results, you have to assume that the sport is a fix. It doesn't mean it is, it just means that suddenly everything becomes guilty until proven innocent.

    When you watch say, NFL football, you can safely assume that everyone involved including owners, players, coaches, staff, officials, etc. have no wagers on the game. If someone is found out, you get a Pete Rose situation. Thus it will be a fair competition between two teams trying their best to win. With horse racing everyone involved might have some, or even a lot, of money riding on every race. And there are people all round the world with money riding on it as well. Even if I had no problem with selective breeding, I can't have any faith that the sport is even a legitimate competition, no matter how many anti-cheating safeguards are in place, everyone involved is heavily incentivized to get around them.

    As for the hobo or hoboe comment, I just look at the pomp and circumstance of say, the Kentucky Derby, and compare it to the sleazy old guys smoking cigars outside the OTB all day, every day. The stark contrast cuts through cognitive dissonance like a hot knife through butter.

    Mostly I view horse racing like boxing. They have many of the same issues, like gambling. Both had their time, back in the day, and now are lingering. I think it's time for both of them to go. Don't mention MMA, that's another story entirely. I love to watch old boxing on YouTube, especially Mohammed Ali. His movements are just so majestic, much like the race horses. But now that it's the year 2010, there's no reason to continue these sports. Much like there's no reason to play Counter-Strike 1.6 or Quake 1. Don't forget them, for history's sake, but there's no need to keep playing them seriously. We have new games now.
    Post edited by Apreche on
  • We've selectively bred all sorts of life for countless years for a variety of reasons. Are you opposed to bulldogs too? How about Jersey cows? Different varities of flowers?

    Why the hell is this iteration of selective breeding different than any other iteration? You could argue that athletic families - like the Mannings - selectively breed their kids. Is that wrong too?
  • Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    For people who are into it. Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it. The general populace only cares about the triple crown.
    I work at a bookies, believe me, the breeder's cup brings as much bets as any of the other triple crown races.
  • We've selectively bred all sorts of life for countless years for a variety of reasons. Are you opposed to bulldogs too? How about Jersey cows? Different varities of flowers?

    Why the hell is this iteration of selective breeding different than any other iteration? You could argue that athletic families - like the Mannings - selectively breed their kids. Is that wrong too?
    I must agree here. I can't see anything inherently wrong with selective breeding, so how can it matter for what reasons it's being done?
  • edited November 2010
    It's not about how the horses are treated. I know they are treated extremely well, because they are worth so much money. It's mostly that I'm just opposed to selective breeding for aesthetic purposes in general. It's one thing to selectively breed away genetic disorders. It's another thing entirely to breed a really tiny species of dog just so ladies can carry it in their purse. Selectively breeding the fastest horses just for the amusement and profit of people, I'm not a fan.
    As Pete pointed out, then you must not be a fan of Bulldogs or Great Danes. Actually, it's pretty easy to imagine you not liking dogs. However, once again, you have stated AN OPINION, not a "legitimate criticism". You haven't said why you don't like breeding. You've just decided you don't like it. That's fine. You're entitled to your opinion, just don't fool yourself that your opinion is a legitimate criticism. It's just your opinion. Finally, that last sentence really needs some editing. As it stands, it's meaningless. Do you speak that way in real life? Have all gramar rules gone out the window, or were you too cool to learn grammar in school?
    As for gambling, I actually don't have a problem with gambling itself. If people want to gamble their money, they can do so. My problem is that gambling on a sport that is endorsed by the sport makes that sport completely illegitimate. One thing that professional sports in the US have right is a harsh stance against gambling. When people have a lot of money at stake on the results, you have to assume that the sport is a fix. It doesn't mean it is, it just means that suddenly everything becomes guilty until proven innocent.

    When you watch say, NFL football, you can safely assume that everyone involved including owners, players, coaches, staff, officials, etc. have no wagers on the game. If someone is found out, you get a Pete Rose situation. Thus it will be a fair competition between two teams trying their best to win. With horse racing everyone involved might have some, or even a lot, of money riding on every race. And there are people all round the world with money riding on it as well. Even if I had no problem with selective breeding, I can't have any faith that the sport is even a legitimate competition, no matter how many anti-cheating safeguards are in place, everyone involved is heavily incentivized to get around them.
    So owners, trainers, veternarians, farriers, exercise riders, grooms, jockeys, and everyone else get together and cheat? Do you know what you've just proposed? You've just espoused a conspiracy theory. Hey everyone! Scott is a crazy conspiracy theorist!

    Seriously, how many individual owners do you think there are? Many "owners" these days are actually syndicates composed of as much as twenty individuals. Do you think they all get together with other syndicates of twenty individuals or more and create conspiracies to "fix" racing? Even one syndicate deciding to cheat would involve a conspiracy. That doesn't even count the other people down the line like the people I mentioned in the paragraph above. Also, there is the problem of getting the 1500-2000 pound animal to agree with your conspiracy. You have not ststaed a legitimate criticism. What you're proposing is crazy conspiracy theory developed through ignorance of how horse racing is structured.

    While we're on the subject of betting, you probably think there are only straight bets and nothing else. You talked before about how you think that Formula One is "awesome" because it leads to the develpment of new automotive technology. Horse betting is pretty awesome too because it necessarily involves a lot of math. Try handicapping a race and taking into account variables like the composition of the track, the weather, the jockey, the horse's latest performance. Then try to do an exotic bet, like an exacta box. I'll bet you can't do it, because the math would be too hard for you. I'll bet that is your real beef with the gambling bit. You can't handle the math.
    As for the hobo or hoboe comment, I just look at the pomp and circumstance of say, the Kentucky Derby, and compare it to the sleazy old guys smoking cigars outside the OTB all day, every day. The stark contrast cuts through cognitive dissonance like a hot knife through butter.
    Once again, that's just your opinion. You don't like the people that hang out at the OTB? They scare you? They smell bad? That's personal opinion, not a legitimate criticism. It's like if I say I don't like hockey because I saw some people hanging around outside a hockey stadium and they were tooothless rednecks. See how that works?
    Mostly I view horse racing like boxing. They have many of the same issues, like gambling. Both had their time, back in the day, and now are lingering. I think it's time for both of them to go. Don't mention MMA, that's another story entirely. I love to watch old boxing on YouTube, especially Mohammed Ali. His movements are just so majestic, much like the race horses. But now that it's the year 2010, there's no reason to continue these sports. Much like there's no reason to play Counter-Strike 1.6 or Quake 1. Don't forget them, for history's sake, but there's no need to keep playing them seriously. We have new games now.
    You wrote before that you like Formula One because it leads to the development of "awesome" automotive technology. Because of your ignorance of racing, you don't realize what the study of thoroughbred genetics has done for the fields of genetics, forensics, and yes, even human medicine and fields like molecular biology. Those fields are the future. The internal combustion engine is a relic of the past. There's no reason to keep toying and tinkering with the internal combustion engine. It's basically 19th century technology and we're at the point of peak oil anyway. Any racing that involves oil in any way has a limited lifespan - the amount of time we can spare the oil. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some major changes in every type of auto racing in our lifetimes - namely the waning and withering away of those "sports" for lack of fuel. I don't believe that they will weather a change-over to electric cars. If you like outdated tech that is on the way out, fine - that's your opinion. However, it's not fine when you try to dress it up as a legitimate criticism. Stick with your old-fashioned, 19th century tech with the limited lifespan. I'll opt for awesome genetics and biotech, the wave of the future.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Ah dang, I lose.

    But it doesn't matter, since horse racing is going to gradually disappear anyway. It's already most of the way there.

    Also, out of curiosity, does any other country besides the US care about horse racing at all?
  • edited November 2010

    But it doesn't matter, since horse racing is going to gradually disappear anyway. It's already most of the way there.
    Proof? We'll see. There will always be horses. Internal combustion? Not so much. As I said, I'll bet we see the end of auto racing in our lifetimes due to lack of fuel.
    Also, out of curiosity, does any other country besides the US care about horse racing at all?
    Oh, just little insignificant countries like Canada, England, Ireland, France, Spain, Germany, Japan, China, Australia (Horse racing is the most attended spectator sport in Australia, easily beating out any sort of auto racing), New Zealand, the UAE, etc. Noboday at all, really, since it's on the way out.

    Seriously, though: Worldwide, I'd hazard that horse racing is easily as popular as Formula One, probably more so.

    BTW, tough luck on that Formula One race-fixing this summer, since I know you're so against any type of race-fixing. This probably made you want to stop being a fan, huh?
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • BTW, tough luck on that Formula Onerace-fixing this sumer,since I know you're so against any type of race-fixing. This probably made you want to stop being a fan, huh?
    I haven't actually been paying attention for a few years.

    But that particular issue wasn't a fix in the same way that taking a fall in boxing is a fix. Basically the problem in F1 is the team structure. Each team has two cars. However, there are many mostly unenforceable rules in place to prevent the two cars from collaborating or conspiring during the race. Team Ferrari legitimately won the race, however, they won by so much that they had the ability to decide which of their two drivers would come in first or second. It's really a matter of broken rules.
  • edited November 2010
    BTW, tough luck on that Formula Onerace-fixing this sumer,since I know you're so against any type of race-fixing. This probably made you want to stop being a fan, huh?
    I haven't actually been paying attention for a few years.

    But that particular issue wasn't a fix in the same way that taking a fall in boxing is a fix. Basically the problem in F1 is the team structure. Each team has two cars. However, there are many mostly unenforceable rules in place to prevent the two cars from collaborating or conspiring during the race. Team Ferrari legitimately won the race, however, they won by so much that they had the ability to decide which of their two drivers would come in first or second. It's really a matter of broken rules.
    Yeah, it's not a really big deal. That's why there was all this talk about punishment and banning.

    From the article:
    The erosion of trust that follows such cynicism, so the argument goes, will inevitably lead fans to question how deep the stitch-up goes; whether what they are paying to watch is, in fact, little more than World Wrestling Entertainment on wheels. [Emphasis mine]

    . . .

    Ferrari cheated, of course, and for that reason they should be punished when the World Motor Sport Council convenes in Paris on Wednesday. But the second issue, the larger issue, is over the ban on team orders in general, which is hugely problematic both from an ideological and a practical viewpoint.
    Now, what was it you said about horse racing? Oh, yeah. You said:
    I can't have any faith that the sport is even a legitimate competition, no matter how many anti-cheating safeguards are in place, everyone involved is heavily incentivized to get around them.
    Using your own criteria, you should be more critical of Formula One than horse racing.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • I didn't say it wasn't a big deal. I said it was just a different thing. It's cheating to win the championship as opposed to cheating to win a bet.
  • I agree with Apreche, that I personally don’t like the idea of breeding horses just for the purpose of gambling. But then again, it creates money. And that’s a good thing, right? Whatever creates money is good for the economy. Hungryjoe- don’t worry, I don’t think Apreche was trying to insult your wife. He’s just insulting horse racing. F1 is perhaps more “useful”, but it’s not exactly that interesting to watch. I agree with others on this forum that when horses race it has a somewhat more “natural” and exciting element to it.
  • edited December 2010
    Every single aspect of F1 is amazing. It is a ballet of science. These people of amazing fortitude can control these incredibly advanced machines at blistering speeds, experiencing massive variations in lateral acceleration, and doing so for hours!

    That said, Professional horse riding is very tough on the body as well, those jockeys are like boxers with their weight control.

    Imagine a horse race where the shoes matter (with 'slick' shoes a tactical choice), the saddle is changed every 35 laps, and the aerodynamics of the beast can be modified within certain guidelines specified by an association of engineers / farriers... also certain horses are banned due to their Arabian bloodlines (turbochargers) and stirrups are not allowed (driver assist)...

    Apples and oranges.
    Post edited by Casa Vino on
  • Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    For people who are into it. Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it. The general populace only cares about the triple crown.
    Particularly us in Louisville since the Kentucky Derby starts the Triple Crown.
  • edited December 2010
    Shows how little you know about racing. Breeder's is a big deal.
    For people who are into it. Just like MLS is a big deal for people who are into it. The general populace only cares about the triple crown.
    Particularly us in Louisville since the Kentucky Derby starts the Triple Crown.
    Do you live in Louisville? I lived there for about seven years.

    Oh yeah - I'm still scratching my head over Scott's fascination with outdated technology of the past. If he doesn't get on the ball with the bio-sciences, his knowledge base will soon be obsolete. I guess that's what happens to people when they get old.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Do you live in Louisville? I lived there for about seven years.
    Yeah, born and raised. As you may well know, the week before Derby basically everything shuts down here and everyone is blind stinking drunk.
  • edited December 2010
    Ah dang, I lose.
    My God, is this a first?

    Will Scott bow out of a discussion he knows nothing about?
    But it doesn't matter, since horse racing is going to gradually disappear anyway. It's already most of the way there.
    Oh drat, this conversation I ignored was so promising.
    Post edited by Cremlian on
Sign In or Register to comment.