Just wondering what you all think on this subject. As we know, Makybe Diva won the race, and ran a great race. But as one or 2 of the other jockeys and owners are suggesting, could the track have been "tailor-made" for the Diva, and does this constitute at least giving other favourites in the race an unfair disadvantage? It has been pointed out that under "natural" conditions, the track would have been dry to middle at best, then when Diva's trainer/owners said they'd pull her from the race if the track wasn't softer, the groundstaff poured a crap-load of water on it... I mean, it probably happens a fair bit more than this, its just the Cup is the only horse-race I follow with any interest. I ldid lose $50 betting on Eye-popper and Vinnie, but it's not a huge ammount so it's not like I'm bitter about the whole thing. It's just like you always hear the Aussie cricket team complaining about pitches being "doctored" to the home teams advantage, and I don't see a whole lot different... Am I wrong in reading it like this?
Viewpoints on the race yesterday....
- Thread starter axeman23
- Start date
I know what you mean, Unfortunately though thats the world we live in. People wanted to see the Dive race, anyevery thing was done so that she could. Even if it means giving the rest of the horses a disadvantage.
Don't get me wrong I'm glad she ran and won, but I do think its a bit unfair when they have to tamper with the course to do it.
Don't get me wrong I'm glad she ran and won, but I do think its a bit unfair when they have to tamper with the course to do it.
Footycardtrader
OzCardTrader
I went to the Cup yesterday...
Freinds of mine owned a horse in the 1st trained by Freedman... He said it was never not going to race.... He said to get on 'cause it'll shit it in..... The rest is history....
I was on it!!!!
Freinds of mine owned a horse in the 1st trained by Freedman... He said it was never not going to race.... He said to get on 'cause it'll shit it in..... The rest is history....
I was on it!!!!
Magicman
Banned User
i think by the time the race was on, the track in 30 degree heat would not be called a "dead" track, maybe a little soft on top, beautiful in my opinion. I think the best horse won on the day IMO.
shes a champion lets face it
shes a champion lets face it
Footycardtrader
OzCardTrader
Wel the track was upgraded to good straight after the cup, so it wasn't oo soft.... Nothing would have beaten her dry or wet....
I agree she ran the best race, and a few of the others probably didn't perform up to par... But the point I'm making is I think natural conditions should be raced under no matter what they are. Some days will favour dry runners, some will favour wet runners... I mean, Diva had been cleaned up before on a dry track by Eye-popper, last year I think it was, even though he had a few more kilos than her on the day. In the Cup, he had a 4kg head-start on her from what I remember, so if the track had of been left "natural", I think it would've been very interesting, if not a different result. And I just don't see the point of watering the track if it wasn't mostly to cater to Diva. I can understand everyone wanted to see if she could do it again, but with her owner and others associated with her saying she wouldn't race if the track wasn't softened seems like a bit of a cop-out on their part. Nothing against the horse, she's a fantastic racer, but I do feel sorry for other runners, especially when us Aussies like to cry foul when another team/country "doctor's" a pitch, and would like to have seen her get the win on the track as it came. I suppose, they COULD have watered the track regardless, but when the owners go on the news basicly saying they won't race on a track they don't like it gets me wondering. I mean, it was Flemington Raceway, not some Goondawindi dust-bowl, it wasn't gonna lead to broken legs or anything...
Footycardtrader
OzCardTrader
They ALWAYS water tracks.... thats what most non-racing people don't realise....
Its all to do with OH&S (or whatever its called for horses )....
When tracks are too dry, a lot of horses jar-up, often ending the horses career.... That happened to an awesome up-and-coming horse 2 years ago... Ustinov.... I loved that horse.... ran in the Oaks and jared-up... (don't think it was career threatening, but it was out for a while....)
Its all to do with OH&S (or whatever its called for horses
)....When tracks are too dry, a lot of horses jar-up, often ending the horses career.... That happened to an awesome up-and-coming horse 2 years ago... Ustinov.... I loved that horse.... ran in the Oaks and jared-up... (don't think it was career threatening, but it was out for a while....)
Fair enough. Seemed like a bit of whinging on Freedman and Co's part to me, but you'd know more about horse-racing than me, as I'm a once a year watcher... :wink: I certainly wouldn't any of the horses injured in a race, just feel the watering catered a bit too much to certain horses, as there were only 2 who said anything publicly about wanting a wetter track.
Shihad
OzCardTrader
On A Jeune might have made the race more interesting if not for being badly held up. Best horse won on the day. As for the state of the track watering it was the correct option by all the owners of all the horses, because in previous years they haven't watered the track and then horses have broken down because of it. Thus why they would have watered it.
Similar threads
