| barn32 |
09-28-2008 01:01 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
That is precisely what I'm saying, and people on this site who know me, know I look at EVERY horse every race.
I've become so good at this, that I can see them even at Aqueduct looking through binoculars. .....And it's not unusual for the NYRA blacksmiths who check these to announce to the public, to ask me what I saw on a horse they were unsure of.
|
I'm not questioning your ability to do this, but I am skeptical. The reason I am skeptical is because I have experience with this. Let me ask you something. How can you see them when the track is off? With mud and gunk caked on I defy anyone to accurately tell who is wearing a calks and who isn't. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by barn32
I'm not questioning your ability to do this, but I am skeptical. The reason I am skeptical is because I have experience with this. Let me ask you something. How can you see them when the track is off? With mud and gunk caked on I defy anyone to accurately tell who is wearing a calks and who isn't.
|
Actually, you are questioning his ability to do this. That is exactly what you are doing. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I'm glad you were able to find humor in how silly your post about sneakers was.
|
I actually found humor in your response…glad we can each find humor were we can. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
I have compiled the following data FROM DIRT races at AQU, BEL, and SARATOGA for the years mentioned above.
|
Interesting study and I'm not saying you are wrong but the problems I have with it are the small sample of tracks, not to mention the exclusion of Meadowland which was the original subject of this thread, and the combining of track conditions. I don't see how you can lump fast dry, sealed, muddy and sloppy tracks together and get meaningful results. Is it possible there are fewer injuries on sloppy tracks wearing calks but more injuries on dry tracks wearing calks? Perhaps they should only be banned on dry tracks? Yes I realize weather conditions can change quickly but it's a gamble the trainers would have to make, the safety of the horses should come first. |
| slewis |
09-28-2008 06:25 PM |
XTB,
Thanks for the reply. You know I can easily query the study and break down the data by sloppy, fast, muddy, etc., but this is SUCH A LARGE SAMPLE, over 100,000 runners, do you really think it matters????
Trust me, the numbers would be very very similar. The whole point of this ruling was the suggestion that CALKS ARE VERY DANGEROUS. It show how off base they are. Realistcally, you know NO TOP TRAINER would risk his top stock, (Like INVASOR, EMPIRE MAKER, COMMENTATOR, etc, if they though there was danger running in MUD CALKS!!!!!
Case closed.. face the reality !!!!
|
| slewis |
09-28-2008 06:27 PM |
jUST IN CASE ANYONE CARES:
Add GHOSTZAPPER TO THAT LIST ABOVE, I JUST RAN A QUERY ON HIM THROUGH MY DATABASE.
June 20th, 2003
|
| slewis |
09-28-2008 06:33 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by barn32
I'm not questioning your ability to do this, but I am skeptical. The reason I am skeptical is because I have experience with this. Let me ask you something. How can you see them when the track is off? With mud and gunk caked on I defy anyone to accurately tell who is wearing a calks and who isn't.
|
I see them BEFORE they go to the paddock and try when possible to catch them walking on cement. Saratoga is toughest, they will get gunked up, but a catch them on the cement by the paddock tent and it's NO PROBLEM...
PS.. stop being so skeptical...... this is one of the things I do, and I've gotten very good at it, and, looking at and evaluating horses physically is part of my repetoire.
If you do it often, you learn what looks "good" and what looks "bad" . |
| the little guy |
09-28-2008 06:47 PM |
Barn32
You can stop questioning Slewis.....it's possible he is the biggest authority there is in the world on this subject and I can personally vouch that he is observing this every day....every race at the NYRA racetracks.
He and I disagree on many things, quite frequently, but he is always there observing and noting the shoes.
|
| Hajck Hillstrom |
09-28-2008 06:49 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
PS.. stop being so skeptical......
|
Reminds me of the joke.... "Do you know the ______ (insert language choice here) translation for trust me?" Answer: "Fucl< you!" |
This game is dominated by people with conflicts of interest. That very thing is causing a lot of the game's problems. I don't see why anyone would think the original post is so far fetched.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
XTB,
Thanks for the reply. You know I can easily query the study and break down the data by sloppy, fast, muddy, etc., but this is SUCH A LARGE SAMPLE, over 100,000 runners, do you really think it matters????
|
Actually yes, could you humor me? How about just wet (sloppy, muddy, sealed) vs dry (fast, good)? I'm really curious because we're talking about such different surfaces, I'll even settle for the one circuit. Thanks. |
| alhattab |
09-28-2008 08:04 PM |
Slewis:
Interesting work. I'm curious how class plays into the equation and if you might reach a different conclusion if you take class into consideration. I'm wondering if it is more likely that the time/money would more likely be spent to reshod a higher class horse rather than lower class, and that this might skew the results.
I have no data, by the way, on the frequency of caulk usage relative to class of horse. Just wondering.
Thanks
|
| The Hawk |
09-28-2008 08:29 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
Realistcally, you know NO TOP TRAINER would risk his top stock, (Like INVASOR, EMPIRE MAKER, COMMENTATOR, etc, if they though there was danger running in MUD CALKS!!!!!
Case closed.. face the reality !!!!
|
This is actually a very compelling argument. You might think he's exaggerating his abilities, and you may even be right, but this post is tough to argue against, isn't it? |
| slewis |
09-28-2008 09:44 PM |
Thank you,
At least someone has an open mind... now go and post my "hidden Agenda" thread......
The plot thickens.......
|
| Shenanigans |
09-28-2008 10:06 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis
Sorry gal,
You're 100% incorrect. Most trainers who use them race on both dry and wet and sloppy tracks. They race ALL their horses in them.
If I broke the stats down by sloppy, muddy or whatever, which my database allows, the results are very similar.
You know what.. rather then caall them "mud calks", they should be renamed "horse cleats"
Let me explain to you what I tell trainers when they ask me about calks.
If you have ever run on the beach (not on the hard stuff by the water, but by the sandy fluffy part) you know that your foot sinks, (cushion) and then there's a SLIDING action as you push off.
This is EXACTLY what a horse deals with when racing on the dirt.
What you want to avoid is HORIZANTAL movement of the hoof. Ankles and knees are not designed to move that way, so if you can limit the SLIDING action horizantally, the horse is oK. Mud calks and bends do this, especially on the turns!!!!!!! They WILL give a horse better traction and more confidence (just like a baseball player rounding third and trying to score).
Horses race better and stay SOUNDER with them!
You will see more horses will get hurt, especially on tracks with tighter turns (inner track at Aqueduct) with this new rule.
|
Sorry pal, your 100% incorrect.
I know most trainers don't use mud calks on ALL their horses. How long do you think I've been in this game?
Secondly, a dry race track is nothing like a dry beach. It has been watered (unless poorly maintained), and yes, the ground may give to a degree, but the comparison to a beach is wrong.
Third, any smart trainer knows that if the hoof is inhibited from rotating a certain amount in the turn, this can possibly cause injury. Think about it. The hoof gets "stuck" while the rest of the leg is turning - not good. Horses don't run peg legged. There is action in every joint. That "pegged" hoof allows stress to travel up the leg. Comparing horses to humans doesn't hold up in your theory unless we had hooves and ran on all fours also. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
|
|
