Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustin Stones
Wouldn't you hope that what is in the best interest of the sport that horses perform in practice at a minimum to prove both fitness and athletic ability to compete?
Yes, I know that isn't currently the standard. But, should it be?
What is the minimum standard for 6f? Should a horse be able to cover it in 1:14 to be considered a race horse? Or are we settling for it's a horse with a rider ergo it's a race horse?
|
In theory, you are not incorrect. The notion that turning a half in 52..53..or whatEVER somehow certifies readiness and ability to compete has always been a complete farce. The real reason horses on lists are required to work is to establish that a runner can safely navigate the course. Few stewards or state vets would outright SAY that's the ONLY purpose of mandated works, but it is nonetheless true.
And that's the reason that making the steward's "poor performance" list nowadays at most tracks means likewise being put on the vet's list. Ideally, that brings an unimpeachable expert on thoroughbred soundness, soreness, and infirmities into the equation to observe the drill, sometimes watch the horse cool out, and even pull blood. And believe me, this was not always so.
Whatever players might desire, looking out for the public can NEVER be top priority in these cases. Safety of horse and jockey is by far the more compelling imperative.
Unless, that is, ANYBODY is foolish enough to believe that mandated workout-speed can EVER provide assurance of impending race speed.
