I saw an article about suggesting a match race between Always Dreaming and Cloud Computing. People were upset and furious citing it was a bad idea because look at Ruffian and Foolish Pleasure. Some of you on hear would turn up your nose and say from a betting standpoint they offer nothing. I get it that people want to see a full field which is the good old fashioned way to see a horse race.
I got to thinking what is a match race. It is two horses pitted against one another to see who is faster. The race usually involves hot fractions that easily become detrimental to good horse. My question is how many times have seen a full field of horses race and it becomes a match race where two horses get locked into a speed duel and are killing each other then one of them either pulls up or breaks down.
1990 Bayakoa vs Go For Wand
and
1995 Cigar vs Holy Bull
Why is it that the argument stops at ruffian and foolish pleasure. It was clearly a match race with the two cases above. Why isn't anyone complaining about these two cases. Is it because they technically weren't match races but full fields but in actuality they were. Thoughts and opinions are welcomed.
I saw an article about suggesting a match race between Always Dreaming and Cloud Computing. People were upset and furious citing it was a bad idea because look at Ruffian and Foolish Pleasure. Some of you on hear would turn up your nose and say from a betting standpoint they offer nothing. I get it that people want to see a full field which is the good old fashioned way to see a horse race.
I got to thinking what is a match race. It is two horses pitted against one another to see who is faster. The race usually involves hot fractions that easily become detrimental to good horse. My question is how many times have seen a full field of horses race and it becomes a match race where two horses get locked into a speed duel and are killing each other then one of them either pulls up or breaks down.
1990 Bayakoa vs Go For Wand
and
1995 Cigar vs Holy Bull
Why is it that the argument stops at ruffian and foolish pleasure. It was clearly a match race with the two cases above. Why isn't anyone complaining about these two cases. Is it because they technically weren't match races but full fields but in actuality they were. Thoughts and opinions are welcomed.
As a bettor I have nothing to gain from match races while, I have something to lose as the betting capital allocated for this kind of purses can be used to create a more interesting betting event. I would have no objection for a match race which will run either as the first or the last race of a card and with absolutely no funding from the pools.
__________________ whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent
Ludwig Wittgenstein
