Finger Lakes 9/11/2010 Race 9

[DRIVEWAY]

#3 Fort Delaware is making start number 70 for Felix Monserrate in Race 9.
This 6yr will be making start #10 in 2010.

My question: Should a horse like this run for purse money only?

[Skanoochies]

No! If you don`t like him don`t bet him. If you like something else he may take enuf action to make your horse an overlay. But if there is a question of his condition and a chance of something bad happening then why let him race period.

[tbwinner]

Why should he? As entitled as any other maiden to be in that race...just because of having 69 starts, 0 wins, 7 2nds, and 14 3rds? Reminds me of that one horse that had 100+ career starts and never broke his maiden.

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by tbwinner

Why should he? As entitled as any other maiden to be in that race...just because of having 69 starts, 0 wins, 7 2nds, and 14 3rds? Reminds me of that one horse that had 100+ career starts and never broke his maiden.

Same trainer, right?

[DRIVEWAY]

Originally Posted by Skanoochies

No! If you don`t like him don`t bet him. If you like something else he may take enuf action to make your horse an overlay. But if there is a question of his condition and a chance of something bad happening then why let him race period.

Your points are valid. The horse's condition is not terrible and he's not a danger to the other contestants. My concern is the horses ability to win.

Should the racing secretary restrict a horse's entry in a bottom level maiden claimer after losing say 50 times? Should the racing secretary card a MC 4000 restricted to maidens that have started a minimum of 30 times? Should a racing secretary card a MC 4000 giving preference to horses that have started fewer than 30 times?

Fort Delaware is on track to start 16 or 17 times in 2010 all in MC 4000 races. When does a racing secretary say a horse is ineligible because of a lack of success? Ultimately a racing secretary is trying to card competitive races and accept entries that have a reasonable chance of winning.

My opinion is horses that are either deemed unfit or incapable of winning should not be allowed to race and receive wagering dollars from the betting public. Let them run for purse money only.

Fort Delaware can easily race another 30-40 times over the next two years and still be a maiden.

Move over Zippy Chippy here comes Fort Delaware.

[tbwinner]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Same trainer, right?

Yep it's Felix Monserrate who had Zippy Chippy (the 100-start maiden) as well.

[cj's dad]

Originally Posted by tbwinner

Yep it's Felix Monserrate who had Zippy Chippy (the 100-start maiden) as well.

revoke his license

[Tom]

70 starts....around here, we call that "lightly raced."

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by DRIVEWAY

My opinion is horses that are either deemed unfit or incapable of winning should not be allowed to race and receive wagering dollars from the betting public. Let them run for purse money only.

The difference between poker players and horse players is poker players know the value of dead money in the pools, but apparently some horse players don't want to have anything to do with it.

[WJ47]

Originally Posted by therussmeister

The difference between poker players and horse players is poker players know the value of dead money in the pools, but apparently some horse players don't want to have anything to do with it.

I agree! We need more horses like this! People can make the decision whether to bet or not on him.

[DRIVEWAY]

Fort Delaware finished 5th at 22-1. Should run again in 7-14 days.

[markgoldie]

Originally Posted by DRIVEWAY

Your points are valid. The horse's condition is not terrible and he's not a danger to the other contestants. My concern is the horses ability to win.

Should the racing secretary restrict a horse's entry in a bottom level maiden claimer after losing say 50 times? Should the racing secretary card a MC 4000 restricted to maidens that have started a minimum of 30 times? Should a racing secretary card a MC 4000 giving preference to horses that have started fewer than 30 times?

Fort Delaware is on track to start 16 or 17 times in 2010 all in MC 4000 races. When does a racing secretary say a horse is ineligible because of a lack of success? Ultimately a racing secretary is trying to card competitive races and accept entries that have a reasonable chance of winning.

My opinion is horses that are either deemed unfit or incapable of winning should not be allowed to race and receive wagering dollars from the betting public. Let them run for purse money only.

Fort Delaware can easily race another 30-40 times over the next two years and still be a maiden.

Move over Zippy Chippy here comes Fort Delaware.

Over the years, many harness tracks have adopted such policies. If the horse seems incapable of beating any class on the grounds, the race secretary effectively bars the horse from racing at his venue. Also, the race secretary reserves the right (and many have exercised it on more than one occasion) to refuse the entry of a horse in a given class due to "lack of competitiveness." So, for example, if your horse was just beaten in a $10,000 claimer, you can enter the horse for $20,000, but the entry is stamped "NC," which stands for "not competitive" and the entry is refused.

In this day and age, however, race secretaries are very careful about barring horses simply because they don't want to aggravate the trainer who may have horses they need to fill their cards. And on the whole, it's a situation that doesn't arise too much because 99% of trainers understand that there's no use of racing a horse when you can't possibly make any money.

[Tom]

Years ago, FL had a rule - if a horse did not finish in the money six straight time, he was banned from racing. That got scrapped when the entry box dried up.