Posted on 05/02/2009 10:58:57 AM PDT by lewisglad
Yes, I watched though it was difficult to see him early in the race when they were coming down the backstretch.
What they’ve done for yrs is show the race rerun with the winner in isolation so you could really see how he ran the race. And if any Derby deserved a rerun with an isolated view of the winner, it was this one!
I can’t believe they scrapped it this year.
ESPN news has an overhead. It is AMAZING to watch. And, it is HD, so you can actually see horses and such, not just a brown blur.
Oh, you know another reason. The ESPN talking heads were mentioning that everyone was “upset” this horse got into the Derby over more qualified horses. Notice the announcer only says his name one, to mention he is in last place, during the race. He didn’t say it again until after the horse won the race.
Thanks. I’ll check out ESPN
I have a love/hate relationship with Thoroughbred racing...I really do love the sport, but have seen way too many former stakes winners showing up at my local horse rescue as cruelty cases. It really is a shame...I hate seeing people not taking responsibility for the animals they own.
Absolutely agree. I love the sport. But, there certainly is room for both a national governing or sanctioning body as was discussed on today's telecast. Also, it seems to me that this sanctioning body could charge some type of annual fee-per horse that would be put into a fund to take care of these animals when they're discarded, abused neglected or abandoned.
When a former Derby winner shows up in a meat-packing plant, something has to change.
From St.Martin Parish, Louisiana
Secretariat’s Preakness time has long been under dispute; in any case it’s likely his actual time was no higer than 1:53 2/5. However, given his times in the Derby (very fast) and the Belmont (I doubt that one will EVER be broken) I’m more than inclined to believe he owns the record at the Preakness. I’m sorry, the clocks just have to be wrong.
Another thing - Secretariat owns those records because he got faster as the race went along, which is almost unheard of. It would be like a marathon runner putting up better times in the last 13.1 miles than in the first 13.1. Racers of any species typically are relatively consistent, tapering off only slightly. Secretariat in the Belmont especially just ran like they were all standing still and ended up winning by 31 lengths. Youtube has a video from the day, and you can see how much the camera had to zoom out to try to get the other horses in the frame. Sham, a great horse in his own right, quit coming around the third turn.
They don't have enough cameras to isolate on every horse.
ML/NJ
It hasn’t been a problem before.
There’s a better view of the race from ESPN
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4128506&categoryid=2488837
You just haven't noticed. They might isolate on six horses or so; and if they don't have the right one they might be able to cobble together a video which makes it seem as if they did. Mine That Bird was way behind the 2nd last horse through the first 3/4 mile. He wasn't in any of the close-ups they took for at least the first 60% of the race.
There’s a better view of the race from ESPN
This "better view" is just the ordinary track feed; and you're right, it is a better view. It is disgraceful that the Network producers think they have to improve on something that they really don't have much knowledge of. The reason the track feed works well is that it is shot from only one fixed perspective, which is the same number of perspectives you get if you watch a race live. Viewing a race from a camera that is moving with the horses is unnatural and confusing unless maybe you are a retired jockey; and switching from head-ons to pans (A pan shot is the track feed style.) makes it difficult to continue following a single horse or group of horses. (I have similar feelings about the flying cameras now used for football. The show you what it would look like to a bird; but since none of us are birds it doesn't work.)
ML/NJ
During the hay shortage on the east coast last year, I saw tons of off the track horses coming to various shelters in the area in deplorable condition - Is there any reason why racing is not being governed by the USEF? Hunters, jumpers, dressage, and eventing is...can’t see why Thoroughbred racing isn’t included under the big umbrella of the USEF.
Money. No one is betting on other equine sporting events besides Thoroughbred, Quarter horse or harness racing. It's the states that won't cede to other entities the ability to regulate (or to not regulate in this case) an activity that brings in to the state coffers a tremendous amount of money. It's always about the money.
That makes sense - shows you how much I actually know about the racing industry. The sad thing is that I think more people would be willing to adopt and re-train off the track horses if it wasn’t so expensive to do it, unless you have your own facility. A friend and I found this out the hard way...people were giving away Thoroughbreds, but when you count the board, extra feed, vet care, farrier, etc., even if you were able to resell the horse for $5000-$10,000, you would still be lucky to break even after all was said and done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.