Sports, Uncategorized

The Debate Wages On with PolitiJim! Join in if You Dare!

Oh Yes PolitiJim and I have a debate going! Join in the discussion if you dare!


Yes. The debate DOES continue.

Clearly some of the Fukushima radiation has made it to the Louisiana coast and become a glowing garnish for your gumbo. Now hang on, I don’t want you to fall off of your stiletto sneakers, but here is my rebuttal to your rebuttal to my rebuttal.

First, you didn’t address the core of my argument. Previous Triple Crown winners WON! Many against even worse situations. (like Seabiscuit) IT IS WHAT MADE THEM GREAT. Lowering standards so that more can win is a principle that is far beneath a woman of class and intelligence such as yourself.

Second, the “rules” interference, drug testing and blocking are not being put in place so that a “favored” horse can win. They are put in place so that all have a fair chance to win. They are (mostly) for the safety of the jockey and horse, and secondly to prohibit unfair advantage against any individual horse. Under your logic, the “Cali Chrome” rule would hurt horses who have every bit as much right to race in the Preakness as others. Why do you feel it is unjust for Tonalist to race when it didn’t qualify for the Derby? So what? As the article I mentioned referenced – this has been standard practice for YEARS. Yes, I understand that there may have been a “gentleman’s agreement” years back, but the same could be said of 19th Century warfare where you line up in front of the opposing army and let them shoot at you without taking cover. Honor is not quite so glamorous when you intentionally decimate your own forces.

And THAT is my key point. Do we ask the NBA to disallow the San Antonio Spurs to play Kawhi Leonard (or any new member that wasn’t on their Finals team last year) so that King James and Klowns can Three-Peat? No. Of course not.

Winners want to win against the BEST competition available. …..Just like I have in my argument against you. :))))

Love always,


California Chrome has something to say

Darling Birdie take a sip of coffee,

You have been a Cubs fan too long even Wrigley’s Field added lights so hopefully I can shed light for you!

Seabiscuit NEVER ran in the Triple Crown. His success started when he was four and he was the King of the match races. At Pimlico at almost 6 years old he would defeat the unbeatable War Admiral both sired by (in my opinion the second greatest horse) Man o’War.

The reason for the Derby qualifiers came down to the track and race rules had a first come first serve to get your horse in the race and anyone with a thoroughbred could enter. To insure a better quality field a point system was inaugurated in 1986 due in fact the old system was too confusing. The actual field for qualification is limited to 24 with 4 on the bubble. Each owner is required to pay 25k like an application fee and another 25k to start plus the actual race fee.

What makes the Derby qualifier so unique is that there are 34 stake races (reduced from the 36 (hmmm change)) that begins when the thoroughbred is racing in their 2-year old season. Which is known as the Kentucky Derby Prep Season with 17 races on dirt or synthetic surfaces and a distance of at least 1 mile.

The Kentucky Derby Championship Series works the same way. A filly is required to run in the same races as colts and geldings.

Under the old system there were 185 graded stake races worldwide. Do I see another change?

So green mean birdie, you didn’t answer my question on all the races that other horses ran. Tonalist ran one in 2013 finishing 4th and a his 3 year old maiden race at Gulf Stream he lost. But finally won the Peter Pan. How is racing in a total of just 4 races fair to the rest of those horses that raced in 10 or more?

My point is if there is a fair field then a thoroughbred should have competed in one of the Derby Series. To have a horse that didn’t compete in either series is like entering a team in the Super Bowl without playing a single game in the season or playoffs.

As I said Chrome still wouldn’t have won the Belmont because General A Rod placed 3rd in the Belmont and like I said on twitter he was due.

By the plumage way General A Rod ran in all three legs of the Triple Crown. Oh slam dunk for me!

Much love and care,



Wagering on The Rules of The Triple Crown Will Change? Don’t Be a Dumb A**!

My good friend PolitiJim response to my blog Rust on the Chrome, All or Nothing!
Now I don’t normally post like this and I hope PolitiJim is cool with it. The point is that these debates or discussions will end in dead heat.

PolitiJim’s comments:

I’m of a differing opinion. As it turns out there are more horses that qualified for the Derby racing these past years than in era’s before. When Affirmed won the Triple Crown in 1978, he faced four horses in the Preakness that had not run in the Derby.

Affirmed faced two horses in the Belmont that skipped the Preakness, one of which didn’t run in the Derby either.

Since when did horse racing suddenly get kindergarten self-esteem syndrome? You know the one that says we have to give everyone a medal so they feel good. The corrosion of the value of merit.

Isn’t one of the most special things about the Derby and the two following races the fact it is RARE? If it becomes common for owners like Coburn to win because “they are America’s horse”, why then is the Triple Crown so special. And why should they suddenly achieve the level of recognition that the Seattle Slew’s and Secretariat’s earned by lowering standards? Next we’ll be giving Nobel Peace Prizes to heads of state not based on accomplishment, but on popularity….oh… wait.

Anyway, John Clay ( had it right. If you change the rules – it’s no longer the Triple Crown:

My response:

Hey My Favorite Green Birdie!

Tonalist didn’t even qualify for the Derby. There are more horses than just 20 that run in qualifying Derby races. He ran just four races and didn’t win with exception of the Peter Pan. Tonalist was not mature enough or well enough to handle a packed field of 20.

The rules change whether we are aware of it or not. Horses were always drug tested but later they added the jockeys. In the 80′s the interference rule was added. That boxing out move is illegal if any contact was made.
It was an unofficial rule or the gentlemen’s agreement to not run a fresh horse in the Belmont. 73 only 4 horses ran. Smaller fields also ran in 77 and 78. However, Affirmed and Alydar were as much of a match race as Secretariat and Sham. The match races were a major drawn in themselves so owners not wanting to interfere held horses or ran horses in other stake races.

Somewhere after the 70′s the gentlemen’s rule evaporated and fresh horses (15 since 79)have entered the Belmont. With this current loss 12 horses lost to a fresher horse.

Each track and Racing association create their own rules. The Belmont has always differed from the Triple Crown because once upon a time the Belmont was the elitist race for the sport of Kings. While the bourbon drinking and beer chugging went with the Derby and The Preakness. Once being referred to as the every man’s race letting distillery workers use the infield of Churchill Downs as their gathering place.

Change has happened over time. The Belmont used to run first then moved to the middle and finally at the end. The Triple Crown didn’t exist until the 1900′s and horses and jockeys were later being tested for performance enhancing drugs. Further the unofficial gentlemen’s rule was monitored because of a threat to conspire. Two owners cannot conspire to mark a race and split the winnings. That said a a racing team can strategically plan to set pace.

Coburn’s biggest issue was Tonalist didn’t have hardly any points compared to all the horses. Check the 3 year old racing cards of Affirmed. Check all the other races from that point up and see how much racing the winners have done right up to the Belmont.

The Triple Crown has made changes. Last point if Commissioner, Medal Count and Tonalist (I had General A Rod did run all three and would have won the Belmont anyway) had not run, it was still a dead heat between Wicked Strong and California Chrome and there is no know precedence if Chrome would have the Crown for not being the sole victor.

Change happens and just because a rule might change it doesn’t change the length of Big Sandy and it is a hard race to flat out win. Why do you think it was move to the last race?