Scratching at the Gate

It continues to amaze me how some stories just never go away. Barbaro is back in the news, this time courtesy of Alan Shuback, who posted a blog on the Daily Racing Form site about the steward's responsibility.

OK, so he was primarily talking about L'Affaire Life At Ten, the overwhelming favorite who failed to contend in the Breeder's Cup Classic way back in November, and about whom there had been speculation that she should have been scratched based on her demeanor and appearance in the paddock. A report has recently been released by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission that suggests some of blame rests with John Veitch, Chief Steward for the State.

Apparently, one of the other stewards suggested that the veterinarian be summoned to take a look at the horse after both jockey and trainer mentioned they didn't like the way she looked. Veitch denies hearing the suggestion as well as making his alleged response: "If we do that, we might a well scratch the horse."

I am not about to get into the politics of this situation but what is most interesting is that Mr. Shuback compares this situation to that of Barbaro, after he broke through the starting gates at Pimlico in the Preakness. "Was Barbaro trying to tell us something, as horses frequently attempt to do when they are not right? Was he in distress, being asked to do something, i.e. run on just 14 days notice, and perhaps not fully recovered from his Kentucky Derby exertions? . . .Was there pressure on keeping the Derby winner in the race in front of 100,000 people and a national television audience? Or did trainer, rider, stewards and vets really believe that all was right with Barbaro that day?" he wonders.

Of course, we will never know the true answers but we do know what we were told. Regardless, I think Mr. Shuback is commenting more on the "pressure" to compete in big races, supposedly felt by trainers, jockeys and, he suggests, stewards, not to disqualify the favorites from big races at the last moment.

One would like to believe he is wrong. That the concept of doing right by and for the horse prevails no matter what the circumstance and if that is not the case, then the sport should cease to exist. And I seriously cannot believe that trainers like Matz and Pletcher would still be in business if they did not do what was in the best interest of their horses.

What I do think is going on here is indeed the lack of communication that Mr. Shuback mentions but I don't think it is between people because of glitches in communication channels. I think it is between horses and people and it exists at the very center of their relationship. Until horses can talk, or until trainers can speak "horse," it remains part of both the allure and the downside of the sport, and in fact, I would argue, is one of the aspects of the sport that makes it intriguing.

I would hate to think that Barbaro would become a "poster child" for every incidence of failure to perform that could have been averted had someone acted differently. If he should not have been in the race, one would like to think that he would not have been entered rather than scratched at the gate to save face.