American Pharoah Overcomes Biology To Win Triple Crown 212
HughPickens.com writes: There are good reasons it's been 37 years since the last triple-crown winner. As Lexi Pandell writes, post-race recovery is no joke for a thousand-pound animal that can run more than 40 miles per hour. There are two weeks between the Derby and the Preakness, and three weeks between the Preakness and the Belmont. That tight schedule—and the super-specific needs of racehorses—means horses competing in the grueling back-to-back-to-back Triple Crown races have a big disadvantage against fresh horses. First, as a horse races, its muscles produce lactic acid. In humans, glycogen recoup takes about 24 hours. But horses take several days to process lactic acid and restore glycogen reserves. Trainers make sure their charges drink plenty of water and sometimes even use intravenous fluids to aid that repair process. Secondly, in addition to being the last race of the Triple Crown, the Belmont Stakes is also the longest. When a horse runs a tough race (or has a new workout at a longer distance), its muscles break down. Then, during rest, they reknit and adapt. A horse that has skipped the Preakness, however, has the luxury of time. Mubtaahij, who some picked to win the Belmont, had plenty of rest so he could be pushed for hard workouts two weeks prior to the Belmont.
Finally, at different points in its stride, a galloping horse puts all its weight on a single leg. That limb bears three times more weight than usual when galloping on a straightaway and, thanks to centrifugal force, a load five to 10 times greater on turns. This translates to skeletal microdamage. Race a horse during that critical period and you increase the risk of serious injuries mid-race. Two weeks ago, vets were forced to euthanize the promising gray thoroughbred filly, Eight Belles, when she collapsed on the track after completing the race at Churchill Downs, suffering from two shattered ankles in her front legs. A fresh horse won't face any of those problems. Even a horse that ran in the Derby but skipped the Preakness will have five weeks to rest, and plenty of time for normal skeletal damage to repair, before the Belmont. "So, American Pharoah, it'd be awesome if you win the Triple Crown, but you probably won't," concluded Pandell. "It's not your fault. It's science and those pesky fresh horses." Science was wrong.
Finally, at different points in its stride, a galloping horse puts all its weight on a single leg. That limb bears three times more weight than usual when galloping on a straightaway and, thanks to centrifugal force, a load five to 10 times greater on turns. This translates to skeletal microdamage. Race a horse during that critical period and you increase the risk of serious injuries mid-race. Two weeks ago, vets were forced to euthanize the promising gray thoroughbred filly, Eight Belles, when she collapsed on the track after completing the race at Churchill Downs, suffering from two shattered ankles in her front legs. A fresh horse won't face any of those problems. Even a horse that ran in the Derby but skipped the Preakness will have five weeks to rest, and plenty of time for normal skeletal damage to repair, before the Belmont. "So, American Pharoah, it'd be awesome if you win the Triple Crown, but you probably won't," concluded Pandell. "It's not your fault. It's science and those pesky fresh horses." Science was wrong.
science was wrong (Score:2, Informative)
Holy shit no. Odds heavily against you isn't zero odds especially when you have previous proof they can be beat.
If I put a red ball in one of one hundred thousand cups, your odds are still low even if you pick the right cup. Your odds didn't change.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like they did not get good odds. So I guess the "wisdom of crowds" correctly pegged American Pharoah's odds of winning were pretty good.
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/b... [wsj.com]
"Fans betting on American Pharoah to be horse racingâ(TM)s first Triple Crown winner since 1978 might see some history if he finishes first in the Belmont Stakes. But they arenâ(TM)t likely to see big profits. The coltâ(TM)s 3-5 odds mean horse players would earn 60 cents for each dollar bet, a stingy prize in the raci
Re: (Score:3)
I think you misunderstand what 'odds' are in horse racing. The odds do not reflect the probability of winning, they only reflect the payoff if you happen to win.
Horse race wagering is a parimutuel system. All of the money for a particular type of bet (win, for instance) goes into a pool. The track gets a certain percentage of that money, and that is their only interest in the race. The rest of the money is paid to the winning ticket holders. So, if many people bet on the horse that won the payout for ea
I really don't care... (Score:5, Insightful)
Altho since you bring it up.
It's really kind of barbaric what we do to horses for our own amusement now.
Not even 'pets' to most people involved. More like slaves we get to bet on.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
you will quickly find out that generally they treat their animals better than most people treat their own kids these days.
It is not the owners, but the system. Horses are not mature at 3 years old, and they should not be competing in back-to-back races at that age. They should switch to 4 or 5 years old, or even better, just eliminate the age restriction entirely, so horses can compete when they are ready.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Im just getting tired of PETA and its supporters(not that i have any idea if OP is involved, just sayin) thinking anything that involves an animal = abuse when the facts are the people making those claims, tend to have no clue whats actually in the animals best interest
And some of the rest of us are tired of how PETA is always used as an excuse to dismiss valid concerns about the treatment of animals.
There is no cause so pure that you can't find some idiot talking about it. Feel free to criticize the idiots if you feel you must, but after that, move on to a fair consideration of the situation.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If having to get intravenous fluids to aid recovery (recovery meaning there was something hard you had to recover from) and having a high risk of breaking your ankles and being euthanized is considered being pampered and being treated great then I guess you are right. Imagine the other "tricks" these professional trainers do to the horses to gain an advantage that is NOT talked about outside of horse training circles. A lot of baseball players and weight lifters thought the same thing.
I'm not an animal a
Re:I really don't care... (Score:5, Informative)
You are right. Now, I'm not saying some racehorces aren't mistreated---that would be false. However, there's not nearly as much forcing as people think.
Firstly they're herding animals (just like people), if one does something then the others all want to to. The thing in question being running. I've done a bit of horse riding. If one horse in the group, or worse all but yours runs off to somewhere, my god your horse wants to run after them. Even the best behaved we-could-plonk-a-nervous-beginner-on-its-back horse will want to bolt after the others. This is why having some people lope off is a much more advaned riding activiy than simply loping.
Its hard to get a horse to go fast away from the group and it's VERY hard to stop a horse going fast to join the group.
And that's the nice ones.
Some horses are just bloody mental. Given half a chance and some vaguely flat ground they will launch into a flat gallop without regard to their own safety. Basically horses have somewhat strong personalities and that includes likes and dislikes. And some simply love to run.
Frankly even the really nice ones can get a bit frisky. Some horses seem to have some sort of sense of racing and if there's a bunch running in the same direction there's always one or two who like to try to be in the front. It doesn't correlate with herd leader either, it seems to be a personality thing.
And finally, go and watch the Grand National. Every so often, a horse loses its rider. The horses generally carry on anyway, sometimes even going on to win (though they're disqualified so it doesn't count for the humans). Why would a horse not only carry on a race but try to win if it didn't want to?
Re: I really don't care... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you have as much money tied into them, what would you do? abuse your animal or pamper it??
Re: I really don't care... (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not sure that being made to run so hard that their bones fracture is "a pampered life".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Tell that to the professional and collegiate athletes here in the US. Or to any of the enlisted men who aren't even getting a pampered lifestyle at all.
Re: I really don't care... (Score:5, Interesting)
Out of curiosity, what's the rate at which racehorses fracture their limbs, vs the rate at which human professional athletes fracture their limbs?
If a substantial fraction of racehorses fractured their limbs, then I'd agree with you. But I suspect the cases where they break their legs are just outliers, as with any high-speed activity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Minor difference... we don't euthanize human professional athletes for breaking a bone.
Re: (Score:3)
They don't destroy horses because they're no longer useful.
They destroy them because they're injured in a way that simply won't heal and will leave the animal in agonizing pain for the rest of its life.
Imagine being in a car crash, breaking both legs, an arm, a bunch of ribs and your back. Then being told by the doctor "we can't operate on you, just live with it".
They're euthanized for humane reasons.
Re: I really don't care... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
All racing does is formalize what horses will do on their own. Pasture horses sometimes suffer similar injuries just doing what horses do, which commonly is run full-tilt in a group for no visible purpose. I've seen untrained horses do that, even to the point of exhaustion and laming.
I'd hazard that on a per capita basis, racehorses probably have fewer such injuries than average, because they're a helluva lot more valuable and are far more closely watched and vetted than the average horse. The main differen
Re: (Score:2)
I do appreciate your useful info about horses dying in the wild. I assumed they lived forever
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as a horse asks me "Pppplease Massah! Can I not run the bad race?", I'll look into it.
Re: I really don't care... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Napoleon would probably have won the battle of Waterloo if they could be persuaded to run into groups of men with pointy things.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called 'animal cruelty.'
Re: (Score:2)
It's not "being made to run so hard".
Microfractures happen in ALL horses when they run. PERIOD. It's a function of physics (force being applied in a certain area) and material engineering (bone strength).
Horses out, charging around a paddock, develop microfractures. Just not at the rate they can develop them during a race.
The thing is, they heal. They just need time. Hence why horses aren't running races day after day.
abusive? (Score:3, Insightful)
if races are so stressful on the horses that sometimes they break and have to be euthanize, doesn't this type of event count as animal abuse?
just a thought.
Re:abusive? (Score:5, Insightful)
if races are so stressful on the horses that sometimes they break and have to be euthanize, doesn't this type of event count as animal abuse?
That is nothing. You should check out what happens to a cow in a slaughterhouse.
Re: (Score:3)
That is nothing. You should check out what happens to a cow in a slaughterhouse.
I just did. Yum.
Re: (Score:2)
It should.
You should read this: 8 Things They Donâ(TM)t Tell You About Horse Racing [peta.org.uk].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If an unexpected injury occurs before the event, the horse is pulled from the race. Hell if the horse simply isn't up for it, they can be "scratched at the gate". In some cases the bettors actually benefit from this - If you had the scratched horse in a pick 3, it counts as if the horse won.
Remember, kids... (Score:4, Insightful)
...cruelty is OK so long as it's an old tradition!
Re: (Score:2)
...cruelty is OK so long as it's an old tradition!
I didn't actually realize it was that bad, from one of the articles:
Mary Scollay, an associate veterinarian at Gulfstream Park Racing & Casino and at Calder Race Course, both in south Florida, who coordinates the on-track project, reported at the March 17 Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit that dirt tracks such as Churchill Downs had seen 2.03 fatal injuries per 1,000 starts compared with 1.47 per 1,000 on synthetic tracks. Scollay cautions that the number reflects less than a year's worth of da
Re: (Score:2)
Math fail.
Re: (Score:2)
Math fail.
True, I think I got 1/2 in my head at some point.
0.2% is still pretty brutal though.
Re: (Score:2)
It's why I still beat the Irish!
Science was wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Science was NOT wrong, you fucking imbecile. Science didn't predict who would win, it described why it's difficult to win all 3 races. It still is, this horse was just up to the unlikely task.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and right up until that line the summary was one of the best, informative summaries I've seen here. I suspect they were trying to be cute but it just revealed there complete lack of understanding of what science actually is.
Re: (Score:3)
. /. in order to increase page hits.
But I would suspect that he may be, as I am, concerned about the ongoing dumbing down of
Re: (Score:2)
Just irritated that some lame-o blames having a poor thesis on 'science' being wrong
Poor animals (Score:4, Insightful)
Mostly, they pump them full of drugs. Even worse than human for-pay athletes, which is a hard one to beat.
Professional sport in general is a disgrace, animal professional sport is even more loathsome.
Re: (Score:3)
Im sure it happens, but to claim it to be the norm is disingenuous
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike, say, the Tour de France or college track?
Given the corruption common to any sport involving serious betting, it can be very difficult to reliably assess the level of doping. But it's certainly commonplace, if not the norm. A casual look at the use of Lasix, a diuretic, in racing animals reveals its widespread use for racing horses and dogs. And the manipulation of supplies of drinking water to both species can be a nearly indetectable form of chemical abuse.
Re:Poor animals (Score:5, Informative)
I have no doubt that there are plenty of people who would dope a horse to win a race, but every loser would want to prove the winner had been doped if they could. So while there may be motivation to dope horses, there is intense testing and motivation to prevent it as well.
Lasix is commonly used to prevent EIPH (Exercise Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage.) Basically race horses bleed from broken capillaries in their lungs due to the tremendous increase in blood pressure they exhibit during a race. (It happens in people and other animals too, but most things I've read are about it happening in horses, particularly race horses.) Essentially horses have been bred to run fast as a primary objective and success comes with health consequences.
So giving Lasix to horses may come with a performance benefit, (since the diuretic causes them to be several pounds lighter) but not giving it to them comes with a known health detriment. Not everyone believes that the bleeding is something that should be treated that way and some horse owners choose not to use it, but there is no doubt that it is an effective treatment to prevent a common ailment. Since Lasix also acts as a diuretic, the counter argument is that the dehydration it causes is worse than the ailment it prevents.
There's an interesting parallel in human olympic athletes: asthma inhalers. They are allowed by the Olympics because they've been exhaustively studied and found to not give performance gains, despite the fact that more and more athletes have been using them and performing better. It turns out that humans at extreme exercise levels also tend to experience issues with their lungs, so top performers can benefit from something to counteract the damages their extreme performances cause.
Re:Poor animals (Score:4, Informative)
> So giving Lasix to horses may come with a performance benefit, (since the diuretic causes them to be several pounds lighter) but not giving it to them comes with a known health detriment.
The most casual literature review shows that it's used not only for treatment of bleeding but as a potent diuretic to lighten animals before a race. And since a bit of "bleeding" is extremely common in racing horses, getting the necessary waiver to use the drug is trivial. It seems to be an andemic part of horse racing, along with the "milkshake" treatment used to manipulate race horse blood pH. (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/milk+shake).
Given that the milkshake is forcibly applied through a nasal cannula, it's difficult to believe it's anything but a common, tacitly accepted, difficult to detect "doping" technique. The list of such techniques goes on and on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly, they pump them full of drugs.
Interesting. So, out of curiosity, what do you gain by making stuff up? The blood drawn from every horse in that race - before and immediately after the event - is highly scrutinized by multiple independent labs. The breeders and invested owners have untold millions at risk if they're caught screwing around with the rules. And they have competitors highly motivated to root out any such behavior by others.
So, you don't like sports. OK. Why not approach criticizing it from an angle in which you don't lie,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at how long it went on in Tour De France! You think horse racing is more stringent then that?
Yes, I do. It went on in the Tour De France even while countless athletes, coaches, doctors, and other observers SAID it was going on. On the other hand, you won't find anyone involved in the level of horse breeding and racing that reaches events like the Kentucky Derby, The Preakness, and The Belmont Stakes even suggesting it's going on. Because they all have enormous amounts to lose. You clearly don't understand that the money doesn't come from winning the race. It comes from interacting with some of the
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely.
The money owners make on the races themselves are laughably small compared to the money of breeding rights. The purpose of the races is to establish the horse as good breeding stock so that they can stud the horse out and Triple Crown horses will command the highest prices.
Re: (Score:2)
So, out of curiosity, what do you gain by taking a perspective of credulity toward the idea that people don't cheat the system?
What I gain is the same thing anybody gains by being sensible - healthier discourse. You can suggest that "everyone" in competitive bicycling uses drugs because there was ample evidence that that was happening in broad circles within that sport. And then you can pay attention to the fact that similar behavior decades ago in horse racing led to a climate where doing so is now so far beyond the pale that huge amounts of money and effort are spent to make sure that it's no longer a factor. In other words, the
My dog ... (Score:2)
Two weeks ago? No, SEVEN YEARS ago (Score:5, Informative)
Two weeks ago, vets were forced to euthanize the promising gray thoroughbred filly, Eight Belles, when she collapsed on the track after completing the race at Churchill Downs, suffering from two shattered ankles in her front legs.
That happened in 2008!
Re: (Score:2)
Two weeks ago, vets were forced to euthanize the promising gray thoroughbred filly, Eight Belles, when she collapsed on the track after completing the race at Churchill Downs, suffering from two shattered ankles in her front legs.
That happened in 2008!
This is Slashdot. TIme is variant. And a lot slower than everywhere else.
how about some logical consistency? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only was science not "wrong," but if science was wrong there would be no story. The science says that this was a statistically improbable event. If the science was wrong, this would happen all the time and the fact that it happened again wouldn't be newsworthy. So not only is this the dumb clickbait that we know it to be, but contradictory to the whole premise. No internal logical consistency; complete garbage.
For our next trick (Score:2)
We can have faster-than-light travel after all! It turns out all we have to do is 'overcome' Special Relativity!
Solid horse (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't watch very often anymore since I saw a Derby that was clearly rigged some years back (the horse that looked like he had the most speed was held back hard all the way to the wire -- if his jockey had let him out he'd have won by several lengths) but I happened to see this year's Preakness. And yeah, American Pharaoh looked to me like he had a lot left, in fact I remarked on that after the race.
Ibuprofen (Score:2)
When I was an American in Germany, recovering from an injury, I told a friend that I took ibuprofen on a daily basis.
She said, "What? That's for animals!" Then continued, "In Germany we have a saying, 'ibuprofen makes old horses run fast.'"
Re: (Score:2)
Real Quiet almost won in 1998 (Score:2)
The Real Quiet lost by a nose in last race Belmont Stakes. So it is not all that improbable.
It's been said before but it bears repeating (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if we euthanized humans for a broken leg, we'd likely have a great deal more than 1000 a year dying from playing a sport....
Pharoah? (Score:2)
What's that? A pickled king who failed at using a spellchecker?
More abuse in the name of "sport"... (Score:2)
Almost as repugnant as, say, gymnastics. Or ballet. Or any other "sport" or "performance" where participants are inducted at a young age, then subjected to agonizing and (often) permanently crippling stresses.
Not wrong. (Score:2)
"...probably won't," concluded Pandell...Science was wrong.
What a dumb remark. The prediction, that the Triple Crown is an unlikely event, is correct. That this outcome happened to occur in our timeline is neither here nor there.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Dice Incorporated(all the garbage that's fit to post) of course. You didn't think this was still /. did you?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
omgponies.com? :)
Re: (Score:2)
At this point it would be better. At least the whole Octavia x Vinyl thing is canon now...
Re:What... (Score:5, Insightful)
website am I on?
Yeah, what the heck. Who cares about an informative look at a high profile part of popular culture that happens to be more interesting once you understand some practical bits of biology? Who cares, when you're a desk-bound pixel pusher, how muscle recovery and performance might differ between equine and primate mammals, anyway? Why would any nerd-ish person be interested when the expected behavior of a complex system, as predicted by well-funded scientists, comes to be out-performed in an instance of that system where its breeding also manifests itself as grit and a powerful, winning competitive personality?
Yeah, boring stuff. Maybe if the runner-up had been called "System-D" or the winner had been named "Edward S" you'd be more interested? Because what's going on, biologically, in a thoroughbred racehorse under pressure is for sure nowhere near as interesting to a well-rounded, informed resident of the 21st century as the fatigue that sets in when the lithium batteries in a Tesla don't get the right treatment following a high-speed amateur race at the track.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, but...
For all of their 'science' and use of terms like centrifugal, their thesis was ultimately flawed, then they go and try and blame 'science' as being flawed when, in fact, it was the author of the article that seems to have failed to understand the variables involved
Sure it is part of popular culture, and certainly it is an awesome accomplishment, but linking to some article where an imbecile demonstrates their complete lack of understanding of the scientific method, or has the gumption to recogni
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but nothing. So journalism is bad? So what? Many of the articles posted here have technical flaws or ignorant authors.
The article has, however opened my eyes to some new things I simply didn't know about. I didn't know humans took an entire day to replenish glycogen reserves and I certainly didn't know it takes horses much longer. I didn't know about galloping stresses either. So either way it was an interesting article and I can go and read more.
Plus of course, 90% of the reason for coming to slashdo
Re: (Score:2)
But - we should not have to read five sentences past the headline to discover the story is about horse racing.
Could they not have mentioned horses in the title? I thought the CIA must have installed a new puppet dictator in Egypt.
Re: (Score:2)
"Triple Crown" was not a large enough indicator?
No, why should I have heard of a domestic event on the other side of the globe? Only the Kentucky Derby is familiar (one of 3 things I have heard of in that state, the others being bourbon and greasy chicken). The Crown is hardly a big international event like the tennis Grand Slam, or formulae one Grand Prix.
Re: (Score:2)
Only the Kentucky Derby is familiar
Re: (Score:2)
No.
To me it's when one of England, Irateland, Skirtland and Wails twats all the other three at Rugby.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This shite of an article is the top of the main page.
Oh, so it's the "being at the top of the page" part that causes your hand to be forced to click on it? Still an amazing feat on the programmers' part, right? Or are you just confused about the fact that EVERY article spends at least a few minutes at the top of the page? Yeah, I thought so.
Re: (Score:2)
Good way to send the riff-raff packing. Kudos to you ScentCone.
Re: (Score:2)
Good bye! Don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and the first AC was pointing out where you could get it from.
LOL. This thread is funny as hell! It was obvious right away he's asking to have his UID *instead* of his own. But being that the other guy's is just a tad shy of 700,000, it wouldn't be much of an improvement!
Sheesh! Get over it.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems the Dice boys aren't above throwing around a few modpoints if they think it'll make 'em look a little less incompetent (hint: it doesn't)...
And your clue that the mod points are from any particular source is ...? That your personal social currency is snark, and that you also don't find practical, applied examples of biological sciences at work to be worthy of /. doesn't mean that three other people don't disagree with you.
And what was the incompetent part, exactly? Linking to an article that you find uninteresting? Guess what: I find it uninteresting to read, for the hundredth time, what a bunch of people think about Nvidia video drivers. I
Re: What... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Complete repost of old news (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't follow horses and I found the article informative. I didn't previously understand how much pain these animals are subjected to for personal glory and profit.
The topic does touch science and current events so it's something I expect to see here.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, it is interesting and I do not see an issue with it been posted on /. If I did not wanr to read it, it would just skip to the next posting.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been reading /. since around 2002, and don't see this article as an outlier with regards to subject.
You would have probably been one of the one who bitched when the articles about the World Trade Center attacks were up. Just as back then, you and your fellow whiners can go read the newest article. Right now that is about Apple music. Wow, that's something new and unexplored here on /. .
Re: (Score:2)
but, but... Science!
Re: (Score:2)
More likely, somebody's "thesis on impact of biological factors of equine performance" was not as substantial as they may have thought
What is that Scientific Method again? Form hypothesis, test, prove/disprove, reconsider...
I think that they are at the reconsider step in regards to their hypothesis, but the scientific method works just fine as long as nobody assumes that a hypothesis is some unalterable biblical truth
Re: (Score:2)
You are roman_mir AICMFP.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing. You can't do that.
The races, are independent business entities. It's just that, over time, they've become the definitive races for the US Triple Crown.
But that doesn't stop each individual race from being open to all qualifiers.
And, because of myriad factors, like recovery, track preference, etc, owners can't guarantee they won't pull an entrant. Indeed, it'd be irresponsible to race a horse that wasn't ready. You can ruin an animal like that.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that all horses that are in the three races should be required to race in all three races. If you pull out and do not race in one of the races you should not be allowed to enter any of the others that follow. Similarly, you should not be allowed to enter a new horse in the middle or last race.
Why? These are 3 completely independent races. It's not like this is a tournament and someone is saying "I'm going to skip the quarter finals and just go straight to the semi finals". The races are completely separate. The people who know they have little chance of winning all 3 chose the smart thing to do and focus their effort on training for 1 or 2 of the races. Those who think they have the ability to go all the way risk going for it all. Bigger risk, bigger potential reward. That's all there is to it.
Re: (Score:2)
The risk is killing the horse and the reward is all the money from studding him out. American Pharaoh will be milked for as much semen as possible and it will be sold off for a high premium.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What are they supposed to do?
The horse was irretrievably crippled.
It's not like they can put casts on and keep the animal off them for 12-16 weeks.
Even then, likely the filly would have been in unbearable pain for the rest of her life.
They didn't euthanize her because they were being dicks.
They did it because a qualified veterinarian ruled that she was damaged in such a way as to preclude ANY sort of quality of life.
Think of being in a car crash and being broken up so bad you'll never walk again and simply
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, in this case, 'humane' changes definition to 'prolong as long as possible.' Despite the person being able to make a reasoned, rational decision, as opposed to a horse.
Re: (Score:2)
Old news. And, as has been said. Horses can't spell.
Re: (Score:2)
Load up slashdot, audio starts playing automatically -- from an ad! I hit the mute button on the ad and it doesn't work! Audio still plays. I was having some decency in not using adblockers so /. still gets the ad revenue. Now I will likely never return. Screw you slashdot. Then, I have to put up with a terrible article that makes no sense. Slashdot died after Dice tookover, sorry.
I agree the ad load can be atrocious. They tend to slow down my chromebook, and once I watched my router for traffic when I loaded up slashdot, and oh boy was it sending a google of requests to dozens of places.
One solution is to log in and maintain excellent karma, that way you may get a neat little check box that says "Disable Ads". Once in awhile they remove it but eventually it comes back. I have no idea what heuristics they use to determine you're eligible. But I don't get why there are so many ACs