[QUOTE=bighoss;4090815]
Gill was never asked to leave suffolk downs I noticed a lot of people on this forum talk a lot of smack please get the facts before you talk poop[/QUOTE]
You are misinformed. I guess you think he decided to leave on his own.
As for the EPA being a “pita;” Horse carcasses left on the ground for several days seems to me to be something reasonable for them to be concerned with. If you look at an aerial view of the track, you’ll see why.
[QUOTE=USAGPJumper;4090930]
You are misinformed. I guess you think he decided to leave on his own.
As for the EPA being a “pita;” Horse carcasses left on the ground for several days seems to me to be something reasonable for them to be concerned with. If you look at an aerial view of the track, you’ll see why.[/QUOTE]
Believe me I am not misformed
[QUOTE=bighoss;4091215]
Believe me I am not misformed[/QUOTE]
Nope, not misinformed, he is the “facts”, and apparently the Good Will Ambassador for MG. 
[QUOTE=USAGPJumper;4089425]
Apparently Gill, like the three trainers that were banned at the end of the 2008 meet, has been allowed back in to Suffolk Downs this year.[/QUOTE]
Why, oh WHY, has he been allowed back? Yes, I know he IS back. One of his horses won a claiming race on the May 6th, besting a little mare I’ve had my eye on for awhile (the only one in my virtual stable).
Quite frankly I’m appalled Suffolk is allowing this considering they’re trying to better the image of TB racing in the eyes of the public (you know, people like me). :rolleyes: :sigh: :dead:
[QUOTE=rcloisonne;4091892]
Why, oh WHY, has he been allowed back? Yes, I know he IS back. One of his horses won a claiming race on the May 6th, besting a little mare I’ve had my eye on for awhile (the only one in my virtual stable).
Quite frankly I’m appalled Suffolk is allowing this considering they’re trying to better the image of TB racing in the eyes of the public (you know, people like me). :rolleyes: :sigh: :dead:[/QUOTE]
I think Suffolk is desperate to fill races. They’re only racing two days a week and they’re several hundred horses short of what it takes to run the meet. Unfortunately, that will probably result in horses running too often and more horses racing that shouldn’t… It’s a shame.
phew! That’s good to know. I’m really happy I’m not misformed either.
[QUOTE=rcloisonne;4091892]
Why, oh WHY, has he been allowed back? Yes, I know he IS back. One of his horses won a claiming race on the May 6th, besting a little mare I’ve had my eye on for awhile (the only one in my virtual stable).
Quite frankly I’m appalled Suffolk is allowing this considering they’re trying to better the image of TB racing in the eyes of the public (you know, people like me). :rolleyes: :sigh: :dead:[/QUOTE]
The track has no slots, they’d probably welcome Usama Bin Laden if he had 100 horses to run there.
[QUOTE=USAGPJumper;4090930]
As for the EPA being a “pita;” Horse carcasses left on the ground for several days seems to me to be something reasonable for them to be concerned with. If you look at an aerial view of the track, you’ll see why.[/QUOTE]
I’m quite sure that spooky doesn’t need to look at an aerial view of the track to understand why horse carcasses left out would be a problem And FYI, the building was built, and in use, last year.
The EPA has been a PITA about other issues, not the disposal of bodies.
You really need to crawl back under your bridge and stop taking shots at SD when you don’t know what you’re talking about. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=AppJumpr08;4093960]
I’m quite sure that spooky doesn’t need to look at an aerial view of the track to understand why horse carcasses left out would be a problem And FYI, the building was built, and in use, last year.
The EPA has been a PITA about other issues, not the disposal of bodies.
You really need to crawl back under your bridge and stop taking shots at SD when you don’t know what you’re talking about. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Well-well, look who’s surfaced to stand up for Suffolk Downs! Why am I not surprised…
Incidentally, I didn’t bring up the EPA; someone else did. I’m not surprised you and presumably Suffolk Downs regard the functioning of the EPA to be a “pita.” The track is on filled, tidal ground, for one thing. Manure management alone is reason enough for the EPA to be concerned; or do you not know about that?
Funny you didn’t address some of the more relevant points that I did in fact raise.
It’s not a matter of “taking shots at” Suffolk Downs. The issue is about what a huge disappointment it is to see our home town racecourse coming up short in so many ways. Case in point: Mike Gill. That is where we started.
As the earlier poster said, they’d probably let Osama Bin Laden in if he had a hundred horses to run…
Nice hearing from you.
[QUOTE=USAGPJumper;4094234]
Well-well, look who’s surfaced to stand up for Suffolk Downs! Why am I not surprised…
Incidentally, I didn’t bring up the EPA; someone else did. I’m not surprised you and presumably Suffolk Downs regard the functioning of the EPA to be a “pita.” The track is on filled, tidal ground, for one thing. Manure management alone is reason enough for the EPA to be concerned; or do you not know about that?
Funny you didn’t address some of the more relevant points that I did in fact raise.
It’s not a matter of “taking shots at” Suffolk Downs. The issue is about what a huge disappointment it is to see our home town racecourse coming up short in so many ways. Case in point: Mike Gill. That is where we started.
As the earlier poster said, they’d probably let Osama Bin Laden in if he had a hundred horses to run…
Nice hearing from you.[/QUOTE]
Erm, I never said I viewed the functioning of the EPA as a PITA. I simply stated that the reasons the EPA is being viewed as a PITA by some is NOT due to the body disposal issue.
And the other point you brought up about the dead horses was already addressed by spooky - NONE of them were due to catastrophic injury, and NONE of them were, I believe, Gill horses. So your earlier post with INCORRECT information was a bit sensationalist, don’t you think?
I have no idea about the horse who supposedly flipped over in the paddock - I wasn’t there that day, didn’t see it, and haven’t heard anything about it. If, in fact, it did happen, obviously that is a horrible situation that shouldn’t have been allowed to happen.
I, too, am very much less then impressed that Gill has been allowed back - and I’m not, in ANY way, defending Suffolk on that count. I think the guy is as big a dirtbag as you do, I promise!
HOWEVER. Gill is allowed at A LOT of other tracks, and Suffolk is the only one you bring up - in not one, but TWO threads. Complete with incorrect information about horses in his barn being euthed. It gets old after awhile. Hence my comment about “taking shots” at Suffolk. You have no problem jumping all over Suffolk for what they AREN’T doing. But are you doing anything to HELP the situation at Suffolk? Or bringing up things that they may be doing right? Not that I’ve noticed. Obviously the situation at Suffolk isn’t a perfect one - everyone knows that. But posting false information to try and get a rise out of everyone doesn’t help anyone - especially the horses.
It goes deeper than that. The trash talk hurts the horses. I am aware of circumstances in which some trainers have become exceedingly wary of dealing with any of the retirement groups --one trainer refusing altogether-- as a direct result of distorted comments painting trainers in a bad light published by one New England rescue center in particular.
If we are ever to provide viable alternatives to slaughter, we need trainers to view retirement resources as a friend, not as the enemy, so knock it off with the Suffolk bashing already!
[QUOTE=AppJumpr08;4094595]
Erm, Gill is allowed at A LOT of other tracks, and Suffolk is the only one you bring up - in not one, but TWO threads. Complete with incorrect information about horses in his barn being euthed. It gets old after awhile. Hence my comment about “taking shots” at Suffolk. You have no problem jumping all over Suffolk for what they AREN’T doing. But are you doing anything to HELP the situation at Suffolk? Or bringing up things that they may be doing right? Not that I’ve noticed. Obviously the situation at Suffolk isn’t a perfect one - everyone knows that. But posting false information to try and get a rise out of everyone doesn’t help anyone - especially the horses.[/QUOTE]
First, I have not posted “incorrect information.”
I wasn’t aware Gill had his own barn at Suffolk Downs. I’m puzzled, however, why it is you say “it gets old after a while” about my comments and still post your own complaints about him whenever the spirit moves you.
My disappointment in what’s going on at Suffolk Downs is important because, as I stated in an earlier post, it’s our hometown racetrack. In 2007 and early 2008, we (the public) were led to believe Suffolk Downs had been saved by its new majority owner and was on its way to becoming what one would have expected to be a world-class racecourse. At this point, there’s not much to be proud of anymore. The management toots its own horn to the local newspapers hoping to polish its local image and get approval for a casino, while the worldwide Thoroughbred media, including Blood-Horse and Thoroughbred Times are more interested in telling the news as it relates to the horses and racing; see my earlier post in which I mentioned the letter in the May 2 issue of Blood-Horse.
You ask am I “doing anything to HELP the situation at Suffolk.” My answer is no. What can I do? Suffolk Downs is a privately owned entity. It’s presumably operated for the purpose of generating a profit. Why is it up to anyone but its owners to “HELP the situation.” They and they alone are responsible for everything that’s connected to their business. One would think that they would be putting forth their best possible effort since they are operating a regulated business with stewards and other racing officials on the property and that those officials are there to see to it that everything is done right. It’s not up to me or any individual member of the general public “to HELP the situation at Suffolk Downs.” I agree with you, however, that there is a “situation” at Suffolk Downs.
You said “the situation at Suffolk Downs isn’t a perfect one - everyone knows that.” Well I say the situation should be “a perfect one.” There’s no excuse for perfection and excellence not being the standards for operating every racecourse in this country. Suffolk Downs should be reaching in to the deep pockets that we’ve all been made aware of, cleaning house on the back side, raising purses; not lowering them and making a substantial investment in an onsite retirement facility for the horses. This business of dealing with the three trainers they allowed back and Mike Gill, etc. is a distraction and a clear indication of desperation in East Boston.
You can call it getting “a rise out of everyone.” I would call it genuine concern.
[QUOTE=Barnfairy;4094681]
It goes deeper than that. The trash talk hurts the horses. I am aware of circumstances in which some trainers have become exceedingly wary of dealing with any of the retirement groups --one trainer refusing altogether-- as a direct result of distorted comments painting trainers in a bad light published by one New England rescue center in particular.
If we are ever to provide viable alternatives to slaughter, we need trainers to view retirement resources as a friend, not as the enemy, so knock it off with the Suffolk bashing already![/QUOTE]
How does this discussion have anything to do with retirement groups? It’s a discussion about Mike Gill and the horses and racetracks, etc. he’s connected with.
I certainly don’t find it hard to believe, however, that Suffolk Downs’ trainers “have become exceedingly wary of dealing with any of the retirement groups.” The three trainers in the news are evidence of that. All the more reason for Suffolk Downs to incorporate a real retirement facility on the grounds. Finger Lakes and others have done it. But that’s off-topic in this discussion.
An outsiders perspective here… I haven’t clue about racing, don’t know more than what I’ve gleaned from reading Walter Farley as a kid and having watched the Triple Crown races for the past 30 plus years or so. Hubby knows even less. Like millions of Americans, we are drawn to racing each year at this time, and then, after the Belmont, the interest fades until the BC races, then we wait again for that first Saturday in May. Frankly, there is never enough accurate information in the mainstream media for people like us to make much sense of what the heck goes on in racing. So, we come to this forum about this time every year to try to understand a bit of background on the Triple Crown races.
Not sure if you all realize how fantastic this forum really is. I wish we had people like Glimmerglass observing the country’s economy… our county would probably be in much better shape. So for you regular posters (some of whom seem to be drawing a bit of fire lately) please know, there are people like my husband and I who greatly appreciate your contributions here. Thank you for taking your valuable time to keep us neophytes informed about what is going on in racing. Your posts help us all understand racing a bit better. Warts and all, you are making a positive difference in shaping the general public’s view of racing. At the very least your posts here help us to understand how to support those working to improve conditions for the horses.
Seems pretty clear to us that Michael Gill is NOT good for racing… but you all are. Keep up the good work.
[QUOTE=USAGPJumper;4095056]
First, I have not posted “incorrect information.”
I wasn’t aware Gill had his own barn at Suffolk Downs. I’m puzzled, however, why it is you say “it gets old after a while” about my comments and still post your own complaints about him whenever the spirit moves you.[/QUOTE]
Sweetie, stating that 2 out of the 3 horses that have died at Suffolk were Gill horses IS INCORRECT INFORMATION. They WERE NOT Gill horses.
And you know darn well I’m not talking about your statements and opinion about Gill, which I just said I AGREED with you on.
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
For USAGPJumper’s Reading Pleasure
Since you clearly missed it on the previous page
[QUOTE=spooky01;4090796]
You’ve got to be fing kidding me!!! Let’s get our facts straight. We have very unfortunately lost 3 horses, you are correct there. But… The first horse was a beloved, old (at least 25 years) pony. The trainer found him dead of an apparant heart attack. The second horse that was lost was put down because of a bad infection in his leg. The third horse that was put down just shipped up from Fl and got sick, beyond help. None of these horses were Gills. As far as the pit goes, the EPA forced SD to replace it with a building. For whatever reason, the EPA has been a pita the last year. Get your facts straight before you start spewing crap.[/QUOTE]
And in case you forgot your statement (which I see you’ve edited to remove the information about the horse flipping over in the paddock)
For starters, you can help by supporting the track to continue to make efforts towards improving conditions regarding the welfare of the horses, rather than close your mind and bash. You can help by supporting CANTER NE and the TRF instead of coming here and undermining them.
You can help by getting your facts straight. You can help by voiceing your “genuine concern” with a little more tact and foresight. Maybe then you’ll regain a little credibility, because right now you have none.
Trainers and owners do share a responsibility in improving equine welfare. Sometimes they need a little push from the outside. Remember, however: you attract far more flies with honey than with vinegar.
If you feel so strongly that on-site retirement is the only way to go, why don’t you go talk to Barbara L. about what it takes to keep Philly’s up and running, get your ducks in a row, and talk to Suffolk?
That’s thanks to people like you and the maligned statements you make. Nice work.
[QUOTE=Barnfairy;4095579]
For starters, you can help by supporting the track to continue to make efforts towards improving conditions regarding the welfare of the horses, rather than close your mind and bash. You can help by supporting CANTER NE and the TRF instead of coming here and undermining them.
You can help by getting your facts straight. You can help by voiceing your “genuine concern” with a little more tact and foresight. Maybe then you’ll regain a little credibility, because right now you have none.
Trainers and owners do share a responsibility in improving equine welfare. Sometimes they need a little push from the outside. Remember, however: you attract far more flies with honey than with vinegar.
If you feel so strongly that on-site retirement is the only way to go, why don’t you go talk to Barbara L. about what it takes to keep Philly’s up and running, get your ducks in a row, and talk to Suffolk?
That’s thanks to people like you and the maligned statements you make. Nice work.[/QUOTE]
That’s pretty lame of you to say that trainers at Suffolk Downs aren’t working with rescue groups because of me…
My expectations and standards for what makes a world-class, well-run racecourse are clearly, far-and-above yours.
[QUOTE=AppJumpr08;4095124]
Since you clearly missed it on the previous page
And in case you forgot your statement (which I see you’ve edited to remove the information about the horse flipping over in the paddock)[/QUOTE]
I have neither edited nor removed anything from my posts. You are a Suffolk Downs groupie and I wouldn’t expect anything less than for you to attempt to draw this thread off-topic and away from the discussion about Mike Gill and his influence on racing. The ancillary points I cited relate directly to the problems at Suffolk Downs overall, including Mike Gill.
You have no one but yourself to blame, dear.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
