The Sports Lounge Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Sports Lounge

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Annette who wrote (210)	2/8/2002 9:08:29 AM
From: E	Read Replies (2) of 234

Hi, Annette. Yes, all the horses were weighted in the 1930's, which is mainly when Seabiscuit ran. And I know there was the competition and negotiation around weight assignments, which it seems clear was a system vulnerable to corruption given the huge purses these races involved. But what I can't find is the rationale for assigning weights, or impost, in the first place. It's like saying Michael Jordon can play only if he had an anvil taped to his back and football players had to wear high heels of differing lengths, up to stiletto for the best players. What it does is make the poorer horse have more chance to win over the better horse. But there must have been some rationale I can't think of. Thanks for looking. It's just curiosity on my part. Yesterday I called the guy who'd recommended the book to me to ask him, and he had no idea either. I passed some horses in a field yesterday and looked at them entirely differently because of reading Seabiscuit. It's really a wonderful book, even for someone who's never been to a racetrack or had the least interest in horses.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next