Wednesday, December 17, 2008
In Appreciation of Readers - Their Blogs Runneth Over
During my 24 years at the Los Angeles Times, I wrote more than 6,000 stories, most of them about horses. I used to joke that if they had paid me by the word, I would own the place. But the way the Los Angeles Times is going, who would want that?
My contributions to HorseRaceInsider.com over the past year have not been as frequent, but the response from readers has been greater. That's one of the big differences in writing for the Internet. Another difference is that you're not edited as much as you would be at a daily newspaper. On the one hand, that's scary. On the other hand, you must make extra effort to dot every "i" and cross every "t," and have your thinking cap on at all times. Otherwise the readers will be there, pronto, to take you to the Tower. In a column about the Racing Hall of Fame, I made a boo-boo in discussing Ouija Board, and someone who called himself "Earl of Derby" rapped in within minutes of publication to tell me that I blew one. The owner of Ouija Board, of course, is Lord Derby, no quotation marks necessary.
In so many words, "Free October" said that the Breeders' Cup was mad to run its races two straight years over a synthetic surface. "I'll return to the (betting) fray when we're back on dirt. . . and grass in two years. . . If ever," he said.
I wrote that the Breeders' Cup was slightly mad to change the name of the Distaff, a stake with an impressive history, to the Ladies' Classic. On the Internet, you can sometimes just stand back and let the readers fire away, pro and con. So with this item I had Allen Gutterman, the marketing chief at Santa Anita, and Thomas Serowick squaring off at 10 paces. Gutterman defended the new name of the race, while Serowick said: "Does this mean we should consider renaming the Kentucky Oaks the Ladies' Derby?" Wish I had thought to write that.
Early in the year, Pat Valenzuela was in the soup again, and a column about his troubles brought a spirited response. Most thought it was well past time to retire Valenzuela's number, but Susan Ross said the sport should be "more compassionate with one of their own. I will pray for him and ask other to do so, too." Doug Efren was more to the point: "Another ignorant column about Pat Valenzuela. Saying he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame is ridiculous."
A rainy-day treatise about the 10 best racing movies prompted a variety of opinions. I was upbraided, more than once, for not including "Let It Ride," and "Boots Malone," the old William Holden flick, had it supporters. One of the bloggers was John Wayne, and while that might have given many pause, because the Duke's been with the dust for several years, I had to explain that this was the John Wayne who heads the racing commission in Delaware.
For all of us, the death of Eight Belles was tough to write. "Chisox" said that "hopefully, racing can rebound from this, but I am afraid (trainer) Eoin Harty is right on with his comment that her death will have a phenomenal effect on racing."
Toward the end of the year, in an encore opinion, I said that, because of their baggage in the test barns, I wouldn't be able to vote for either Steve Asmussen or Todd Pletcher for an Eclipse Award. "Good for you!" Steve Zorn said. "If all of us (horse) owners took the same position--firing a trainer who had multiple drug violations--that would send a message as well. But too many turn a blind eye and put the winner's circle photo on the wall."
Gentle readers, we had a nice run, and let's keep getting together and doing this again sometime. When John Pricci hired me for this gig, he said he'd like to see a column a week, plus a blog. I didn't know what a blog or blogger was then, and I still don't. But I'm willing to learn.
Written by Bill Christine
|
 |
