What do you think?
Rate this book
THE BEST and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing
The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing is a fascinating listing of the history of horseracing's most memorable moments. Every aspect of the game is covered in this unique collection. Whether it's legendary handicapper Pittsburgh Phil, top sire Storm Cat, or the renowned 1978 Belmont Stakes with Alydar and Affirmed the racing aficionado will have hundreds of entertaining racing data and anecdotes at his or her fingertips to feast upon.
- GenresHorse Racing
324 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2006
17 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
September 28, 2018
I usually do not read reviews of books I want to buy or read (or both) because I like being surprised. However, in the case of Steve Davidowitz's The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing I should have read the reviews first before buying. Caveat empor and all that. Come to think of it, that reminds me of a Belmont Stakes winner named Caveat -- who, unfortuately, is not mentioned in this book.
Now, with a title like The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing it's hard not to open the book with some rather large expectations. For example, I was hoping for a book that actually DID cover the best and worst of Thoroughbred racing. I was hoping that Best Jockeys list (for example) would get paired with a Worst Jockeys list but that never happened. What I got was a lot of anectdotes about American racing from the 1950s on interspersed with the occassional bitch-fest.
The book consists of a series of lists -- not always a Top Ten. You may think that after a Best Of list there would be a corresponding Worst Of list. There isn't. There is hardly any "worst" at all, as if Steve Davidowitz (a long time racing writer and gambler) is afraid to bite the hand that feeds him.
There is far too much emphasis on gambling and the humans involved for my taste. The focus really should have been on the horses. I really could have done without the Best Horseplayers and Best Racecallers.
The book was also published before the tragic death of 2006 Kentucky Derby winner Barbaro so happy references to him were chilling.
The book is rambling, poorly organized and unbalanced as if it was made up of notes by Davidowitz and the real book is laying around somewhere. He goes into massive detail for a few pages and suddenly give only perfunctory nods in another.
There are no illustrations, either, except for the horses on the front and back covers. These horses are not identified, which infuriates me not because the horses get slighted but because my memory keeps telling me that I should recognize these horses (those silks the jock on the cover is wearing are Calumet silks after all) but that I cannot. I've even wasted time trying to Google stakes-winning chestnuts owned by Calumet but got nowhere.
This is more of a haigiography of modern American thoroughbred stakes racing with a few "hey -- we're like any other sport, we have problems but STILL" kind of feeling to it. Some very important issues are addressed, such as "the fragility of the modern thoroughbred" (his phrase) and too many racing dates. But nothing really of any substance.
This book stumbled at the starting gate, never recovered and ran out.
Now, with a title like The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing it's hard not to open the book with some rather large expectations. For example, I was hoping for a book that actually DID cover the best and worst of Thoroughbred racing. I was hoping that Best Jockeys list (for example) would get paired with a Worst Jockeys list but that never happened. What I got was a lot of anectdotes about American racing from the 1950s on interspersed with the occassional bitch-fest.
The book consists of a series of lists -- not always a Top Ten. You may think that after a Best Of list there would be a corresponding Worst Of list. There isn't. There is hardly any "worst" at all, as if Steve Davidowitz (a long time racing writer and gambler) is afraid to bite the hand that feeds him.
There is far too much emphasis on gambling and the humans involved for my taste. The focus really should have been on the horses. I really could have done without the Best Horseplayers and Best Racecallers.
The book was also published before the tragic death of 2006 Kentucky Derby winner Barbaro so happy references to him were chilling.
The book is rambling, poorly organized and unbalanced as if it was made up of notes by Davidowitz and the real book is laying around somewhere. He goes into massive detail for a few pages and suddenly give only perfunctory nods in another.
There are no illustrations, either, except for the horses on the front and back covers. These horses are not identified, which infuriates me not because the horses get slighted but because my memory keeps telling me that I should recognize these horses (those silks the jock on the cover is wearing are Calumet silks after all) but that I cannot. I've even wasted time trying to Google stakes-winning chestnuts owned by Calumet but got nowhere.
This is more of a haigiography of modern American thoroughbred stakes racing with a few "hey -- we're like any other sport, we have problems but STILL" kind of feeling to it. Some very important issues are addressed, such as "the fragility of the modern thoroughbred" (his phrase) and too many racing dates. But nothing really of any substance.
This book stumbled at the starting gate, never recovered and ran out.
Displaying 1 of 1 review