It's only a bet...Ef! The Horse...

This weekend was the hundred and something Kentucky Derby and in three years, tragedy struck. For the horse, not the rider. Eight Belles was euthanized on the track on Saturday after breaking both front ankles.

Last week at work, I sent an e-mail to my co-workers outlining what I deemed are sports. Horse racing, didn't make the list, due to the fact that horses aren't athletes and the midgets riding them aren't either. To me, horse racing is a bet and I wondered why, auto racing does not have betting window so all racing fans could really cheer their favorite driver on..

But horse racing involves the incessant beating of a horse to make him go faster. Isn't that cruelty? And yes, although horse racing is legal....How is beating a horse acceptable and fighting dogs that are bred to fight so dispecable...I don't get it.


Speaking of betting...The Boston Celtics finally woke the hell up and did the Atlanta Hawks. Great! unfortunately, it was three games too late. The Hawks forced a game seven on the NBA's best team and had all New Englanders worried like a mofo....First their beloved Patriots whip out a league best record by going undefeated in the regular season, go to the super bowl and get punked by the Giants...And now the Celtics are looking to mirror the Dallas Mavericks.


MVP? Can someone tell me the criteria of selecting the MVP...Because somewhere I got it mixed up...I thought in order to be considered a MVP, you would have to meet the following:

1. Play in a (x) number of games, this got Kevin Garnett, who missed a huge portion of the season due to injury..


2. The player's team would not win, but for the player...example..Steve Nash was given the MVP because the thinking was, if you take him off the Suns, the Suns would suck, but with him on the floor, well they're better..

3. Huge reason of why the team is in the position it's in...

So having said that, can you tell me, when longitivity is the main reason why a player should be MVP. Over the weekend, it was reported that Kobe Bryant has won the MVP award. I got no problem with that, but based on the criteria...lets go down the list..

number one, he played all season

number two, I believe the lakers would win without Kobe, with the new additions of Pau Gasol and the reemergence of Lamar Odom.

number three, see number two...When Andrew Bynum went down, the lakers were on a losing skid and the local media all but spelled doom for the lakers, but up comes Pau Gasol and the lakers overnight became favorites...But Kobe is the MVP? He's not MVP on his own team....

Meanwhile you take Chris Paul:

number one, check..played all year

number two, the hornets would be missing a huge asset to it's team, would not be the same..

number three, was part of the reason why the Hornets had the best season...

sounds like the MVP to me...But to give a player an award because he's played longer and been deserving doesn't fly with me. Regardless of Paul played one year of fifty, based off the season...His was better than Kobe's

Sorry Lakers fan...