ShareThis Page
Notebook: Cielo Gold’s 2nd place pays the bills |

Notebook: Cielo Gold’s 2nd place pays the bills

| Monday, August 7, 2006 12:00 p.m

&#149 Out-of-town trainers and owners typically don’t make the trip to Chester, W.Va., for the West Virginia Derby. But the connections of long-shot Cielo Gold weren’t missing the party. Churchill Downs-based trainer Hal Wiggins and the partners at Hillcrest Farms Racing descended on the out-of-the-way track along the Ohio River, booking at least a dozen rooms at the Grande Hotel. The trip was worth it. Cielo Gold, a 23-1 shot, took second place to win $150,000 and more than double his career earnings.

&#149 The big-name trainers fared poorly Sunday. Wanna Runner, trained by Bob Baffert, was sixth, 12 1/2 lengths back. Todd Pletcher-trained Circle the World checked badly on the backstretch and finished seventh, and Regent Spirit, trained by Nick Zito, was eighth.

&#149 Yesterday offered more proof that owners should listen to trainers. Trainer Kiaran McLaughlin wanted to run Flashy Bull in the West Virginia Derby. The owners wanted to run him in the $1 million Haskell. The owners had the final word, and Flashy Bull, who figured to be one of the favorites in the West Virginia Derby, finished seventh in the nine-horse Haskell at Monmouth Park.

&#149 Dana Whitney, the top jockey at Mountaineer Park, lost his mount in the West Virginia Derby when High Finance scratched with a quarter crack, and then finished out of the money in the day’s first four races. Whitney salvaged the afternoon by winning the $125,000 Breeders’ Cup Memorial Stakes aboard Yucatan.


15 Victories in the past 16 races by Outcashem, who won the $85,000 Chairmen’s Cup for the second year in a row.

4,840 Career victories by West Virginia Derby-winning jockey Mark Guidry, a native of Louisiana.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.