Talk:Makybe Diva

Wikification

This article badly needs wikification and to conform to standard layout. I'm inserting the wikify tag. --K. 23:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

The above wikify tag was taken out after very little improvement, I'm putting it back in because it is still nowhere near up to scratch. Remy B 06:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

GO MAKYBE DIVA!!!! WIN THE CUP TOMORROW!!!!!

Expansion

I feel the article needs some major work commited to it aswell as a major expansion due to the hourse now being regarded as a sporting icon in australia, --Munnday 05:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Re write with full race record (dark horse 03:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC))

Extra

Its even bet pharlaps record..

What a bloody amazing horse. Three Cups!!! Unheard of. And I had money on her to win!!! Take that bookies!

--- Yes Im sure your $5 brought the bookies to their knees.

Copyright free photo

Anyone got a photo we can use???

Done(dark horse 02:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC))

Post Race reactions

I've added a reference to Lee Freedman's great comment after the race that only a small child will likely live long enough to see another horse win three. Cite: http://www.sportal.com.au/horseracing.asp?i=news&id=73454

I've also added a paragraph about the trak watering issue as well. Cite: http://www.ozeform.com/site/news/news.aspx?id=1903

Sorry for not putting the cites in the article as I'm not sure how to do that. Lisiate 02:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Is the comment regarding the track watering issue necessary ? Following injuries related to the hardness of the track at Flemington during the 2002 Melbourne Cup the VRC have had a consistent policy of preparing its racetrack to a condition on the morning of the race that will allow it to improve to the ideal "Good" condition by race time. This was done for the 2005 Melbourne Cup, and for every other meeting held at Flemington this season. Melbourne was forecast it's first 30+ degree day in 6 months on Cup day, and additional water was added to prevent the track drying too quickly (as Flemington is want to do). The track was upgraded to a "Good" rating at 3.25pm and the time for the race was 3.19.79 It is worth noting that in the State of Victoria, the ruling body has a firm policy of not racing on racetracks rated harder than 'Good' and the preparation of the Flemington track on Melbourne Cup day 2005 was fully consistent with that policy. There was some controversy at the time, so Lisiate's edit is not factually incorrect, but it seems a pity to grubby the achievement of the mare with an account of what amounts to an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory. Tontonan 23:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the solution would be to note the VRC's track policy in the article to clarify the issue?Lisiate 23:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

i think that tontonan makes a very good point. Whilst there is a certain amount of controversy with many famous race victories whether that be interference, track state, whatever, it has to be pointed out that the track was fully consisttent with the VRC policy. (dark horse 05:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC))

Okay, I've added the following at the end of the relevant section: "However these criticisms ignored the fact that it is the Victorian Racing Club's policy to water tracks to avoid racing on overly hard surfaces." - Perhaps Tonton might like to expand Lisiate 23:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Lisiate - that is fine by me. I am a Wiki dunce and have made several attempts to comment but my messages have been going nowhere. Nice edit, balances things well.Tontonan 03:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Better yes, but it gives the impression of post race sour grapes when in fact some owners complained the previous day about track watering, not after the race. Moriori 03:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm with Tonto on this. Let's look at the facts.

1. The race time was 3min 19.17sec which was 2.9 seconds outside of Kingston Rule's 1990 track record. Hardly what you could call a "doctored" track. In the fifteen years since then there have been 8 races which have been run in slower times than Makybe Diva's 2005 run - see List of Melbourne Cup winners.

2. It would be an unusual Melbourne Cup which did not have some pre and post race comments and and a bit of spin doctoring. Gai Waterhouse and John Hawkes had vested interests in the race and are hardly shrinking violets when it comes to providing the racing hacks with a comment or three.

3. Leaving those comments in the article detracts from the mares achievement. I think they should be removed. - Cuddy Wifter 07:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Please remove the conspiracy theory it will only detract in latter years from a truly remarkable achievement. She would have won on any track!

i have had a think and i'm all for removing the comments. There are controversies / comments everywhere in racing that at the end of the day should not detract from the winner, they do not even need to be mentioned. (dark horse 01:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC))

Really don't like the section about the track watering conspiracy. The club has watered the track before other Cups, but there's no mention of that. There's also no mention of the fact that the track was suitable for ALL horses, or that punters heavily backed several other horses in betting on the race, or that most of the controversy seemed to spring up - as sour grapes - after the race. Nor is there mention that the reason for watering is to prevent injury.

Objective?

Isn't this meant to be objective? These are not:

"Makybe Diva stamped herself as the champion stayer of the modern era."

- "The"? After only the 2nd Cup?

"She proceeded to take Sydney's most important WFA race, The BMW, with a sensational last-to-first burst."

Yes, but it was arguably a rather weak race. Grand Armee had no form at 2400m. The horses behind him were not great.

"In driving rain the mare defeated one of the strongest Melbourne Cup fields in years,"

"strongest"?

" featuring multiple Irish St. Leger winner Vinnie Roe, Caulfield Cup winners Mummify and Elvstroem, highly regarded European stayer Mamool from the Godolphin stable, as well as the 2002 Melbourne Cup winner Media Puzzle. "The judge and jury 23:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC) The Judge and Jury

Mummify had a poor record on wet tracks. There's no proof Elvstroem could get the distance. There's no proof Mamool properly acclimatised to Australian conditions, similarly to many others of the highly touted overseas runners (e.g. Oscar Schindler and Drum Taps). Also didn't Mamool break down during the race? Media Puzzle had had a very bad injury which meant he had raced only 2 or 3 times since his Cup win.

"By her victory on the rain affected Flemington track, Makybe Diva stamped herself as the champion stayer of the modern era."

The champion? Very subjective!

"The mare further enhanced her reputation as one of Australia's greatest turf icons with a comfortable victory in the 2005 Cox Plate,"

"Australia's greatest turf icons" is rather subjective too.

However these criticisms ignored the fact that it is the Victorian Racing Club's policy to water tracks to avoid racing on overly-hard surfaces.

But have they not left some of these surfaces unwatered since? I have seen people on Australian racing forums claim this to be the case. The judge and jury 00:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC) The Judge and Jury

Because of stuff like you have mentioned, I added {{POV}}--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 13:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Half the article is subjective at best. The track watering issue is something that did happen and should be included in any accurate record of the horses career. Several other race meetings have gone ahead without the track being watered, that is fact and it makes the whole track watering policy an absolute farce.

I really can't agree with the above comments. The fact that the horse won the Cox and three Melbourne Cups speaks for itself. Not many would dispute, say Kingston Town being named as an "Australian Sporting Icon". Yet he did not win even one Melbourne Cup. The same applies to Tulloch. Makybe Diva simply captured the heart of the nation. I know people who were in Australia for a year, know absolutely nothing about racing, and yet are very familiar with the Diva's exploits. To my mind, she certainly deserves all the accolades in this article. It is not biassed. Wallie 23:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

You strayed off the point Wallie, which was well made by the previous poster. Something happened, it doesn't happen in all cases, and to not mention it is censoring history. A factual report is all that is needed. Moriori 03:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The article is more subjective now. : The Judge and jury.

The "watering" controversy

Reading material across the web and particularly in the marketing/merchandising side of the Diva, it appears that many people believe the track watering controversy is frivolous and overblown. Curiously, however, many of these are the exact same people elevating the Diva to a level with Phar Lap. I am skeptical.

Dare to compare: Phar Lap crossed the Pacific Ocean and beat a class American field, running on a dirt track for the first time in his career, and winning by going away after trailing the field by seven lengths. The owner of Phar Lap did not expect the best horses in America to come down and beat him on his track; he went up there and beat them on theirs.

The same can hardly be said of Makybe Diva. Her handlers were extorting the VRC and threatening not to run her unless they gave her preferential treatment and watered their track. The VRC complied, and then made up a fictitious story about it being normal proceedure, which was later exposed as a phony story.

I love the Diva. But facts are facts, and opinions are opinions; and as long as people continue to express the opinion that the Diva is another Phar Lap, then facts need to be examined, and for that reason alone the "track watering" debacle should be a permanent sticky.

Besides, what we are talking about here is a handicap race. The Melbourne Cup is a terrific race, the one that stops the nation. But champions are decided at WFA, not handicaps. Phar Lap destroyed a top-class American field, in their backyard, at a championship distance, running on a dirt surface for the first time, and doing it at WFA. He was an Australian AND an American champion. The Diva's accomplishment is one for the ages, but it does not rise to the level of Phar Lap. If anything, the Diva should be compared with Sunline, who won one more Cox Plate than the Diva, and that race is considered the true championship of Australasia. I can't say which girl is better; those two sheilas are the two greatest mares to race in Australia in the past 25 years, and perhaps of all time.

The facts speak for themselves. Old timers overblow a horse's reputation over the years. When I was younger all you ever heard about was Gloaming and Nightmarch. Later, it was Phar Lap. Makybe Diva has done far more than these animals put together, and is now up there with the likes of Secretariat, Man O' War and Nijinsky. Wallie 09:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Right on. It's also worth remembering that a lot of Phar Lap's races had less than 10 starters (some as few as 5 or 6).

Keir59.167.51.240 (talk) 09:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If anything, the Diva should be compared with Sunline, who won one more Cox Plate than the Diva, and that race is considered the true championship of Australasia.

I hate to say it but this is an utterly ridiculous comparison. Sunline contested 3 Cox plates and won 2. Makybe contested only One Cox Plate for a convincing win. There is absolutely no evidence to say that if she had contested 3 of them too, she would not have won them. Not just that, comparing a middle distance horse to a stayer is considered absurd anyway. I could just as easily argue that Makybe won 3 more Melbourne Cups than Sunline. "She run further carrying 2.5kgs more, so is clearly superior! So what if Sunline never tried!" It's a pointless and stupid argument.

I get you don't like the Makybe/Phar lap comparison. Some people don't. But making absurd comparisons like Sunline v Makybe does not help that argument at all. Phar Lap was easily Australias greatest gelding, and Makybe is easily Australias greatest mare. Of which is better is a question that can never be answered, and nor should anyone be as presumptuous as to try. But the Makybe/Phar lap comparison will always make more sense than Makybe/Sunline because they were both stayers with impressive Melbourne Cup wins.

Onto the Track Watering thing. Blaming the Diva and her handlers for that is absurd. It does not take a genius to remember that Dermot Weld threatened to boycott the Cup in 2003 because of the condition of the hard track in 2002.

Weld threatens cup boycott over hard track

By John Schell August 20, 2003

"If you expect to get European runners again to run in the race, you are going to have to do something with your track," he told 2KY.

Racing Victoria equine business development manager Mark Player said he would contact Weld to discuss his concerns.

"I sent off a fax to Dermot outlining RVL's policy on the preparation of tracks. It clearly states that safety for the horses is the priority and that means that if an error is to be made, we should err on the side of preparing tracks with more cushion in it," he said.

Godolphin trainer Saeed bin Suroor said: "Our horses got beaten by the ground. It was too fast for them."

Weld said Media Puzzle was likely to resume racing over 2800 metres at Fairyhouse next weekend. He said Vinnie Roe was "less likely" to travel to Melbourne.

"Look, I'd love to come back but there is no way I'm going to bring horses to race on a track that's as firm as it was on that day."

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/19/1061261154430.html?from=storyrhs

Something he continued to advocate in 2005, the Diva's last win.

Watering puts stayers on safe ground

By Adrian Dunn October 31, 2005

The renowned Irish trainer made an impassioned plea for the Victorian Racing Club to present a track at Flemington for the Melbourne Cup that offers safe ground.

Weld said he was not asking for a soft track, but one that allowed all horses to return safely and continue their careers.

Weld, who will walk the track today and again tomorrow, said his position was no different to last year.

Weld said Vinnie Roe would not run if he wasn't happy with the track.

English trainer Mark Tompkins echoed Weld's sentiments about watering the track so it would be prepared with safety as a priority.

Tompkins said he wanted every horse to come out of the race without injury.

He said the Flemington track was perfect when Franklins Gardens galloped last Tuesday, but noted the track had dried out.

"It was quite firm ground on Saturday. I hope they do water," Tompkins said.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,17087941-32343,00.html

Feel free to think it gave her an unfair advantage - but to accuse her handlers of extortion over it when it was very widely publicised that it was the international trainers who were unhappy with the hard track is going overboard. As you say though, facts are facts, and opinions are opinions, and thankfully for the handlers of the Diva, the facts are well published. That Policy existed prior to November 2003, as is shown in the above article. --Inflexus (talk) 01:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

General

Can you please be careful with your additions? It is extremely obvious you're a huge fan of the Diva. But that's not the idea - encyclopedias are meant to be objective. Yes, MD ran well in Sydney in Autumn 2004 (it's hard to disagree) but moreso I think her form improved up there. As for the Sydney Cup being her main goal...well, do you have proof? Why aim at a 700k race which is ok on the CV when the BMW is worth 2 million, is wfa and puts the horse in HOY contention? Even then if a MC-wining BMW fancy pulls up well from the BMW it could continue on to the Sydney Cup. (I suspect this is what happened.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The judge and jury (talk • contribs) 13:43, August 21, 2007 (UTC).

--The judge and jury 07:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The Sydney Cup was never her main aim in the Autumn of 2004 at all. It was widely stated at the time that the BMW was the aim. Infact, the horse was floated back to Melbourne following the BMW and only came back to Sydney for the Cup as an afterthough when the true weakness of the race was confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.32.145 (talk) 23:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

When are people going to stop vandalising this talk page?

Surely that's not too hard to do?--The judge and jury 08:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)--The judge and jury 08:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality and Unsourced

The horse is not "Australian". She is a British-bred racehorse. Wallie (talk) 08:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

This is another disruptive edit by Wallie, who is on an anti-Australia crusade. Look in the info box. It shows the country of foaling as Great Britain. There is no dispute here except in your mind.Cuddy Wifter (talk) 22:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

This is not true. I am definitely not on an anti-Australian crusade. The horse was foaled in Britain, and this should be pointed out in the first sentence, as it is in nearly all other articles related to horses. By calling the horse Australian to my mind is POV. I have placed a tag. This is a legitimate dispute over supposed bias. Please do not revert item. Wallie (talk) 11:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Where a horse is foaled is not why it is notable, so why does it need to be in the lead paragraph? Please provide a citation which states that Makybe Diva is anything other than an Australian horse. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 23:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Cuddy Wifter. There has to be a format. Nearly every horse article starts out saying where it was foaled and the date. Any professional organization gets it right. For example, the Australian Racing Museum. [1] To call the horse "Australian" is highly POV, and wrong. When someone challenges this, you say "This is another disruptive edit by Wallie, who is on an anti-Australia crusade.". Please try to be professional. Thank you. Wallie (talk) 08:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Update. The horse now has foaled in UK. I will remove the POV tag. :) Thanks. Wallie (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You have no right to impose any format on articles without proper discussion. The articles from the Australian Racing Museum appear to vary in format from horse to horse anyway. You can't just cherry pick one that is to your liking. Makybe Diva belongs to the category of Australian racehorses. It is of course correct that she was bred in the UK, and that fact is duly pointed out in the article. It is interesting that a Kiwi editor should object, especially as Makybe Diva was also widely reported as being an Australian racehorse by the popular press in NZ. I’ve yet to see any objection from UK editors. Indeed, Makybe Diva does not appear to be included in the category of British racehorses. This article should be geared towards the average layperson, not aficionados of horseracing. For those with a special interest in horse bloodlines or pedigree there are other online references which are far superior to what Wikipedia can offer. I could say a little more about the reasons that have motivated this one particular editor to embark on his particular path of revisions, Makybe Diva is certainly not the only example, but I shall hold back on that for the present. Ernest the Sheep (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

OK. I have corrected it. The horse is now in the cateogory you mentioned. Wallie (talk) 09:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

LoL Ernest the Sheep (talk) 10:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Blanket reverts

Once again, there has been a blanket revert. Please do not do this. Thanks. Wallie (talk) 16:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What! Another one, Ernest. :) Please discuss things one at a time. Wallie (talk) 13:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to respond to my above comment. Ernest the Sheep (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Prior to racing

These sentences in the article "The filly was offered for sale at the December 2000 Tattersall's sales but did not make the reserve. Called Makybe Diva, the filly remained at Britton House Stud until August of 2000, when she and Tugela were shipped to Australia" may contain one or more errors because it doesn't make sense that she would have been offered for sale, in Britain, in "December 2000" if she had already been shipped to Australia in "August of 2000"

Good point. I found this [2] reference to the 1999 Tatts Newmarket foal sale, which seems more logical. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 05:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Distances in feet

Can someone please either let me know what the go is with a number of the race distances being espressed in feet or just delete them? I haven't found any other horse racing pages on Wikipedia that express distances in feet, and it just looks stupid.Pittsburghpenguin (talk) 12:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Weight carried relative to the weight-for-age scale (Third Cup)

I believe there may be one or more errors in these sentences: "Makybe Diva carried 58 kg during the record third Melbourne Cup, 2.5 kg above the standard weight-for-age scale. The last horse to carry more than weight-for-age and win was Rain Lover, who was 2 kg over when he won his second cup in 1969, with 60.5 kg." This is a complex area because the weight-for-age scale has undergone a number of changes over the years, especially in the last few years. I have also found it as good as impossible to find copies of the scale, for the different eras, on the web. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised to find that weight-for-age for five-year-old stallion, as Rain Lover was in 1969, at two miles may have been the equivalent of 59.5 kilograms, which would make the weight he carried one kilogram, rather than two, above the scale. As to Makybe Diva, could somebody please confirm what weight-for-age was for a seven-year-old mare over 3,200 metres in 2005? Pittsburghpenguin (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Miller's Guide shows weight-for-age for 5 year old+ over 3200 metres in November 2005 to be 58.5 kg (less mares allowance of 2.5 kg) = 56.0 kg. There is no allowance for horses foaled in the northern hemisphere which are 5 years old and upwards. The weight-for-age scale shown at Australian Rules of Racing - Weight for Age Scale - see AR.104 was amended on Jan 1 2007. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 04:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. It would appear, then, that the article should read that she carried two kilos (rather than 2.5) above weight-for-age, but I am still unconvinced that the Rain Lover reference is correct because I know that from, 1977, at least, weight-for-age for a five-year-old stallion was 59.5 kilos, so I would be surprised if he was two kilos over weight-for-age when he won Pittsburghpenguin (talk) 08:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I found an old scale for 1969 which shows WFA for a 5 year old at 2 miles in November to be 9 st 5 lbs or 59.5kg. So Rain Lover did carry one kilo above WFA. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - have updated the article accordingly Pittsburghpenguin (talk) 10:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Makybe Diva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714174233/http://makybe-diva-news.newslib.com/story/2353-3065966/ to http://makybe-diva-news.newslib.com/story/2353-3065966/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080720014337/http://sahof.org.au/awards/spiritOfSportAward/memberProfile/index.php?spiritAwardID=1 to http://www.sahof.org.au/awards/spiritOfSportAward/memberProfile/index.php?spiritAwardID=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Who. That.

These 2 sentences would make much more sense with a “who” (instead of “that”);

The last horse to carry more than weight-for-age and win was Rain Lover, that was 1 kg over when he won his second cup in 1969, with 60.5 kg. Makybe Diva, that broke her own weight-carrying record for a mare of 55.5 kg, which she set in 2004, was the highest-weighted winner of the Cup since Think Big won his second Melbourne Cup with 58.5 kg in 1975.

Is there a reason a horse can’t be a “who”? If so, consider dividing each sentence as;

The last horse to carry more than weight-for-age and win was Rain Lover. He was 1 kg over when he won his second cup in 1969, with 60.5 kg. In 2005, Makybe Diva broke her own weight-carrying record for a mare of 55.5 kg, which she set in 2004. She was the highest-weighted winner of the Cup since Think Big won his second Melbourne Cup with 58.5 kg in 1975.MBG02 (talk) 00:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Agree. Certainly in UK & Ireland we would always use "who". I wonder if this is a feature of Australian English. Tigerboy1966  05:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

I checked some other Aussie horses, and they get a “who”; and found the “that” author was an IP address in May 2014; so looks (to me) like it was changed to see if it would remain. The next edit was stupid too, and when reverted, returned to the (stupid) “that” version. MBG02 (talk) 08:50, 5 August 2018 (UTC)