OFFICIAL: '09 Cup Back to Santa Anita
 

Why don't we just blow up the game? How stupid is this idea.....

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=43536

How can they say that they are the leading candidate? Doesn't CD want it again..If NYRA gets their act together isn't Belmont due?

Not to mention the "Tier 2" possibilities...or are they not going down that road again?

We'll the quote it comes from the VP of Marketing for Santa Anita so I would take it with a grain of salt. It's like the VP of Marketing at the Mountain saying we've got the finest racing in the East. You know those Marketing guru's will say anything to get press.

I know, but it is just ridiculous, if they have it at back to back sites, I am taking up Jai ali or however you spell it.

Could or would they ever have the Breeders' Cup at the Fair Grounds? If Belmont and Churchill are out, what are the other reasonable alternatives?

You know, I totally forgot about Churchill saying they don't want the BC anymore. This is why Santa Anita can mention something like this.

Soon the BC will be, The Breeders Cup at Magna International

It would be hard to fathom that the BC would return to the same place back to back.

If they wanted to keep it in Cali, why not DelMar? They can have an abbreviated meet like Monmouth.

The conversation I heard at Monmouth about this was that having it at Santa Anita back-to-back provided NTRA/BCL with some excellent marketing opportunities revolving around "continuity" and "repeat exposure"... specifically with the Entertainment Industry.

Churchill will lose out on a tax exemption deal with the City of Louisville if they do NOT get the Cup back for '09.

I love the idea of having it at the same place for back to back years. I think it is easier for horsemen/women to plan well in advance. It also helps with patrons as well.

I think Churchill and the city of Louisville will work out another tax exemption deal. I wish the cup would be run at 3 venues--Belmont, Churchill and Santa Anita.

I know its a pipe dream, but I love Steve's idea of using Hialeah Park as a sight every other year... and then rotating between the "Big 3" with an occasional alternate site thrown in every 4th or 5th year.

The 12f "marathon" woud sure be fun to watch over that track. The winner would finish in about 45 minutes.
Doing it at Santa Anita again would be absolutely ridiculous....but I seriously doubt we'll see that happen.
I wish they would run the BC at a track like Fairmount so the hideousness of the setting would match the stupidity of the event's existence.

I like throwing the Lone Stars and Monmouths of the world a bone every couple of years, and see no real benefit in keeping the cup at Santa Anita every single year.

Exactly.....

And now that Arlington has an alternative finish line, they should get a bone also because they can accomdate all BC races

except the seating...and i was there last time..betting was a mess..and it was cold..

When it's held in any place except California, it seems that the weather is almost always a factor or at least a concern. It's too often cold and raining and miserable. Santa Anita has hosted some great BC races in the past. The concern always heard about SA is that it's too hot. That was one time and personally, I'd rather they are racing when it's 95 degrees instead of this stuff we just had at Monmouth. My only concern is that they are racing on fake dirt in Cali and I don't like that and I think it's premature to be even considering awarding them another BC when they don't even know how this one will turn out because of the track. Under normal circumstances though, I wouldn't have any problem at all with it being at Santa Anita every year.

I still think that the BC is a great idea and a great thing for racing. At no other time do we get this kind of participation from horses from other parts of the world. At no other time do we get so many top horses matching up with each other. It's not the BC that has messed the sport up. It's the way horses are bred, trained, and raced now that has done the most damage. Tracks change up their prep distances and dates not because of the BC but because of how trainers train now. I just don't see the sense in blaming the BC when the BC has not changed. It worked fine in the beginning and still works fine now. Blaming the BC is like blaming the Derby because a lot of trainers are starting to go to the two-prep thing. When I first got involved with the game, having four preps was not unusual. Then it went down to three being the norm. With the recent good runs of horses that only prep twice and the way that many trainers like to copycat, I can easily see two becoming the norm. I can easily see more trainers holding out their 2yo's and starting them out as 3yo's because of the success Bernardini and Curlin had. The Derby is not to blame for any of this though because it hasn't changed. Other than adding a few more races, neither has the BC.

well why a track like the fair grounds can't hold it. plenty of hotel rooms and great food and entertainment.also weather is good in october down here.

also a dirt track.

I don't like the BC being run over the synthetic surfaces either and I don't feel like the turf races are legit b/c the turf course is so hard and short its more like running on astroturf-those courses out there made Citronnade look like a monster on the turf, which she isn't. Churchill and Belmont are the best venues to use.

as long as they've got enough barns for it (which I think they do), there's no reason they couldn't have it.... also, it'd be a nice boost back for the city to have another feature event there.

I'd like to see it back at AP someday, as I was unfortunately unable to go last time it was there due to being out of town.

I am a little bias because I didn't get to go. I was down at SIU and my dad wisely told me "It will be here another day, I wouldn't come all the way up just for the BC"

I should have not listened to him, like I don't listen to everything else