Triple Crown Not Great For Horse Racing....

[munster705]

Before you jump all over me on this one....please hear me out....

I am as happy as anyone the AP got it done on Saturday (historically as well as financially for myself :0)). But I would argue against this being so great for horse racing in a long term sense. Consider this. The people on this forum....the people that truly care about horse racing like you and I will always be fans. The triple crown races draw in the bandwagon fans for 5 weeks a year. In the short term, this is great for racing. Horse racing is the lead story on Sportscenter. It is being talked about on the local radio stations. That's today. What happens a month from now? Nobody outside of the usual passionate fans will care anymore. That is the sad truth of it all. Next year when another 3 year old wins the Kentucky Derby, there will not be the same buzz about the Triple Crown because it only happened a year ago.

I can make the comparison to my favorite baseball team, the Boston Red Sox in 2004. After 86 years, we finally won the World Series. Boston partied like crazy. We nmever thought we would see the day. And now, there simply is not the same passion as it used to be. I fear that this will be true for Horse Racing.

[pointman]

How can anyone take this seriously when it starts out with a redboard on a 3/5 shot?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by pointman

How can anyone take this seriously when it starts out with a redboard on a 3/5 shot?

no, there won't be the same buzz next year, but as years go by, it'll build again.
and for however many who don't tune in, others will keep following because they got hooked by a horse, or a fan, or a bet.

[joeydb]

Ever hear of the Scientific Method?

It's a technique for experimentation where you hold all other things constant to measure the effect of the one variable being studied.

So, when you see the state of horse racing in 2015 as a constant, and the variable is whether or not we had a Triple Crown winner, are you going to assert that having it is no better than not having it?

I think not.

As you pointed out, at least there was attention and interest. Some of that will carry over. Even more so if American Pharoah goes to the Haskell as announced today, and hopefully the Travers and Breeders' Cup Classic. He'll be in the news again and people will be interested. Imagine if he wins the Haskell and Travers? The Breeders' Cup could be huge.

Not trying to be critical, but you had to really bend that curve to make the Triple Crown success into a negative for horse racing. It didn't matter what the inputs were - the answer was negative. f(x) = "pessimism".

[munster705]

If AP continues to race then obviously his races will carry a huge following. The fact of the matter is there are tracks across the country that are still going to be closing (Suffolk Downs in my backyard to name one). The same battles that the sport had last week are still there now. This is a great short term boost, I agree with all of that....but long term this will wear off and the same challenges will remain.

BTW on the redboard...it wasn't intended to be serious. Just making a funny little side note so please don't take that the wrong way.

If you must know $20 trifecta paid $1,095.00

Is a regular season game with Milwaukee Bucks vs Charlotte Hornets on a Tuesday in February draws much attention?

No one tunes in to the NBA until late in the playoffs and NBA finals.....5 weeks in a given year.

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by munster705

If AP continues to race then obviously his races will carry a huge following. The fact of the matter is there are tracks across the country that are still going to be closing (Suffolk Downs in my backyard to name one). The same battles that the sport had last week are still there now. This is a great short term boost, I agree with all of that....but long term this will wear off and the same challenges will remain.

Of course they will. There are problems that need to be addressed, changes that need to be made. Maybe some tracks need to close... it might make more sense to kind of streamline racing and offer a better product.

Cheaters still cheat, suspensions are still a joke BUT we finally have all of THIS and you choose to, not find a negative but search one out and rip it out of nowhere? Why? For what?

Sorry... do not know you at all and I mean no disrespect but I don't get it (and I don't agree. Simple mathematics... some (not a lot but some) of the people exposed WILL become fans / bettors. I would imagine anyway).

You can choose to go through life appreciating the good, searching for what is right, being joyous, finding beauty OR you can be the other kind of person. It's really a choice.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Ever hear of the Scientific Method?

It's a technique for experimentation where you hold all other things constant to measure the effect of the one variable being studied.

So, when you see the state of horse racing in 2015 as a constant, and the variable is whether or not we had a Triple Crown winner, are you going to assert that having it is no better than not having it?

I think not.

As you pointed out, at least there was attention and interest. Some of that will carry over. Even more so if American Pharoah goes to the Haskell as announced today, and hopefully the Travers and Breeders' Cup Classic. He'll be in the news again and people will be interested. Imagine if he wins the Haskell and Travers? The Breeders' Cup could be huge.

Not trying to be critical, but you had to really bend that curve to make the Triple Crown success into a negative for horse racing. It didn't matter what the inputs were - the answer was negative. f(x) = "pessimism".

the only negatives are that for the next year or two, some interest may wane...but i'd imagine that a lot of people will still go to the belmont if the tc is on the line, everyone wants to be a witness to history. the big help to the belmont, is the derby winner taking the preakness. that is more of an effect than how long ago the tc was won.
the other real negative is just regarding the one horse-it's been so long, that we all know he's going to be rushed to retirement like secretariat, and not run longer like the two who followed in 77 and 78.

[ghartman02]

I grew up in Horse Racing, my Dad owned them, and all I really cared about was our horses. Then in 1969 I went to the KY Derby for the first time and fell in love (also went to Keeneland and did the same). Then in 1973, I saw Secretariat win the Derby, and when he won the Belmont I became a fan. So who knows what this will do. Can you get excited in the 4th race at Monmouth on a Friday? No, but you can love the horse and betting. I'm not a hot shot gambler. However, I love the sport and often times I break even. Example: I can go to a Cincinnati Reds game and drop $30 for a ticket, $30 for a couple of beers, maybe a dog and a drink and my day is $70 or so. I can go to the track and I can spend $70. At the Reds game my wallet is empty, but at the track, even if I come home with $50, the day cost me $20 and on a day like BlueGrass Day at Keeneland, that's cool. If I win a few, and I come home with $80, I got paid $10 to go to the track! In 1977, Poor Seattle Slew was kinda boring so he didn't get the press (until later), and 1978 Affirmed had Alydar which made that thrilling. Hopefully with smart marketing, and knocking of heads the sport can be the great sport it is...we just got to get people to find out about it!