Tips/Thoughts on Breeders' Cup tickets this year?

[CSC]

Owner's don't have an obligation to run anywhere they don't desire, I think it is just a wish to some of the interested observers of the game to have someone step fwd and take risks in the game, to add some juice to the game. All I know is we would have never had a great story as in Seabiscuit/War Admiral match race if they ran today. Since everyone optically speaking mostly seems interested in protecting their horse's reputations these days.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Quiet Chris

Why wouldn't Casino Drive try the BCC. Do you think he should be afraid of that awesome 3yr old division or is it that really scary older horse division? There are about 6 or 7 horses running that even belong in a race like the BCC, and it if wasn't for the euros, that number might be 4 or 5.

it's supposed to be the place where the best gather. two starts really doesn't say much about the horse. some who are supporting him coming to the classic most likely feel zenyatta is too lightly raced to do the same, and would rather she stay vs females. not a lot of consistency in what should or shouldn't happen with racing. i can only imagine the vitriol that would be spewed if casino drive was trained by dwl.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by CSC

Owner's don't have an obligation to run anywhere they don't desire, I think it is just a wish to some of the interested observers of the game to have someone step fwd and take risks in the game, to add some juice to the game. All I know is we would have never had a great story as in Seabiscuit/War Admiral match race if they ran today. Since mostly everyone optically seems interested in protecting their horse's reputations these days.

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

[Danzig]

well of course owners have every right to run their horses where they wish, good of the game or not. after all, we all know the best thing for the game would be for the best horses to remain in training, when owners know the best thing for themselves is to make money and stay in the game-hence the quick route to the shed when they get a top horse.
but, for the same owners to take umbrage when fans and media don't give the kudos to those horses for staying in against weaker competition (zenyatta for example), they've got no one to blame but themselves. zenyatta could take hoy, she could get her praises sung to the heavens should she take on the boys, but she 'deserves' to stay vs females according to her owners. no, if he wants her to be considered as being great, then she has to PROVE it, not just make everyone assume.
that filly has beaten her peers time and again, and has the best three year old and best older horse coming west to run on an untried surface. i think they are wrong for skipping the chance to put her where she really deserves to be. this nonsense that fillies shouldn't run vs boys is absolutely ridiculous.
as for zarkava, i think they're doing the right thing with her. as for curlin, i appreciate jackson for taking him west. we all know curlin would have been gone long ago but for the legal issues...but so what. jackson could very well have remained on the east coast, and i don't think anyone would blame him.

and of course if the bc folks are unhappy with a possible watered down product, it's their own fault for giving owners too many choices for those two days. rather than adding all the other racing, they should have increased the purse for the classic. but then, we all know it's handle they're after, and the bc gets all handle for all bc races. they're killing the golden goose imo.

Originally Posted by ELA

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

Talk about a bunch of nonsense. It's a business that is dying.

It's like the Jets owners being pissed at fans because they won't accept the inflated seat license and season tickets in the new stadium. They conpletely overlook the fact that the product they've had on the field the last 30 years has sucked...it's the fans fault!

I wish she would run because it would very simply be,
interesting.

Well another horrendous business decision by a few tracks (synthetic) have given the owners just another excuse on a list of excuses that is already the size of the U.S. tax code.

[Cannon Shell]

But isnt the point of the article ultimately that the "sport" of racing is far less importnt than the business of racing? That the mainstream attention that supposedly would come to racing if it had these high profile matchups dont really translate into more dollars invested in the pools? That the overall product on the track on a daily basis and better treatment of its core customers is a far bigger issue than Curlin or Big Brown but gets far less coverage from the press?

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by Danzig

well of course owners have every right to run their horses where they wish, good of the game or not. after all, we all know the best thing for the game would be for the best horses to remain in training, when owners know the best thing for themselves is to make money and stay in the game-hence the quick route to the shed when they get a top horse.
but, for the same owners to take umbrage when fans and media don't give the kudos to those horses for staying in against weaker competition (zenyatta for example), they've got no one to blame but themselves. zenyatta could take hoy, she could get her praises sung to the heavens should she take on the boys, but she 'deserves' to stay vs females according to her owners. no, if he wants her to be considered as being great, then she has to PROVE it, not just make everyone assume.
that filly has beaten her peers time and again, and has the best three year old and best older horse coming west to run on an untried surface. i think they are wrong for skipping the chance to put her where she really deserves to be. this nonsense that fillies shouldn't run vs boys is absolutely ridiculous.
as for zarkava, i think they're doing the right thing with her. as for curlin, i appreciate jackson for taking him west. we all know curlin would have been gone long ago but for the legal issues...but so what. jackson could very well have remained on the east coast, and i don't think anyone would blame him.

and of course if the bc folks are unhappy with a possible watered down product, it's their own fault for giving owners too many choices for those two days. rather than adding all the other racing, they should have increased the purse for the classic. but then, we all know it's handle they're after, and the bc gets all handle for all bc races. they're killing the golden goose imo.

Racing has it's collective head up it's ass and they prove it every chance they get. The ADW situation is still a problem and I don't know what has been done or not done, just know I can't wager many tracks online. TwinSpires is taking Telephone bets Only for Santa Anita (Oak Tree). Slightly less inconvenient. I wonder since the Breeder's Cup is it's own deal if I will be able to advance wager online this year since it is at SA. not taking a day off work for the lesser Friday filly/ mare championships.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Well another horrendous business decision by a few tracks (synthetic) have given the owners just another excuse on a list of excuses that is already the size of the U.S. tax code.

Dont forget that the tracks in CA were forced to install synthetics by the racing board. fast trigger fingers all around.

[CSC]

Or is the BC concept becoming antiquated and has lost it's lustre? You would think a million dollars and more would be incentive enough, apparently not for all.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by ELA

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

I hear you and I don't disagree with anything you said, On the subject of Curlin he has very little to lose in my mind, if he runs and wins he goes out a hero, if he loses an excuse is already in place, the track is to blame. I don't see how running in the BC Classic is a bad business or sporting decision, it defies logic to me.

[the_fat_man]

"I'll take 5% of YOUR pick 6 ticket and you can have 5% of mine".

Those EXTRA cashes come in handy.

INSURANCE

[letswastemoney]

Casino Drive would crush her

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by CSC

Or is the BC concept becoming antiquated and has lost it's lustre? You would think a million dollars and more would be incentive enough, apparently not for all.

1 day is right 2 days is stupid..asking huge prices for tickets on fri is stupid along with inflated hotels ect..make it 1 day of championship racing .

[King Glorious]

No, they don't owe us anything. They can do what they want with their horses. Period. Christ is right that them doing some of the things we want as fans won't increase the fan base one bit. But I think he fails to consider something that is very important and that's what happens to the existing fan base when owners continously do what's good for them and forget about what's good for the game. Keep doing things to drive away the existing fans and there will be no sport to bring new ones to.

Owners also can't complain when people don't give them the support and praise they think they deserve. If the Zenyatta people make one sound in support of their horse for HOY, I'd lose all respect I have left for them. If they want to make her case, they should be in the Classic. Let the horse make her own argument. There is something to be said for being sporting. After all, even though this is a huge business, it's still a sport. At it's core, it's still about one thing....my horse is faster than your horse. While nobody HAS to do anything, it's why you gain more respect for a guy like The Aga Kahn. He didn't HAVE to run Zarkava in the Arc. But he knew he had a once in a lifetime kind of horse and he wanted her to PROVE her greatness on the track. She did and because of her owner being as sporting as he is, she'll go down in history. Because of Zenyatta's owners, she'll be forgotten in a couple of years. Again, they don't owe us anything. But I think that sometimes, they forget what it was like to be a fan instead of an owner. They absolutely do cheat the fans. That's not to say that sometimes they don't have legitimate reasons but in the end, it's still cheating the fans.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

1 day is right 2 days is stupid..asking huge prices for tickets on fri is stupid along with inflated hotels ect..make it 1 day of championship racing .

They lost me when they tinkered with the lineup up races of not leading off with the sprint. I'm also not too fond of the BC Filly Mare race, Miss Alleged, Makaybe Diva, Borgia, and more recently in the Arc remind us fillies can compete in turf races against the boys. Some races have become too watered down.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by CSC

They lost me when they tinkered with the lineup up races of not leading off with the sprint. I'm also not too fond of the BC Filly Mare race, Miss Alleged, Makaybe Diva, Borgia, and more recently in the Arc remind us fillies can compete in turf races against the boys. Some races have become too watered down.

Not to forget Pebbles, Indian Skimmer, Hatoof, and Estrapade. All ran very strong races in the Turf. What about Safely Kept, Meafara, Very Subtle, Honest Lady, Soviet Problem, and Pine Tree Lane....none of whom needed their own sprint race.

[Quiet Chris]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's supposed to be the place where the best gather. two starts really doesn't say much about the horse. some who are supporting him coming to the classic most likely feel zenyatta is too lightly raced to do the same, and would rather she stay vs females. not a lot of consistency in what should or shouldn't happen with racing. i can only imagine the vitriol that would be spewed if casino drive was trained by dwl.

Zenyatta will do what they want to do and Casino Drive will do what his connections want to do. She will do fine in either and if they don't want to take on the boys that is understandable.

Casino Drive has proven he is good enough to compete with this year's top horses because there aren't any top horses with the exception of 5 or 6 of them. By your reasoning we should only have a 6 horse field for the BCC.

You could make the argument that Casino Drive is the 3rd best 3yr old in america, and it is not exactly a stretch.

Atleast Casino Drive has done something to make one believe he has the talent to compete at this level, because other than Big Brown and Colonel John there is not another 3yr old that belongs.