Can Somebody Please Explain The Stakes Grading System...

[docicu3]

I have tried to research this myself with numerous sites and history books but fail to see a consistency to the pattern of what makes a Grade 1 race different from a Grade 2 race etc....

I think I get the points idea for the Derby but what determines how much a given stakes race is worth and what category is goes in.

Maybe I just don't have the right reference material.....

[robfla]

i dont know all the criteria, but some criteria is purse money, longevity, restrictions ( or lack of ) , how horses fare from a race in future races. the Committee grades on the overall quality of the previous fields and the performance of horses in the previous fields in stakes both prior to and after the race. For example: if the winner of the Breeders' Cup Turf raced in the Arlington Million then the race would almost certainly be a Grade One.

[Holland Hacker]

Originally Posted by docicu3

I have tried to research this myself with numerous sites and history books but fail to see a consistency to the pattern of what makes a Grade 1 race different from a Grade 2 race etc....

I think I get the points idea for the Derby but what determines how much a given stakes race is worth and what category is goes in.

Maybe I just don't have the right reference material.....

The Bloodhorse includes a quarterly supplement that list of all stakes races to be run, including graded races during each quarter. I think in the beginning of the supplemnt there is a rather long explanation of how the races are graded by the committee.

I beleive they look at the "quality" of the fields that have run in the race for the last few years based on what the accomplishments of the field was dicitates how the races are graded. Typically a race will only move up or down one grade from year to year.

I think in order to maintain it's status as a graded race, a race can not have a hiatus of more than one year.

Also I beleive that as a requirement to be graded a race can not have any restrictions other than sex or age. For example state bred races do not qualify.

I'll look for the quarterly supplement and if I find it I'll scan it and PM it to you.

Did you check the Bloodhorse website?

[JJP]

To answer the original question, I think a good analogy would be the NCAA tourney selection. Its subjective, and fraught with mistakes. There's no reason a race like the Arkansas Derby, after spawning the likes of Smarty Jones, Borrego, Purge, Afleet Alex and the horse who won the 2005 Travers (name escapes me) should've stayed a Grade 2. Meanwhile, a race like the Prioress, which should be fortunate to be a Grade 3 after three miserable renewals, remains a Grade 1. Come to think of it, is there any reason to have any Grade 1 sprints for 3YO fillies? The Test was dreadful as well. The runnerup in the race this past year was coming off an off the board finish against Illinois bred fillies.....and she almost won the Test.

[Linny]

One or two poor runnings shouldn't require a downgrade but 3 or 4 should. The Committee (which I think is nuts) supposedly meets annually to re-assess the grading. Some of the decisions are inane. I still cannot understand why the Keeneland Mile is G1 and the Oak Tree Mile is G2. In late 2004 they met and upgraded the Clark H to G1. It was run in 2005 as a G1 and by the end of the year, it was a G2 again. If they supposedly use 3 or 4 year averages, then how can a race's grade change twice in consecutive years?

There is a push now, esp. with the arrival of a BC race for female sprinters to have a "G1/2/3" season of races for filly sprinters and it makes sense. In some seasons the Prioress and the Test are outstanding. Does the carson Hollow/You race ring a bell?
In the rush to push new races into the fray, like the American Oaks other historic events are often short sold. The Sunshine Millions has diminished the quality of G1 races like the Santa Monica and the San Antonio, even the Donn. The new BC races will create a push to "make divisions" which include G1's leading up to a championship race.
Where I think the grading system is wrong is this. A G1 should be a G1, they should all be equal. Is the Gulfstream Park Turf H. (G1) as important as the Arlington Million (G1) and/or the Breeders' Cup Turf(G1)? Is the Las Virgenes or the Acorn as important as the Ky Oaks and/or the Alabama? They are all G1 so in theory they are. If the Ky Derby and the Travers and the Pacific Classic and the Breeders' Cup Classic are G1 then all other G1 races should be just as important, if not they are really G2.

[Danzig]

i don't think the graded stakes committee can explain it.