BC shamed into making Whitney a "Win/In"

[Kasept]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/105812.html

Whitney now a Win and You're In
By David Grening

The Grade 1, $750,000 Whitney Handicap at Saratoga has been added to the 2009 Breeders' Cup Challenge Win and You're In program, meaning the winner of the race receives an automatic berth into the $5 million Breeders' Cup Classic at Santa Anita on Nov. 7.

The Whitney will be run at Saratoga on Aug. 8 and is expected to feature defending winner Commentator, who did not run in the Classic last year. As of Friday, those being considered for the Whitney included Asiatic Boy, Dry Martini, Finallymadeit, Macho Again, Arson Squad, and possibly Tizway. Neither the Whitney nor any race at Saratoga was included among the original lineup of Breeders' Cup Challenge races announced June 22.

[chucklestheclown]

How could they possibly "shame" them into something already shameful? Toga shoulda taken it as the badge of honor it was.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by chucklestheclown

How could they possibly "shame" them into something already shameful? Toga shoulda taken it as the badge of honor it was.

CtC,

Well put. And I think they were wearing it as a badge... Charlie Hayward was stoicly amused in pointing out the obvious slight when the topic came up last month.

[johnny pinwheel]

spokeman jim gluckson said they wanted a classic race for win and your in at a northeast racetrack. his reason was suffolk was not having its race this year. last years edition was commentator and a bunch of high priced claimers, i guess thats the caliber of horses that the BC wants to attract(suffolk vs. saratoga....lol). they were not going to have any win and your in races at saratoga. the breeders cup has become a complete debacle. the best horses around will be racing here starting next week and for the next 3 months ny will have the best racing in the country. after saratoga, belmont has their championship meet. yet, the breeders cup entity acts like ny tracks barely exist. why? they are having it at the same track twice in a row. its just stupid! it won't happen but i wish belmont put together a card to compete with the breeders cup. i used to think breeders cup day was a good thing but i have alot of doubts now. if it were to go under, which it could, it may not be bad for racing! it used to force horses to meet at least once but now its not even going to accomplish that! why have it?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

spokeman jim gluckson said they wanted a classic race for win and your in at a northeast racetrack. his reason was suffolk was not having its race this year. last years edition was commentator and a bunch of high priced claimers, i guess thats the caliber of horses that the BC wants to attract(suffolk vs. saratoga....lol). they were not going to have any win and your in races at saratoga. the breeders cup has become a complete debacle. the best horses around will be racing here starting next week and for the next 3 months ny will have the best racing in the country. after saratoga, belmont has their championship meet. yet, the breeders cup entity acts like ny tracks barely exist. why? they are having it at the same track twice in a row. its just stupid! it won't happen but i wish belmont put together a card to compete with the breeders cup. i used to think breeders cup day was a good thing but i have alot of doubts now. if it were to go under, which it could, it may not be bad for racing! it used to force horses to meet at least once but now its not even going to accomplish that! why have it?

It WAS a great thing... until they decided to have it at the same place two years in a row with a comically bad surface. It WILL be great again in 2010 at CD.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by philcski

It WAS a great thing... until they decided to have it at the same place two years in a row with a comically bad surface. It WILL be great again in 2010 at CD.

I'm glad you posted this. The BC is still a great thing. The idea to run it on fake dirt (twice in a row at that) was a bad thing. Horribly bad. But even with that bad decision, how else in the world would we have seen some of the matchups that the BC brought us? We would have never seen Zenyatta vs. Music Note and Cocoa Beach. We wouldn't have seen Curlin vs. the world. Were Goldikova and Conduit going to come over for the Matriarch and Hollywood Turf Cup? Indian Blessing vs. Ventura. Throughout the year, we get the sporadic matchups of one or two of the top horses in a division. The BC is still the only spot where we get usually 3-4 of the top ones all in the same race and we get that for multiple divisions all at the same time. It was and still is the best day of racing that we have. A lot of people are down on it because they say that it de-emphasizes the rest of the year too much and that voters place too much emphasis on it when it comes to voting for champions. While I agree that they do, I say that you have to blame the voters and the ones that campaign the horses for putting the top horses together so few times during the year that the BC is often the only time we get to see them matched up. Blaming the BC for how trainers now campaign their horses is like blaming the Kentucky Derby because more and more trainers are looking at two preps instead of three and more are coming into the race 5-7 weeks out instead of the traditional 3-4. You don't blame the event for the changing attitudes when the event has stayed the same.

[chucklestheclown]

You can see Goldikova on TVG quite often, and why you'd be waiting to see Cocoa Beach is beyond me. Toga should have told them to stick it where the sun don't shine and run a card equal to what the BC will be...3 weeks earlier.

[the_fat_man]

Damn, we can't quite get through any thread here without some POLY whining.

Why is anything that's happening on DIRT any better?

And this, after the leader of the DIRT movement, Mr Beyer himself, personally did some ad hoc tweaking of his synthetic figures so his followers would have a clue.

Guess there's no convincing those who love (to roll around in) dirt.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Damn, we can't quite get through any thread here without some POLY whining.

Why is anything that's happening on DIRT any better?

And this, after the leader of the DIRT movement, Mr Beyer himself, personally did some ad hoc tweaking of his synthetic figures so his followers would have a clue.

Guess there's no convincing those who love (to roll around in) dirt.

The only thing wrong with Poly is the racing tends to be borish..I don't think it lends itself to flattering a horses turn of foot. I think watching a TB acelerate is what thrills fans. Plodding doesn't seem to get the heart beating. As for making money betting it, I believe any hi quality capper who puts the time and effort in will be rewarded regardless of the surface.

I think you also have to understand that it is a third surface. So many stars or hi quality animals aren't necessarily able to be good on dirt and poly. So you may have a multiple grade 1 winner on dirt who can't run a step on the stuff. that isn't good for the sport. The sport needs its stars to have a fair shot at being stars on the sports biggest showcase day

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by freddymo

The only thing wrong with Poly is the racing tends to be borish..I don't think it lends itself to flattering a horses turn of foot. I think watching a TB acelerate is what thrills fans. Plodding doesn't seem to get the heart beating. As for making money betting it, I believe any hi quality capper who puts the time and effort in will be rewarded regardless of the surface.

I think you also have to understand that it is a third surface. So many stars or hi quality animals aren't necessarily able to be good on dirt and poly. So you may have a multiple grade 1 winner on dirt who can't run a step on the stuff. that isn't good for the sport. The sport needs its stars to have a fair shot at being stars on the sports biggest showcase day

Absolutely the opposite. Horses that run well on turf and poly are much better athletes. (Look at Curlin, as an example. No horse was capable of pushing a bigger gear than he but he just wasn't nimble enough in the turf race and was swallowed by the race dynamics in the classic -- dynamics he would probably overcome on dirt.) Their footwork is significantly better than dirt horses. Fire up a headon replay sometime of a turf sprint and watch how many lead changes some of these horses are going through on the backstretch. And, as far as the acceleration part: watch last years turf mile and notice how the filly takes off like a rocket after drafting and having to wait behind horses.

There are no bursts on dirt. No quick lead changes to avoid trouble. It's a bunch of plodders taking advantage of the kickback. The reason there's so much whining about poly is that dirt players aren't accustomed to horses accelerating the way they do on poly (and turf). They're used to a speed horse going out there and being carried by the track. Those that play a lot of turf know that to wire on the turf (and poly) is to clearly be best. And, that the best horse in the race need not be compromised by the track in a lone speed race, as, a well time burst more often than not can run down just about any frontrunner. There's your problem: simple handicapping like picking out the clear speed of the race just doesn't work as well on these surfaces Something a bit more complex is needed.

Tell you this much, Bro. I started a few years ago (when I returned to the game) by playing almost exclusively power closers on the turf. Now, more than half of my game consists of playing speed on POLY (and turf).

It's DIRT racing that's UGLY.

[freddymo]

Horses exploding with amazing turn of foot on poly? Honestly I don't see it at all. Sure on turf you see a 11 flat furlongs by a powerful closer but I honestly havent noticed Poly resembling a quality exciting turf race. I really have no issue with poly I just think the racing tends to be blah.

But the point is not if the racing style is good or not just that when the sports stars are running on dirt and then can't run on poly it isn't good for the sport. Curlin(who I really had little use for) wasn't capable of showing himself as a star on poly and that was not OK for the sport

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

i used to think breeders cup day was a good thing but i have alot of doubts now. if it were to go under, which it could, it may not be bad for racing! it used to force horses to meet at least once but now its not even going to accomplish that! why have it?

In my opinion, eliminating the Breeders' Cup would be a wonderful thing for the sport of horse racing. It was a terrible idea in the first place, and the last five years have merely highlighted the stupidity of the event. This should not be a sport designed around one freaking day (or two), and as connections attempt to win championships off of one race instead of a body of work, the summer and fall meets across the country suffer. The BC obviously isn't the only factor in this development, but it sure hasn't helped. I think the sport would be healthier now if there had never been a Breeders' Cup, but by how much it is impossible to know.
But, even with all that being said, isn't it EXTREMELY unlikely that the BC will actually be going away any time soon....if ever? Instead of going away, the damn thing keeps expanding.

As for the Saratoga thing, I am glad to see people take a 'who cares' attitude about the BC. That is what it deserves. Half of the racing days at the Spa will be more interesting than the BC anyway, so who cares what races the Saratoga winners 'qualify' to run in?

[Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

spokeman jim gluckson said they wanted a classic race for win and your in at a northeast racetrack. his reason was suffolk was not having its race this year. last years edition was commentator and a bunch of high priced claimers, i guess thats the caliber of horses that the BC wants to attract(suffolk vs. saratoga....lol). they were not going to have any win and your in races at saratoga. the breeders cup has become a complete debacle. the best horses around will be racing here starting next week and for the next 3 months ny will have the best racing in the country. after saratoga, belmont has their championship meet. yet, the breeders cup entity acts like ny tracks barely exist. why? they are having it at the same track twice in a row. its just stupid! it won't happen but i wish belmont put together a card to compete with the breeders cup. i used to think breeders cup day was a good thing but i have alot of doubts now. if it were to go under, which it could, it may not be bad for racing! it used to force horses to meet at least once but now its not even going to accomplish that! why have it?

Totally agree Pinwheel. NYRA or whoever owns NY's big three should sell Agadirt and invest in barns in the green lot, hire the CT Indians to install and runa world class casino on the ground floor of the Belmont grandstand, build a hotel at each end of the facility. Install a 9 furl;ong dirt track inside the inner turf. The CT Indians generate $300 mil a year for the Nutmeg State. Use the wampum earned from the casino and hotel to stage a $20 mil day on the first week of October. Then things will be back to the way they used to be with championships being determined at Belmont Park in October.

The BC was a great concept 25 years ago but has basically ruined the sport in the last two decades.

[cakes44]

Alot of this "BC has ruined racing" talk would be gone if Belmont would move its championship day back a couple weeks next year.

[chucklestheclown]

I said Toga but I guess I meant Belmont. But it's too late now anyway, everyone's locked in and there's not the money floating around that there used to be. Unless you just want to watch 1000 Goldolphin prospects running around all fall and winter, it's over. (And that's not a bad thing imo).

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Kasept

The Whitney will be run at Saratoga on Aug. 8 and is expected to feature defending winner Commentator, who did not run in the Classic last year. As of Friday, those being considered for the Whitney included Asiatic Boy, Dry Martini, Finallymadeit, Macho Again, Arson Squad, and possibly Tizway.

You know racing is in bad shape when the highly forgettable Guided Tour would have been an odds-on Whitney favorite at his best .. and probably a national superstar if he was around today.

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by miraja2

In my opinion, eliminating the Breeders' Cup would be a wonderful thing for the sport of horse racing. It was a terrible idea in the first place, and the last five years have merely highlighted the stupidity of the event. This should not be a sport designed around one freaking day (or two), and as connections attempt to win championships off of one race instead of a body of work, the summer and fall meets across the country suffer. The BC obviously isn't the only factor in this development, but it sure hasn't helped. I think the sport would be healthier now if there had never been a Breeders' Cup, but by how much it is impossible to know.
But, even with all that being said, isn't it EXTREMELY unlikely that the BC will actually be going away any time soon....if ever? Instead of going away, the damn thing keeps expanding.

As for the Saratoga thing, I am glad to see people take a 'who cares' attitude about the BC. That is what it deserves. Half of the racing days at the Spa will be more interesting than the BC anyway, so who cares what races the Saratoga winners 'qualify' to run in?

i agree with most of what you are saying. but i feel the expansion is helping it go away, it did not help. site selection is definetly helping it go away because of lack of interest and the poly tracks (2 years in a row)don't help. you are right a body of proven races is a way better system, than this one race deal that they push. anyone that seriously follows horse racing realizes that ANYTHING can happen in one race and ONE race is a poor way to judge ability. thank goodness that everyone doesn't vote with just the breeders cup results or you would have horses running like twice a year! you are absolutely right about saratoga, the races are better anyway, every saturday and sunday is as good as it gets. two years ago i saw every winner of the breeders cup prep here in ny before they won at monmouth. the only one that didn't was kip deville. now the breeders cup committee thinks it needs one of these races in saratoga? maybe NYRA should of said "no thanks". belmont and saratoga will ALWAYS have the best racing in the summer and fall REGAURDLESS of what happens to the BC. and if aqueduct gets the slots, i predict new york racing will be far and away the best. the BC will be begging to come here or they will be all done !

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by miraja2

In my opinion, eliminating the Breeders' Cup would be a wonderful thing for the sport of horse racing. It was a terrible idea in the first place, and the last five years have merely highlighted the stupidity of the event. This should not be a sport designed around one freaking day (or two), and as connections attempt to win championships off of one race instead of a body of work, the summer and fall meets across the country suffer. The BC obviously isn't the only factor in this development, but it sure hasn't helped. I think the sport would be healthier now if there had never been a Breeders' Cup, but by how much it is impossible to know.
But, even with all that being said, isn't it EXTREMELY unlikely that the BC will actually be going away any time soon....if ever? Instead of going away, the damn thing keeps expanding.

As for the Saratoga thing, I am glad to see people take a 'who cares' attitude about the BC. That is what it deserves. Half of the racing days at the Spa will be more interesting than the BC anyway, so who cares what races the Saratoga winners 'qualify' to run in?

Without a BC there is no way in hell Bernardini, Invasor, and Lava Man would have all met up. I find it completely pointless to watch a sport where the top contenders don't meet so in that regard the BC is a good thing. Unfortunately the last two years on the synthetic has ruined it because we don't see the best horses match up and even when they do (like with Curlin against the Euros) the result feels cheapened.

The BC isn't the problem, the problem is the rest of the season. Do away with voting for the Eclipse Awards and go to a point system in each division that uses your top six races each year. Give people an incentive to race their horses all year instead of just trying to get them to peak on BC Day knowing that a win there will net you an Eclipse.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Without a BC there is no way in hell Bernardini, Invasor, and Lava Man would have all met up. I find it completely pointless to watch a sport where the top contenders don't meet so in that regard the BC is a good thing. Unfortunately the last two years on the synthetic has ruined it because we don't see the best horses match up and even when they do (like with Curlin against the Euros) the result feels cheapened.

The BC isn't the problem, the problem is the rest of the season. Do away with voting for the Eclipse Awards and go to a point system in each division that uses your top six races each year. Give people an incentive to race their horses all year instead of just trying to get them to peak on BC Day knowing that a win there will net you an Eclipse.

I don't understand why many people don't get this. If it wasn't for the BC, we would get very few matchups of top horses. The horses would pretty much be kept in their regions and never meet up. There are so many spots on the schedule to race that they can be kept apart easily.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't understand why many people don't get this. If it wasn't for the BC, we would get very few matchups of top horses. The horses would pretty much be kept in their regions and never meet up. There are so many spots on the schedule to race that they can be kept apart easily.

But KG, to many..there is no racing West of Albany