They should just offer discounted or free admission for women on the Saturday card instead of segregating the horses.

the actual wording in plessy was "equal but seperate".

one of the great mysteries how that got reversed in common usage.

sponsored by Planters...

This lady is holding out for a George Foreman Grill.

I'm looking forward to putting on my best apron, and saving enough S & H grocery coupons to get a special half-priced "Female Friday" admission ticket!

Has anybody else bothered to e-mail the Breeders Cup with their thoughts?

why, we don't matter, they would do it anyways. The only way it would go back to normal is if handle was down 10%, which it might be anyways given it is on a synthetic

Look for special admission coupons on your next box of tampons!

The last time the BC tried to market the addition of the 3 new races Steve had a representative from the BC powers to be on the show, who also was from West Point Stables if memory serves.

The gentleman was a fairly stand up guy answering questions about why the changes were made. I was wondering who you were going to get this time Steve to explain why it was necessary to segregate the event to boys and girls and how they saw this as a step forward when the best day in racing has been ruined to be replaced by two mediocre days.

Given that the higher profile owners who are represented on the BC governing body are likely race fans to some extent, is it not obvious how poor a decision this is when they look at the event as players and fans aside from business.

Usually when something in the realm of the world does not make sense it has something to do with money.....but for the life of me I cannot see how this will make them more money as the serious players leave their Dead Presidents
at home rather than wager serious coin on turf sprints and other random events....what am I missing here??

I wonder what John Gaines would think of this? Is this what he envisioned? Maybe it was?

This will make them more money in the short term. More races to get sponsors for, control of the venue for another day, higher ticket prices neatly packaged into a weekend event, more handle simply because of more races...

But aside from the weather last year didn't they already have that with the new races.....won't they actually hurt handle by eliminating the toughest P6 in racing and P4's that payed like no other.....they split it up and destroyed the handle

Those who don't wager by computer...they'll be forced to come to their track 2 days in a row.

Then once you are there on a day you normally aren't there...you're going to buy food...drinks...parking...and you're going to play races you wouldn't normally play because you're going to get bored waiting for the BC to start, so you'll probably blow half your money on some cheap claiming race...then you realize you'll need money for the BC still so you'll withdraw from the ATM and lose some more....but you still have to see the male division...

So then you're going to come back the next day and spend more money on food, drinks, etc

I see why they do it, even though I don't like it.

I knew Breeders' Cup was in trouble when they stuck "World Championship" in their title. The BC is about as much a world championship as the World Series. If it weren't for a few trainers like Dermot Weld, Andre Fabre, and Aidan O'Brien, the Euros would be uniformly second stringers (Red Rocks, etc.). Southern Hemisphere horses don't attend, because November is spring, their horses are just gearing up for the classic season, and they aren't going to miss the Melbourne Cup or Carlos Pellegrini carnivals to pay shipping and enormous supplementary fees on the long shot that their horse adapts to US conditions fast enough. (The purse structures in South America are such that a champion horse may not have earned enough money to pay a full BC supplement, sire not nominated, foal not nominated.)

"World Championships" sounds like something a PR flack thought up and management bought into it as a means to attrack new fans. But it is lie.

And so is "win and you're in". A non-nominated horse cannot get in by winning one of the designated races; he still has to pay the supplement. The lack of basic understanding of the meaning of English words in the upper BC management is staggering.

I wonder what this will do for TV revenue. The BC has never been a big TV success. Few non-hardcore fans were willing to sit down for 4-5 hours of nonstop horseracing. But stretching the races out over 2 days, while adding races of less interest can only make whatever TV interest there was all but non-existent.

--Dunbar

Kasept, ESQ.

Though it is just speculation I would guess that ESPN has had a hand in the entire process

it's less of a success due to moving the coverage to espn, which many still do not have. so they can't watch even if they want to.

I would have to say that if you live in this country and dont have ESPN or access to it there is a good chance that you may not be of vital interest

believe it or not there are still a lot of people without cable/dish, and they complain about any type of coverage moving from the traditional networks. not sure what they call them in your neck of the woods, but i usually refer to them as tightwads.

I hope you are investing in a digital signal converter soon. You won't get any signal with the conventional rabbit ears by this time next year.