What a great show watching 10 jockeys strangle their mounts thru a 26 second opening quarter and a 51 second half. Maybe they should just make all the races 2 or 3 furlongs. At least it would look athletic.

All this bitchin' and moanin' -- "I've lost interest", "I won't play!" -- come Fall of '08, all these whiners will be on here with their "2,8/4,11,5/4,7/all posts. When RM wins 5 races, Ateam will proclaim "that's horrible racing." When Funnycide wins, we'll hear, "see, glorified claimers out there!"

When it's all said and done, we'll see the usual headlines: Another record handle, so and so upsets, a spill, blah, blah, blah....

From what I've seen on this board, most are gamblers and will bet any horse, anywhere if they think money is to be made.

How do you get the audacity to know that SA with a new surface will illicit an early jock stranglehold?

is it possible they would level the purses between the classic and the turf? the only real problems i've seen stated here are "i haven't figured out how to handicap this stuff" and "the turf horses will run for more money in the classic".

the first one is a personal problem. the second one is something someone needs to think through. i think if the new surface is as kind as hollypark there may be a preference for it among overseas shippers vs. the usual good (hard) conditions on sa grass.

it really is a different world now isn't it?

I'll be there too!...and Scuds is coming, and MMSC will be ensconced in the Finish Line box seats to root for the Euros!:D

Nah, broski, I haven't bet a So. Cal. track since the summer, and don't intend to anytime soon. Thanks for singling me out, though.

My dude Scuds hasn't seen the light of day in eight years, I doubt he's risking turning into a bat just because the Breeders' Cup is in town.

pedigree could become a factor depending on how the surface turns out.

Last year we had two turf horses in the BC Classic who didn't stand much of a chance. Both out of the sire Danehill. At Hollywood cushion-track, they would have run better races and wouldn't have been automatic tosses.

I don't like any Grade 1 race being run on polytrack. On the bright side the payoffs could be very nice.

I will take the 5th on that one! You never know....

That's a good point. Every year, the Danehills are automatic tosses in the dirt races, and now they probably will have to be considered.

How have you been able to formulate this opinion?

I feel it is a different surface and a fair share of high class dirt horses may not perform as well on polytrack.
When we have a Grade 1 polytrack race that usually means that it was formerly a Grade 1 dirt race. Mainly I like the dirt races and as a fan/observer don't want to see them go :).

And I will be there with bells on. Might even bring ya some special cajun cocktails. :eek: :D I done put in my reservations at the "Brown Hotel"!! ;)

We just ran the B.C. on an incredibly biased track,and most everybody still didn't seem to mind much.You pathetic losers just read the lady say her horses' legs hold up better on it,but you want them to run on the more dangerous surface(a surface that they can't seem to ever get fair on B.C. Day, anyways.) EITHER YOU GIVE A SHT ABOUT THE HEALTH OF THESE HORSES ,OR YA JUST DON'T.We actually have no choice out here,we get pathetic field sizes if we were to just keep running on dirt.That's just a fact.

Joey,I gotta better chance of going out for dollar day this Saturday than I do of going to B.C. 2008. I WENT TO THE 1ST ONE AT HOLLYWOOD PARK.I don't care much about it anymore.People get their horses ready for their one shot to win a B.C. race,and the track is so far out of whack that only half the field(front,back,outside,or inside) has a chance to win.That is pathetic.

Turf horses dont necessarily run well on Poly. Look at Wait A While. Then you also have some horses who can run on dirt and Poly. Look at Street Sense and Quay. Then you could also use Hard Spun as an example as well. The reason why bettors like Keeneland is because of the payoffs that are happening over there. Also, I like the races. I dont care how fast they run the quarter in, and then they sprint home. I think that is more exciting than watching a horse go to the lead and stay there (so called merry-go-round race) like Sinister Minister. The only problem I have is that it will be less than a year since the track surface will be put down. Other than that, it will be a success.

i do wonder one thing....

how does the graded stakes committee justify refusing grade one status to new races, due to not being run under the same conditions for two years (since they're new) but all graded races now on poly, rather than dirt, remain at their current status--but turf moved to dirt due to weather loses its status for that race?

Yes, and look at the horses who beat Wait A While.....

Do you realize that the top three finishers in the Commonwealth all exited one-mile races on the turf?

Wait A While, had far and away the best dirt form of anyone in her race last Saturday.

Hollywood Park's Cushion track surface isn't much better than the hideious polytrack at KEE. To me, that's not the same horse racing I grew up with and have been a fan of for all my life.

I can understand using the surface in the North-East, at cheaper tracks that are sensative to weather....from what I've seen so far, it doesn't belong anywhere else in my personal opinion.

But hey, the interests of the horseman/commerical breeders always trump what the fans and the betting public want.

Don't the interests of the horses matter at all. What you seem to be saying is that certain segments of "the betting public" are more concerned with their pocketbook and their subjective enjoyment of the races than the welfare of the horse - and the safety of the horses should be relegated below the "wants" of the bettors.