Derby Trail Forums - Which (if any) 3-yr-olds will run next year?

Page 3 of 5

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- Breeders' Cup Archive (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=22)

- - Which (if any) 3-yr-olds will run next year? (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17472)

freddymo

10-29-2007 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

I think it's ridiculous not to root for Street Sense because he's going off to breed. Either he's good enough or he's not. If he is and this is your reasoning, it's pure spite which is crazy.

Regarding next year, I think they're thinking Dubai World Cup with Lawyer Ron and frankly I enjoy seeing him do what he's been doing. This isn't some sad attempt to eek out another race, he's G1 caliber and seems to thoroughly enjoy himself. They get the purse money (which let's face it, is why he's still going), we get to keep seeing him, and should he start to wind down before they choose to retire--which I doubt--the finish position contractually limits him from being driven into the ground.

Doesn't Any Given Saturday already have a stud deal? They bought shares in his dad too. Maybe we could see AGS and LR go at it in Dubai if they opt to keep him going. I wonder what's going on with Curlin--does he not have a deal due to his owner-situation craziness? It's either that or they're playing hard to get. It would be nice to see him too but I'll wait for the announcement.

Nobody's brought up Rags to Riches who I figure would've been retired already if they were going to. I think they've had more than enough opportunities. I realize they'd probably send Rags to Riches to Storm Cat or something but maybe they could consider Smart Strike (I just hope $75,000 isn't under breeding in their minds, I think the pedigree holds up). Pulls in Mr. Prospector and Curlin has that over Deputy Minister who's Rags' BM. You'd get a similar family mix in addition to the Mr. P/AP Indy that works out so well so often. That's another reason I think they'll try to bring her back, Storm Cat's no spring chicken so if they wanted to go that route they'd be trying to do that now. His book's already going down.

Don't you think they will send Rags to GC for free?

SniperSB23

10-29-2007 09:09 AM

Curlin winning was probably worst case for 3yos returning next year. Street Sense and Hard Spun were already gone so it wouldn't have mattered if they won. By Curlin winning they are now considering retiring him which likely wouldn't have been the case had he lost.

philcski

10-29-2007 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

open wound means infection, don't forget that barbaro suffered from a massive infection, and he did not have an open wound when he broke down.
also, because of the dislocation, the blood supply was cut off. that is the worst thing that can happen, as there is no chance once the supply is gone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

If what was said was true there is no chance of recovery...multiple fractures to sesamoids and conjular to cannon with open wound.

I stand corrected then, it was most definitely dislocated. I hope ESPN did their best to avoid showing it, it was very ugly. :(

Dunbar

10-29-2007 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While agree that it would be nice if horses raced longer the idea that the game will somehow be revived if a few of the big horses run at 3 is just not true.
1st problem - The greater the chance of a popular horse having an untimely ending which does far more to hurt the game than one staying in training and running does to help it. Making anything mandatory will always make people make questionable decisions especially when so much money is involved. The truth is that I am sure that you can get a much lower insurance rate if a horse is not in training and some may retire and sit the year out anyway. Or run in the Dubai race then retire.

Quote:

2nd Problem - Racing fans are going to watch the big events regardless. New fans may not know who the hell is running anyway. Beside a few big days a year, it is not like the horses will run much anyway. Racings problem is that it needs new fans that bet, not just new fans.

I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.

Quote:

3rd Problem - See recent campaigns of Funny Cide

Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar

Dunbar

10-29-2007 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Good point. That's sort of a Catch-22. If he loses, we get him back, but then maybe he's not all that great and the attraction of having him back isn't that great. Having won the BC Classic, we'd REALLY like to see him back next year, but maybe now he gets retired.

We're left rooting against all the really good ones winning so that they won't retire them!

--Dunbar

pgardn

10-29-2007 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merasmag

that was the old computer, which i, along with the brilliant macncheese half a world away, taught fluent english in less than 3 days..my fourth one is this litle laptop puppy which u will regret my having wireless capability on sometime by derby 2012, and

don't degrade yourself by goin down to the pillowhead level, i guarantee you i have put more into the industry this summer than you have in your life, not even countin paying extra for tvg...

i think your tv argument would make more sense re nascar fans; the ncaa, nfl, mlb etc all have much more $ than the nyra will ever have, even if they finally wised up and got a national horseracing authority like they should (but maybe i should be a little careful what i wish for there)...

i somehow doubt you watching the bc, or the derby for that matter, on tv without putting any money into it except ordering a pizza made pizza hut decide to pay more for the broadcast rights

Magma do you go to the track?
Do you actually go to the track and bet?

I think I might actually put more into Street Sense's coffers than you do wagering at some maggot infested OTB. Get ye to Arlington or Hawthorne and then talk to me.

Cannon Shell

10-29-2007 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Good point about the risk of the untimely ending, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Anguish is part of the game. The Barbaro saga did nothing to hurt horseracing. Horseracing got more good press that year than any year in the past 20.

You may be right about some owners sitting out rather than paying higher insurance, but I'm skeptical of that.

I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.

Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar

You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.

If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

Riot	10-29-2007 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hacker Craft will run next year

Whew! I was searching Blood-Horse for same tonight, just saw this.

Byk's list ALWAYS gets the early, accurate news! ;)

Dunbar

10-30-2007 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

Quote:

Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.

I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.

Quote:

If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar

Cannon Shell

10-30-2007 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I'm saying that the spector of a breakdown is not a reason to rush a healthy horse off to the breeding shed. And I'm saying that Barbaro's breakdown brought the sport more positive press than any other event of the last 20 years.

In general, I don't think the occasional loss of a top horse to a breakdown will hurt the sport enough to offset the benefit of keeping the stars in training.

I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.

Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar

Barbaro's story while unique in its effects will be the exception rather than the rule. If GW had been Street Sense the outcry in the US would be much more severe. We as an industry have no way to defend or spin breakdowns that will be acceptable to the general public. The more the public gets familar and attached to a horse the worse the kickback will be if there is a tragedy associated with him.

Almost every sports gambler that I know plays horses but maybe I am the exception to the rule because of where I live and where i grew up.

The farms will not allow their investments to contine to run and possibly decrease in value. Once a horse reaches a peak value there is no reason to risk them losing that value especially considering insurance premiums. If they sit out a year they sit out a year. Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?

SniperSB23

10-30-2007 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?

Seems to me if you didn't allow any horses to race in the country that were offspring of stallions under five and didn't allow any horses to stand here if they stood in another country before they turned five that it would decrease the stallion prospect enough in value to not make much sense for the majority of stallion prospects to stand elsewhere for that one year.

Cannon Shell

10-30-2007 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

It would also lead to issues when dealing with Southern Hemisphere horses. It is an interesting idea but there are too many problems associated with it. Capping the number of foals per year does the same thing without all the complications. You need to find a way to decrease the value of the stallions a bit without to help the entire market. By capping the number of foals, you will increase the quality of books of mares to the top stallions by eliminateing the lesser mares. That in turn means many mares currently being overbred will need to find a lesser stallion which in turn will lead to lesser mares at the bottom of the chain finding racing a better option.

SniperSB23

10-30-2007 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

How about foals by stallion age? If you want to stand a 3yo he can only cover 20 mares. If you want to stand a 4yo he can only cover 50 mares. Then you have a set amount for 5yos and up. You could easily factor in Southern Hemisphere horses that way by setting a number for the SH horses by age. If you truly have a horse that can't race and want to stand him at stud as a 3yo or 4yo you could on a limited basis but if you have a horse capable of racing there is less incentive to send him to the shed while limited to a book of 50.

Cannon Shell

10-30-2007 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

That is still too complicated. Cap the number at 90 for any age and you will lower the value of the stallion but they will still be valuble. They may raise the prices a bit to compensate but the market will not bear a wholesale rise in stud fees, they are overvalued now. You cant destroy the breeding industry because thousands of horses are owned and raced by those same people. Racing horses will be the first thing they will cut out.The 2 industries need to be more aligned and by nudging the value of stallions down it will have a trickledown effect on the whole breeding industry which should help the racing side. But doing things radically wont help. The fact is that many of our biggest owners are involved because they are trying to hit a homerun with a stallion deal. You have to still have that carrot to dangle or they will go elsewhere which will not be a good thing for anyone. But if the top were lowered while still being lucrative the same effect of them leaving should not be felt.

Danzig

10-30-2007 04:13 PM

farms make a deal based on what they know a horse can draw at stud, x's the first couple years they can get that fee, x's # of mares bred. that # sets the initial price. most farms who set up these huge deals know they have to 'get out' after those first few seasons, while the name of that horse is still big, and before any of those first crops hit the track--hopefully to do well, but more often then not, horses stud fees decrease.
once they lock in a price, they can't take the chance of the horse going in a tailspin and lowering his value at stud. much as we like to think WE understand that horses are not robots, the truth is that losses will lower future value--take discreet cat for instance. he's really lowered his value. of course he's going to stand for his owner, so it's not as tho a big syndicate was put together, and there are part owners to keep happy. of course at times you also have horses such as lawyer ron, who improved his value at four, and will command a higher fee at retirement now than had he foregone racing this year.
also, once a syndicate is put together, and value set, insurance will have to meet that, pushing premiums thru the roof if you continue to race the horse--that's what forced smartys retirement.

Cannon Shell

10-30-2007 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by merasmag

why do you say that? i think stud fees are ridiculously cheap (cpt for maybe corinthian)...plus, don't most deals also include some sortof deal on the foal(s)...the owners on both sides would just have to get into bed with each other too...for the good of the game of course:cool:

Stud fees are only considered cheap in bizzaro world (see Jerry Seinfield)

Danzig

10-30-2007 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Stud fees are only considered cheap in bizzaro world (see Jerry Seinfield)

street sense at 75k
hard spun is 50k
discreet cat, 30k
rockport harbor (i just read) 20k--that's high imo.
hell, i think they're all high anymore. look at friends lake for instance!

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 PM.

Page 3 of 5

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page