La Traviata, Dream Rush, and Diamond Stripes off the top of my head.

turf sprint - who will show up? its a great idea in theory but i cant see it getting the quality of the HK sprint.
dirt marathon - terrible name, most of the top quality 12f horses are top quality 10f horses anyway..
juvi turf fillies - turf race didnt look great this year, this race could be awful..

I agree there. People complain if races are shortened, they complain if races are lengthened. Some complain that the rest of the world seems more interested in turf and we're crazy for being dirt-centric, then others get upset at the idea that turf is getting more play because the foundation is just not there yet. I understand the dilution issue if you cover every conceivable distance and surface, that's absolutely a concern. I do think we'll have some lousy fields potentially but the BC folks are looking at their job glass half full (of handle, hopes and dreams, more handle...) and is it really their fault many owners, trainers, and breeders aren't thinking about getting a horse all year to the end of the year to run a championship race and decide instead to tip toe with their hothouse horses? They used to have that mile and a half on dirt distance in mind, at least some did anyway. As for who's going to win that 1 1/2 (that I would've preferred to see at 1 3/4 to ideally 2 miles or so) I am actually a little intrigued by the situation in which they've put themselves. Not sold but intrigued. I'm not going to complain about this one, I've been wanting more route races, I'm gonna hush and let them give me one. I will however do like I do with the juvenile turf preps and critique the lead up. Can't just throw those things into a vacuum. Speaking of which you just knew they'd pad the schedule once the 3 races came on Friday...I knew they couldn't help themselves and were eying this as a KY Oaks-day style deal but not just for the ladies.

Amen. There's so much irony I don't know where to look. The industry's getting so full of blame--one side blames the other and then turns around and causes part of the problem. It's almost becoming a chicken and the egg deal right now. The downfall of stamina definitely coincided with the BC era but that was also the glut in the stallion market right? Bubble days with the yearling purchases,etc I mean. That played a role in 'bubble'-wrapping the expensive purchases and protecting them from too much pesky racing and wear and tear. (sarcasm) These animals cost money don'tcha know. Is the argument that the BC fed into the bubble-fest? You'll have to forgive my slight obliviousness and educated guess at the connection. I wasn't really terribly focused on adult matters at that age. Not to date the rest of you but some folks here have more of a first hand experience of the change in the industry. It helps to have things put in context for us spring chickens.

Yup, the first thing I chuckled at was the going ape over the 12f when my reaction was to the juvenile turf race for fillies. Surely there's enough spots in the juvenile turf and not much difference in the sexes at that age that you'll get a fuller field with just the one. That's not crazy right? Are people that afraid to go co-ed on turf at 2? Turf mares face boys a lot more in Europe, really it's in our interest if they're trying to follow that model to just throw em all in the pot and start it young. I like the concept of the Breeders' Cup, not gonna lie, I just feel execution's an issue because there are so many variables and breeding dollars are just nuts. I'll applaud the effort to promote turf and distance here because I've always thought that would be a good idea (though through the BC, that's a whole can of worms) and I'll spend the next few years watching in between my fingers like you do with scenes in movies where you really don't know if you're gonna enjoy the thing but you can't quite help yourself.

Let's not joke about the Greys only race thing. Some folks would truly jump at it. ;)

I thought he meant more a dilution in the sense that the BC wagering dollars were spread out across two days instead of one. Clearly most people who bet on the first day and lost had less to wager on the second day. just my guess. It was true in my case anyway.

Maybe I am being naive but why the all personal anomisity toward the Breeders Cup? I understand what many of you are saying but the fact is the ship has sailed on mny of these subjects like the over focus on the Breeders Cup to the detriment of some traditional races. It is like bitching about the DH in baseball or 3 point line in basketball.

As an owner/trainer I can say that it is hard not to appreciate the addition of a turf sprint or 2 year old filly turf race. I'm sure many of you would think the same if you owned a horse that might possibly be good enough to compete in one of these new races.

As discussed in another far too long thread I can't see why anyone would bitch about the purses for these races being too big or the fact that the fields will be weak or not up to BC quality. There are tons of races that come up weak or with short fields throughout the year that no one call for the removal of. For instance most graded non turf races run in California.

The philosophical reasons behind the complaints are baffling to me. So what if we have a turf sprint champion? Or a 2 year old turf champion. Or a champion miler? What difference does it make to your bankroll or enjoyment of the game? I personally thought Matt Holiday should have been the NL MVP but he when Rollins got it I didn't say that baseball sucks and it is a conspiracy. I mean I dont agree, it was close and I hadn't thought about it until I wrote this since I am trying to think like a fan instead of a participant.

The "dirt" marathon seems like a silly idea but who really cares? There is constant harping about the shortening of the major races but when they put this kind of race in (though it seems very arbitrary and like as Andy said an attention deflector) everybody is against it or unbelieveable says it is too short.

The Breeders Cup is far from a perfect organization and some of the things they do are certainly debatable but I can only see one reason why you guys should bitch about the addition of these races and no one has brought it up yet.

Actually I meant it the way Chuck interpreted it....but your comments may make more sense.

When I think, "home run horse", I think of a horse that wins on the track. I am wrong.

In this weeks issue of Blood-Horse:

"Forestry - Home Run Sire"

"The long-ball home run in the Thoroughbred business is the Stallion Prospect. Two of the hottest Sire Prospects on the horizon, who cumulatively stand to generate over $5 Million in income this next year alone, are by Storm Cat's sensationally consistent home run son Forestry."

The home run in the TB business is not an exceptional race horse, not even a proven stallion - it is a stallion "prospect".

weather and a lack of good horses..imo.. if the product is good enough we will bet..hell look at the delta crock pot..im also thinking s.a. will attract a better euro contingent.. thus bringing a "hatton" like pump to the pools but win and your in must go.........

People are " bitching ", Chuck, because it's a topic of interest. The BC has run roughshod over major racing to the point of making a year of once historically great racing almost superfluous. Luckily, these new races won't make many races meaningless because there are absolutely no races to substantiate them.

It is the BC that named themselves the " World Championship " races and now they are making supposed championships for divisions that barely exist and only do so at a very mediocre level. We have every right to bitch about how preposterous they are.

None of this particularly affects me personally as I deal with racing on a day to day level and from a betting standpoint these major races have very little affect on me. However, from the standpoint of a fan of the game, which I am, I hate to see the BC further marginalize racing.

Is it proven that the Truf Sprint will be 6.5f? Or will it bhe 5-6f? I think it should be 6.5f if they hold it as SA. As I said before when this subject was brought up a few weeks ago, the
the "Breeders Cup Down-the-Hill-Mil" sounds like the coolest name ever. 6.5f seems to be a funky distance anywhere else though.

I think it's funny that you continue to take the word "championships" so literally in this case.

I still cant see how a fillies turf race or turf sprint hurts the sport or marginalizes it. It is not like Saratoga is going to flip the Hopefull with the With Distinction or drop the Forgeo for a turf sprint.

I would assume they will run it at the turf sprint distance that each track can best accomodate

Just pointing out how full of sh it they are. I didn't claim they were championship races.....they did.

The money would be better spent elsewhere.....a lot better spent.

They just added a 4th race. A right handed 2 mile race with one hurdle to jump 200 meters from the finish.

Compared to where a lot of it($$$) has been going these races are almost the equivalent of charities

the evil knievel...?

because nobody will have the time to handicap all the races?

I'm not bitching about it, just making comments. I don't really care one way or the other. To me it just seems that its heading in the direction of trying to be all things to all people. Like they are adding a "Claiming Crown" aspect. also its going in the direction of that goofy Calder deal where you have backwards races, etc. In the end it seems like it might end up diluting the overall quality of the events and that we might not see the great betting opportunities like we had in the past.

Also what will the total races now be, 14? and six of them are turf races? what is the real ratio in the US of turf to dirt? 1 out of 10 maybe? Its like suddenly we have to have all these turf championships when throughout the year its much less a factor. I don't mind turf races but shouldn't the championships be supported by a regular season?

Somewhere, someone probably said that about the Marlboro.

I expect the allowance/stakes turf sprints out west to decrease in field size and quality...and using quality is a real stretch. Really what's the use in running when there is $1 million race at the end of the season?

At least they can fill the card with another maiden claimer instead if the turf sprints don't fill.

If the ratio was like a typical day of US racing there would be 6 -6 furlong races, 3 - 1 1/16th, 2 turf races and a few statebreds.

I believe that some of the lessor dirt stakes for 2 year olds especially at the smaller tracks may morph into turf stakes which would be a positive for racing. There are too many of the same options leading up to the BC and I think that some tracks may do like River Downs did.

The reason that a regular fan should complain about the addition of the races is that the price of attending the event/events will go up. Like virtually all other sports they will surely tie in the first day with the second and probably raise the prices across the board. Now that is something worth fighting against!

The Marlboro was a sponsorship race that ended when Marlboro pulled out

Because the you will need points to qualify since the race will be overfilled

Phillip Morris pulled out when the race couldn't draw entries and lost it's audience. The last year the race drew a field of 5 and was on ESPN.

Directly a result of the Breeders Cup.

Why do fans need to fight in the first place? Any sane person would take their wagering dollar elsewhere. There is really no need to fight morons. They'll never change.

The day the industry listens to the gambler/fan and is able to implement the good ideas and not the bad ones is the day The Pale Horse comes from the Heavens and prevents anyone from enjoying the changes.

I love the Australian greys-only race. It drew a good field!

Which will result in some of the good horses in the division not running in the summer because they already have enough points which results in weaker fields. Hooray.

Please correct me if I am wrong, Aren't most of the turf sprint races run between five to six furlongs? Isn't Santa Anita the only track that runs Six and half furlongs on the turf. I though they were about six and half furlongs on the turf.

What determines whether these new races are a success or failure? Will it be field size? Quality of field size? Attendance? Just curious....................

Breeders cup is starting to look more like Calder Extreme day

Exactly.

One thing about 2008 and the addition of these 3 races -

- combined with AWT track instead of dirt, it immediately makes the event more foreign friendly.

Absolutely.....now mediocrities from all over the world can converge on our supposed biggest races like cockroaches.

I guess I'll never understand why people say that the BC hurts racing. The idea was to have a series of races at the end of the year where everyone focuses on being and the best meet the best to determine the champions. That is basically what we get every year with the BC. That's bad? People say it's so bad because it's hurt other races run during the year, races like the JCGC and Turf Classic turning into basically prep races. So what. They are still huge prep races. Didn't this year's Classic winner run there? Didn't last year's runner up run there? The 2003 HOY Mineshaft? Cigar, Skip Away, Easy Goer, Slew o' Gold, AP Indy, Turkoman, Gate Dancer. All of those horses came back to run pretty well in the Classic. What has changed is NOT the races but the attitudes of the PEOPLE involved with today's horses. From the breeders to the trainers, THEY are the ones that have messed the game up, NOT the BC races. It's them that don't allow horses to be able to withstand racing 8-10 times a year anymore. So now, because people can't breed or condition a horse to run more than eight times a year and they "need" two months between starts, they have to cut back schedules. That is not the fault of the BC. Trainers like Pletcher and Frankel are as much to blame, even moreso in my opinion, than blaming the BC.

As for the BC being what caused a lot of this shortening in the first place, I find that to be absolutely ridiculous. For those that have been around longer than I have, I know that for you, the championship distance was always 12f or maybe even 16f when the JCGC was run at that distance. But for as long as I've been around, the 10f distance has always been referred to as the championship distance. So the BC put in a race at that distance. That was bad? They put in a sprint championship at ......6f. That was bad? What is the distance considered the championship distance on grass? It's 12f and the BC put in a race at that distance. That some of the races like the JCGC, Vosburgh and Super Derby decided that they needed to shorten up to become better fits for the BC races, blame that on the racing secretaries and the horsemen that asked for it. Don't blame it on the BC. The 12f of the JCGC was just fine for Easy Goer, SoG, Turkoman and Gate Dancer. It was the breeding of horses that could no longer handle running 12f anymore and especially running 12f and returning to run 10f in a few weeks that caused them to shorten the races. That's not the fault of the BC.

Champs Elyssees for 2008 BC Classic

Whether Diamond Stripes ever "ran" on Saturday is up for debate but he certainly at least left the starting gate. For the two fillies not running in the BC Sprint was probably the best thing that could have happened to them. They were toasted by much cheaper speed in the FM Sprint and had no business against the boys.

In the case of Corinthian and Discreet Cat both would have likely skipped the BC altogether to run in the Cigar Mile if the races hadn't been added. I think the Cigar Mile suffered more than any BC races did cause of the additional three races.

wow...just.....wow!

Yeah pretty much. I mean what a horror, more races with big fields filled with horses from all over the country and possibly the world. Races which will have huge pools in which to bet into. I mean it is sooooo baaaad for the game. The negativity around here is unbelievable.

Extra races that will reduce the pools on Saturday. Outstanding.

I get what you are saying to an extent. Did the addition of races this year hurt field size? Probably, but the weak dollar probably played a larger role in keeping non-U.S. horses away. But still....I just don't like it.
For example, if they expanded the NFL playoffs from 12 to 16 teams I would hate that too. As a fan of the sport, it would stand to reason that I would enjoy having a couple more playoff games to watch. But it would piss me off because at some level, I feel the playoffs should be reserved for really good teams that earned their way into the playoffs by accomplishing something meaningful in the regular season. I think the same holds true for the Breeders' Cup. As a fan, I just don't like to see a bunch of horses with questionable talent in "Breeders' Cup" races. It might not make a lot of sense, but as a fan, it just bothers me.