Derby Trail Forums
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Stronach reneges on SA surface change.. (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34679)

Danzig 03-03-2010 07:36 AM
i'm just glad i've made plans to go this year to churchill. might be my only bc in person.

Danzig 03-03-2010 07:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GBBob
From a fan's perspective, and not taking into account the surface at all, there really is no better place to attend a BC than SA. The physical plant is designed well, the lines are the shortest of any BC that I know of, the infield is a great viewing alternative and you have the best chance for good weather that time of year outside of GP (where it never will go again) and LS ,where it probably will never go again. Yeah..it's a pain for the East Coast people to get to and that is why I still think a three way geographical rotation is best, but I do see the reasoning behind a single track hosting.

That being said...and I have been on the bottom of the poly hater list, but the need to have a dirt track for BC races is becoming more and more evident and to award SA the permanant rights if they keep an artificial surface is a slap in the face to the Bettor and the Breeders, Trainers and Owners of dirt horses.

sure, weather wise i'd imagine it's the best place to be. but, business wise, it's not. if the bc wants to make this a profitable venture, you'd think they'd go to the place that draws the most bettors and achieves the highest handle.

GBBob 03-03-2010 07:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
sure, weather wise i'd imagine it's the best place to be. but, business wise, it's not. if the bc wants to make this a profitable venture, you'd think they'd go to the place that draws the most bettors and achieves the highest handle.
Isn't that what I said?..Dirt track and SA is the best track to host it.

randallscott35 03-03-2010 07:46 AM
The BC should not have a permanent host site. It should be just like the SuperBowl. Why is this so hard for everyone?

johnny pinwheel 03-03-2010 08:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
If you hate the BC then electing SA to host it permanently will be an awesome stroke of luck. Within a few short years the BC will fail and the racing will return to its roots, G1 races that feature horses competing against one another with key races being the benchmarks. Great dirt horses will point to the Fall Champsionship, great turfers will race at AP in the million and Secr. and order will be restored. That being said I really loved the BC and enjoy the racing immensely but I do see the damage it has done to racing and wonder if the industry wouldnt be better off without it?
i agree with you. The BC is great racing and its exciting. i've been to all the belmont editions and monmouth. i would not even want to go to santa anita. its to the point where i don't even bet those (poly)tracks and i'm not a 2 dollar bettor. keenland used to be one of my favorites, now its a joke. the BC won't last if its always there (SA) on the current track. it would get to the point where no dirt horses would bother showing. this would be good for racing however. people want to see the stars run, win or lose. this cherry picking of so called "prep" races(graded stakes no less) all leading to the BC is killing the game. horses run 2 or 3 times to get to the "cup". the price paid by not seeing these horses run is not good for the sport in the long term. i actually believe this is incentive for horses to race less and when you are talking about the big guns, that can't be good.

2Hot4TV 03-03-2010 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by alysheba4
.......brutal, this sport is doomed:(
At least in the state of California.

You truly have to be a rich king to pay the bills for a horse in training at Santa Anita.

Scav 03-03-2010 08:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV
At least in the state of California.

You truly have to be a rich king to pay the bills for a horse in training at Santa Anita.
What is the financial breakdown to have a horse in California? I find it hard to believe it is that much different then anywhere else.

freddymo 03-03-2010 08:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
What is the financial breakdown to have a horse in California? I find it hard to believe it is that much different then anywhere else.
why?

Bigsmc 03-03-2010 08:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GBBob
From a fan's perspective, and not taking into account the surface at all, there really is no better place to attend a BC than SA. The physical plant is designed well, the lines are the shortest of any BC that I know of, the infield is a great viewing alternative and you have the best chance for good weather that time of year outside of GP (where it never will go again) and LS ,where it probably will never go again. Yeah..it's a pain for the East Coast people to get to and that is why I still think a three way geographical rotation is best, but I do see the reasoning behind a single track hosting.

That being said...and I have been on the bottom of the poly hater list, but the need to have a dirt track for BC races is becoming more and more evident and to award SA the permanant rights if they keep an artificial surface is a slap in the face to the Bettor and the Breeders, Trainers and Owners of dirt horses.
That is a function of where you sit at each venue. I was at the BC in 1993 at SA and it was the worst betting lines I have encountered at any BC. For the record, I have attended BC's at Churchill, Woodbine, Hollywood, Santa Anita, Arlington Park, Monmouth and Gulfstream. Hands down, the worst betting lines I encountered were at SA.

Scav 03-03-2010 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
why?
I just don't see it being any more expensive then having a horse in NY, or Kentucky.

It isn't like the normal dayrate out there is 120$. Dayrate ends up being about 66%-70% of your monthly expense anyways

Scav 03-03-2010 08:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigsmc
That is a function of where you sit at each venue. I was at the BC in 1993 at SA and it was the worst betting lines I have encountered at any BC. For the record, I have attended BC's at Churchill, Woodbine, Hollywood, Santa Anita, Arlington Park, Monmouth and Gulfstream. Hands down, the worst betting lines I encountered were at SA.
You didn't roll there with me.

Patrick333 03-03-2010 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by randallscott35
The BC should not have a permanent host site. It should be just like the SuperBowl. Why is this so hard for everyone?
I agree with you. But, how many tracks want to host it? Wasn't that one of the reasons Santa Anita held two years in a row?

freddymo 03-03-2010 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
I just don't see it being any more expensive then having a horse in NY, or Kentucky.

It isn't like the normal dayrate out there is 120$. Dayrate ends up being about 66%-70% of your monthly expense anyways
You think the vetting expense is the same? You think transportation is the same? Day rate in Pa is 50 bucks vs. 100 in Ca. and the purses are larger in some regards WAY larger.
What do you do with a 15k claimer in Ca.. Kill yourself?

randallscott35 03-03-2010 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
You think the vetting expense is the same? You think transportation is the same? Day rate in Pa is 50 bucks vs. 100 in Ca. and the purses are larger in some regards WAY larger.
What do you do with a 15k claimer in Ca.. Kill yourself?
Pony rides at kids parties, a la Old School.

Bigsmc 03-03-2010 08:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
You didn't roll there with me.
You were still in diapers.

Scav 03-03-2010 08:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
You think the vetting expense is the same? You think transportation is the same? Day rate in Pa is 50 bucks vs. 100 in Ca. and the purses are larger in some regards WAY larger.
What do you do with a 15k claimer in Ca.. Kill yourself?
Transportation is the killer I am guessing, but it isn't like you are shipping from CA to KY every other day.

This isn't talking about Pa. I love Pa as much as you do. But some around here are trying to say it majorly expensive to have a horse out there when 1) it is majorly expensive to have a horse in general and 2) it probably costs about 4k to keep a horse in California (That isn't including any trainer purse %'s that you can deduct as an expense)

No one is talking about the opportunity to run against short fields, and while running for 'decent' purses

freddymo 03-03-2010 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
Transportation is the killer I am guessing, but it isn't like you are shipping from CA to KY every other day.

This isn't talking about Pa. I love Pa as much as you do. But some around here are trying to say it majorly expensive to have a horse out there when 1) it is majorly expensive to have a horse in general and 2) it probably costs about 4k to keep a horse in California (That isn't including any trainer purse %'s that you can deduct as an expense)

No one is talking about the opportunity to run against short fields, and while running for 'decent' purses
I think you are missing the point

Scav 03-03-2010 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
I think you are missing the point
Which is?

freddymo 03-03-2010 09:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
Which is?
If everything is more expensive(which it is) and the urse structure is poor the average industry horse can not reside in the state and the average operation like you guys cant be enticed to commence an operation in the state. PLUS the average industry operation that wishes to stay in the business is forced to move shop to a more cost effective environment.

Of course the elite operations that reside/race in the state that don't really have ANY P&L issues like a Juddemonte, Moss, Wygod, etc can stay there.

Scavs, regular race horses can not race in Ca.

Scav 03-03-2010 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
If everything is more expensive(which it is) and the urse structure is poor the average industry horse can not reside in the state and the average operation like you guys cant be enticed to commence an operation in the state. PLUS the average industry operation that wishes to stay in the business is forced to move shop to a more cost effective environment.

Of course the elite operations that reside/race in the state that don't really have ANY P&L issues like a Juddemonte, Moss, Wygod, etc can stay there.

Scavs, regular race horses can not race in Ca.
There purse structure is poor based on what you are running against, but they still pay out decent money. Maidens are still 45k....

They just don't spread it out like Pa does, where maidens are running for 40k, and 5 claimers are running for 18k. Its the 10 claimers only running for 13k that is the issue, those horses run for 24k in Pa

freddymo 03-03-2010 09:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
There purse structure is poor based on what you are running against, but they still pay out decent money. Maidens are still 45k....

They just don't spread it out like Pa does, where maidens are running for 40k, and 5 claimers are running for 18k. Its the 10 claimers only running for 13k that is the issue, those horses run for 24k in Pa
So if the MDN SL which are not the issue are 40k and the 10k claimers are 14k what do you do with your 10k claimer. Mexican slaughter house? Ship it for 3k east? Or sell it for 4k and realize that unless you get dead lucky with a real horse you cant have a decent modest 3 to 7 horse stable because once you arent a MDN SPL or significant Allowance type you cant possibly survive the 30% vig for racing in Ca.

hoovesupsideyourhead 03-03-2010 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
So if the MDN SL which are not the issue are 40k and the 10k claimers are 14k what do you do with your 10k claimer. Mexican slaughter house? Ship it for 3k east? Or sell it for 4k and realize that unless you get dead lucky with a real horse you cant have a decent modest 3 to 7 horse stable because once you arent a MDN SPL or significant Allowance type you cant possibly survive the 30% vig for racing in Ca.
send it to golden gate.or mike mitchell..it will run huge overnite 3 classes over its head

freddymo 03-03-2010 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
send it to golden gate.or mike mitchell..it will run huge overnite 3 classes over its head
GG 8k claimer go for 10k.Alert the media you have no reason to gamble in racing when it costs 3k a month (min) and you need to win 5 races a year and place 5 times to lose money. Your horse ran ten times finished first or second in all and you might have won a few thousand dollars..

Scav 03-03-2010 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
GG 8k claimer go for 10k.Alert the media you have no reason to gamble in racing when it costs 3k a month (min) and you need to win 5 races a year and place 5 times to lose money. Your horse ran ten times finished first or second in all and you might have won a few thousand dollars..
It is like there everywhere though Freddy. Newsflash, this isn't an easy game to make money, hell, if you can run at a 20% loss you are feeling really good about things.

Here is another thing to think about, and it will help make your point, but I don't think people realize that before you even see that win purse, you are hit for 10% for the jock and you owe your trainer 10-12%. So when you win that maiden claimer at Philly for 20k, you really only see 9600, or 48% of the purse.

freddymo 03-03-2010 10:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
It is like there everywhere though Freddy. Newsflash, this isn't an easy game to make money, hell, if you can run at a 20% loss you are feeling really good about things.

Here is another thing to think about, and it will help make your point, but I don't think people realize that before you even see that win purse, you are hit for 10% for the jock and you owe your trainer 10-12%. So when you win that maiden claimer at Philly for 20k, you really only see 9600, or 48% of the purse.
The point is not how tough it is the point is the premium to race in Ca. The vig (30%) makes the equation unbearble for development of ownership

asudevil 03-03-2010 10:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
I just don't see it being any more expensive then having a horse in NY, or Kentucky.

It isn't like the normal dayrate out there is 120$. Dayrate ends up being about 66%-70% of your monthly expense anyways
125/day with top echelon trainers.

hoovesupsideyourhead 03-03-2010 10:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
GG 8k claimer go for 10k.Alert the media you have no reason to gamble in racing when it costs 3k a month (min) and you need to win 5 races a year and place 5 times to lose money. Your horse ran ten times finished first or second in all and you might have won a few thousand dollars..
ok bulldoze the whole place..:wf

freddymo 03-03-2010 10:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
ok bulldoze the whole place..:wf
AGREED

richard 03-03-2010 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
GG 8k claimer go for 10k.Alert the media you have no reason to gamble in racing when it costs 3k a month (min) and you need to win 5 races a year and place 5 times to lose money. Your horse ran ten times finished first or second in all and you might have won a few thousand dollars..
I agree that lower level purse money should be increased a lot. The BC I watch on tv so I have no preference .

Cannon Shell 03-03-2010 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by randallscott35
I have a problem with #12. No one can replace Vic.
Vic is a dual qualifier

Cannon Shell 03-03-2010 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
There purse structure is poor based on what you are running against, but they still pay out decent money. Maidens are still 45k....

They just don't spread it out like Pa does, where maidens are running for 40k, and 5 claimers are running for 18k. Its the 10 claimers only running for 13k that is the issue, those horses run for 24k in Pa
It is more expensive to run a business in CA than just about anywhere. The labor laws force you to carry more employees, the insurance, cost of living, etc drives the prices of everything up.

2Hot4TV 03-03-2010 08:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
You actually think Stronach needs the potential revenue from the sale of Santa Anita to 'retire'?
Doesnt really matter what I think, but maybe.

Kasept 03-04-2010 08:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV
Doesnt really matter what I think, but maybe.
Frank Stronach's rather enormous personal fortune is unencumbered by the MEC situation.

Kasept 03-04-2010 08:21 AM
Horsemen dismayed by Stronach's stance
By Steve Andersen

http://www.drf.com/news/article/111176.html

ARCADIA, Calif. - Comments by Santa Anita chairman Frank Stronach that he intends to retain the track's troubled synthetic surface were met with disappointment Wednesday by some horsemen who would like the track to return to a dirt surface.

Darrell Vienna, the Southern California vice president of the California Thoroughbred Trainers, said his organization wants the existing Pro-Ride surface replaced in the near future. "The CTT has taken an official position for a return to dirt and anti-synthetic in general," Vienna said Wednesday. "What we all want is the safest surface we can get, whether it's synthetic or dirt. At this point, our members want a new natural dirt surface. The synthetic track has failed us in too many regards." Vienna said the CTT wants to "uncouple" Stronach's wish for deregulation in racing with the issue of racing surfaces, adding, "I don't want to minimize his concern for deregulation."

"The whole thing with the track surface was a surprise," said owner Arnold Zetcher, a member of the Thoroughbred Owners of California's board of directors. Zetcher said he is most concerned with safety, regardless of the type of surface used at Santa Anita. "After the Breeders' Cup, the sentiment was to stay" with synthetics, Zetcher said. "Then, the sentiment went to dirt. It shouldn't be about sentiments, it should be what's best for horses."

freddymo 03-04-2010 09:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
Frank Stronach's rather enormous personal fortune is unencumbered by the MEC situation.
You figure he is still super sizing the value

joeydb 03-04-2010 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
ok bulldoze the whole place..:wf
If by "the whole place" you mean "California", you may find a lot of people who agree with you.

Kasept 03-04-2010 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by freddymo
You figure he is still super sizing the value
Did you hear Jerry Jamgotchian's take on Stronach's possible gambit in regards to the deregulation? Was very interesting. He called in response to Davidowitz' suggestion that Stronach is a serial failure running racetracks and should sell out. Jamgotchian, who has been three steps ahead predicting every misstep by California racing, thinks Stronach is shrewdly planning to expand Santa Anita's race date domain.

Scav 03-04-2010 09:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
Did you hear Jerry Jamgotchian's take on Stronach's possible gambit in regards to the deregulation? Was very interesting. He called in response to Davidowitz' suggestion that Stronach is a serial failure running racetracks and should sell out. Jamgotchian, who has been three steps ahead predicting every misstep by California racing, thinks Stronach is shrewdly planning to expand Santa Anita's race date domain.
Isn't this exactly what happened down in Florida(deregulation) after he purchased Gulfstream?

Kasept 03-04-2010 10:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
Isn't this exactly what happened down in Florida(deregulation) after he purchased Gulfstream?
Deregulation happened 10 years before Stronach bought Gulfstream (1999). The war between Brunetti and Gulfstream had been well underway.

randallscott35 03-04-2010 10:05 AM
Gulfstream blows. Bring back Hialeah full time.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:08 PM.
Page 3 of 4 < 12 3 4 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.