Derby Trail Forums
Page 5 of 7 « First < 34 5 67 >
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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:52 PM.
Page 5 of 7 « First < 34 5 67 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

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