I cant disagree here because I just find the mechanics of the sport broken. If you do draw in new people it is very tough to retain them as customers. Thats a different discussion though.

seriously?

This is racings fault...blame is squarely on their shoulders. You can't blame fans for living in the "now".

When was the last time you saw a 19-0 horse going for back to back Classic wins? and a female to boot. It was historic.

Yes, seriously. The 2008 Derby was watched by something like four times as many people as the 2010 Breeders Cup Classic, and that was without the 60 Minutes special.

All casual fans are drawn to the Derby.

What is the point?

Should equipoise and winstrol still be allowed?
Of course they should. They are horse medications with valid uses. The fact that there was no regulation of them was really the issue. Overreacting and banning them has not seemingly helped horseracing in the least. Of course we can now brag that we banned steroids knowing full well that the people who dont believe the sport is on the up and up still dont believe it. And when your horse is in need of a treatment program, you can now waste money trying substitutes that dont work nearly as effectively, if at all.

You comparing apples and oranges, please compare BC to BC, and triple crown events.........no one I talked to could care less about BB, he was like the 5th horse in 8 years to go for a TC attempt.

Well, nobody I know watched the Breeders Cup because of Zenyatta, so I guess we're even then.

Well maybe next time they can expose medications that have no valid uses...the use of perftoran and the like in race horses.

Of course they should. They are medications with clear and necessary clinical indications in the horse. Use doesn't automatically equate to abuse. Of course abuse of any drug shouldn't be allowed.

Alot of the negative attention to horse racing regarding "OMG steroids!" was ignorance-based and simply wrong.

I shouldn't blame people for ignoring the the history of the sport or its greats? Did racing declare that everything that happened pre-Smarty Jones is not relevant? The sport does not do a great job with keeping its history alive, this is true. But it isnt as though there isnt a lot of information available.

Her going for a second BC Classic and being undefeated was historic but not worthy of her placement in the annals of history by her ardent supporters. There was no greater moment in baseball history than Kirk Gibson's walkoff HR to win game 1 of the 1988 series. Doesnt mean Gibson ranks with Willie Mays and Babe Ruth.

Doesnt the "good of racing" or "exposure for racing" encompass all races?

The difference being that was was legal and one is illegal

We are talking about people tuning into the moment, history....and from that standpoint Gibsons HR was every bit as historic as Willie Mays over the head catch or Ruth's called shot.

How far do they need to go back? I say 1989. Are you more of a 1980 person?

The problem is whether legal or not some people use whatever they can get their hands on to improve performance...and think that as long as it doesn't test, they are doing nothing wrong. You're a trainer and a smart one...I'm sure you know others who use stuff on their horses and have absolutely no clue as to what it does. Kind of like going back to Dutrow when asked why he gives his horses steroids...he didn't have an answer for the interviewer.

Comparing the Kentucky Derby to the BC is just silly, I am sorry you can't see the difference. Thats what apples and oranges meant, you knew that though.

FTFY

Since you are so into history, can you please name for me those performances, since Lady's Secret, by an older female on dirt against males that were superior to Zenyatta's Breeders' Cup Classic?