From the NYRA Web Page
 

First Post Noon (seriously, can't they start the races at 1030 or 11am? Do they need to have a big crowd for the NW1X and the MSW 6f Turf race?)

13 total races - Last Post at 8pm (great day of racing for the "fans" except it's basically a 10 hour day for people that want to see the whole card, nevermind trying to get out of there)

Belmont Post Time is approx 640 (have they lost their minds? Just another case of the fans taking the worst of it. 640 is way, way, way too late!)

Jeez, some people just love to complain.

The way Belmont does it is better than the way Pimlico and Churchill do it. I'd much prefer the races start at noon and there be 40 minutes in between post times than have them start at 10:30 and have over an hour between races by the time ther stakes come around. That **** is brutal.

Is 6:40 really that much later than 6:15 or 6:20? Really, what's the big deal?

And getting out of Belmont would be a pain no matter what time the Belmont and last race went off, so I'm not sure what you want them to do about that.

We're four days away from a Triple Crown possibility, and you're griping about post time for the Stakes being 20 minutes late?

I agree totally. I'm loving the fact that I can get there at noon and catch the first race and that there won't be the ridiculous breaks between races later in the day that you have at Churchill and Pimlico.

Actually having the last race go off and hour and a half after the Belmont probably allows for the crowd to get out a little more smoothly. It's going to be lousy regardless but this way maybe it will be a bit more staggered.

I agree. Churchill does this also for the Derby and it was quite pleasant as we stayed for the last two races unlike 90% of the crowd, we actually walked right up to watch the last race on the finish line, pretty cool

Great, so there is only 40 minutes between races. That is better than 1 hour. Why does the Belmont need to go off at 640? The Breeders Cup Classic doesn't go off that late. I'm not condoning that the Derby is at 615, I'm saying 640 is way, way too late. 615 is just way too late. Why can't they start racing at 11:00am and have the Belmont go off at 530-540? What would be the big deal? Does the feature race at Belmont usually go off at 640? Does any NYRA feature race go off at 640? The Travers goes off at 540, right?

What are you basing your "late" claims on? Does it interrupt your 6:30 pm talk show? Church started at 10:30 back home. It wasn't late nor early. It's when it started. The Belmont starts at 6:40, which is when it starts. I don't understand the complaint.

Ugh.. 5:40, 6:40, what's the big deal? The race isn't going off at freaking midnight.

It's really all a question of TV.

As for 40 minutes between races....you do realize how hard it is to get a race off after the Belmont....right? There will be media in the winner's circle for upwards of a half an hour. My guess is the next race goes off almost an hour later. It's not significantly different at the Preakness or Belmont.

It's not a normal day.....there will be so much going on after the Belmont is run, one way or another, that 30 minutes will go by in a flash.

Reminds me of this...

http://video.aol.com/partner/hulu/sa...GdK4QJfhTW5VbP

I would agree that it is for TV except for the fact that the 2nd biggest race in the country, the BC Classic, doesn't go off that late. It's not Prime Time any way you slice it.

Here is the question for all of the arguementative folks out there. What would be wrong with backing everything up an hour and have post time for the Belmont be at 540? Wouldn't that make your evening a little more enjoyable?

Not really, no.

Again, what is the big deal? It's funny that you call us "arguementative" when you're the one getting your knickers in a twist because post time is ONE HOUR later than you'd like to see it.

I'd say the people rational enough to realize the minimal difference and significance between 5:40 and 6:40 aren't the argumentative ones.

You do realize that the BC Classic is run in late October/early November, when the sun sets about 6:30 in NY, whereas the Belmont is run in mid-June where it stays light till 8:30?

Hell, at CD, they practically had to have lights for the Classic in '06, it was so late.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Thanks.

Except when they ran in Texas in '04 post time was 442 local time (542 east coast time). And the sun must go down real early in California in late October early November because post time for the Classic in '03 at Santa Anita was 240 pst.

My evening? I don't do evenings, but if I did, a horse race going off at 6:40 instead of 5:40 is going to ruin anything, much less my evening.

That's really funny.

You got a hot date or something that night? It's 20 minutes different from when the Derby actually went off... big deal!

On big racing days, the later posts for the feature and longer time between races doesn't bother me. I kinda like it, actually. Give me more time to BS and have some interesting conversations with the people around me.

Please see Post #6 where I say the Derby at 615 is too late also. It's the ONLY feature race in the country (not night racing) that goes off that late. That's all. I would prefer the 1st post to be at 11am rather than losing an hour on the back end. We get there at 10 am or earlier anyway, 8 o'clock when you were allowed to enjoy yourself. And before you all get uppity about my stance on the beer ban, if you don't think they prevent you from bringing in your own beer to increase their own beer sales, you are fooling yourselves. You can get just as drunk and stupid paying 750 for a beer as you can bringing in your own.

The beer prices are usually quite reasonable at the Belmont. Much better than most sporting events (including the Derby and Preakness), especially for NYC.

Actually it will finally be a nice day. If I remember correctly, it's been a little on the cold or rainy side the past few years.

In regards to not going, thanks for the suggestion. I've gone every year since 95 and will continue to do so. In regards to complaining about things, I'm sorry I don't just accept things I feel to be substandard.

Here's another thing I'll complain about, please read the damn post, then comprehend it, then respond. Where did I say beer was too expensive? I said I thought it was foolish to believe the reason the don't allow you to bring beer in is for safety issues as they want you to believe.

LOL @ a 6:40 post time being called "substandard."

Ain't that the truth.

This thread tells me its a dark day for most race tracks today.

The only thing we don't complain about is winning too much money.

Oh wait, then you have to sign a tax slip. Come to think of it we complain about that too!

Beer at Preakness was $7 for a 24 ounce Bud Light. You sure as heck don't find a beer for anywhere near that price at the Derby. Belmont is pretty similar to Pimlico.

And I'm pretty sure if I recall from last year at Belmont they even have Guinness for like $6 which is better than you'll do in a lot of NYC bars.

I think the beers were 7.50 at the Derby, don't remember...

Derby has a couple options, but the main one was bottle-cans of 16 oz Bud or Bud Light, and I think they were all in the $9 range.

Bigsmc will know, he was at the track on Thursday and since I left him there for 2 hours by himself after the races, he saw the freshly printed signs going up with a 2.50 surcharge

Thanks for being the complaining police. You are needed over on the Hatta Fort thread. Fat Man is complaining about Gomez's turf riding skills.

Yeah, I went Thu-Fri-Sat two years ago and the 16 ounce beers went from $5 on Thu to $7.50 on Fri to $9.50 on Sat.

......couldnt agree more.

the 04 belmont was like woodstock in the paddock........dudes were bringing in cases on their kids wagons:eek: being in new york for the 1st time i was laughing my ass off....... here in so cal you cant get away with that stuff.