Is this really a good thing?
 

As it turns out, it looks like Mine That Bird is legit and the best (non-Rachel Alexandra) 3-year-old in the country at this time. Yes, everyone loves Rachel Alexandra, but is her ruining MTB's Triple Crown chances really good for the sport?

Look, he probably wasn't going to win it anyway (I'm convinced it's a near-impossibility for whatever reasons after watching War Emblem, Funny Cide, Smarty Jones and Big Brown fail the past few years), but at least it would keep the casual sports fan interested for another three weeks. Now, instead of three solid weeks of horse racing and Triple Crown talk on ESPN (they who tell them what to watch, who to root for, and what is relevent in sports), we might get a few "nice little stories" about silly nonsense like "girls can beat boys" a few days leading up to the Belmont.

For a sport struggling to stay relevent that really only enjoys about six weeks in the spotlight out of the year IF there's a Triple Crown chase, Rachel Alexandra just chopped that time in half.

I've been trying to get my NFL/NBA/MLB obsessed idiot friends half as interested in the sport as I am for years and I've discovered that after the Belmont, the game's momentum comes to a screeching halt. One of them actually sent me an email saying "better luck next year, cuz NOBODY cares about the Belmont now."

I don't know who to blame, RA's previous owners and their incredibly foolish and stubborn refusal to race a filly against colts in the Derby, or the sport itself for not doing everything in its power to make sure there's a Triple Crown chance each year. If that means freezing out a threat in the Preakness or even an outright, good ol' fashioned race fixin', I'm on board!

(I don't know if I even mean what I wrote with that last paragraph, I just got on a roll.)

you're kidding, right? this is a joke?

No. I'm not. This isn't a joke. It may be great for all of us who love the sport, but as far as growing the fanbase of the sport, I think anytime you don't have the Triple Crown run, it is a terrible thing. Whether this is right or wrong, it's a reality.

i think it's wrong, and far from reality.


we haven't had a tc winner since affirmed. if you talk to some writers, they think the non tc winner is a good thing. look at it this way, had MTB won the tc (lol yeah, right) there would be next to no drama next year because people wouldn't expect it to happen again next year, and the draw would be down dramatically. not having a tc winner gives a lot of folks a reason to tune in to see if it will finally happen.
besides, what good would it have to have your idiot friends (as you called them) interested in a sport that they think ends with the belmont? i'd imagine if nyra can get both mtb and rachel to come, the excitement of 'round two' would be tremendous.

and i have to question just how serious you are when you think they should freeze horses out or fix the race for a favorable outcome. i'd love to see a tc winner as bad as anyone, but i was cheering for rachel yesterday. it was a great race, and a great performance from the filly. people have been talking about the demise of racing for years...yet here it remains.

Wrong. My phone is ringing off the hook this morning from non race fans telling me what a great race that was. Yesterday was a great day for horse racing, lets enjoy it.:zz:

They could put in an earnings rule for the Preakness and Belmont. Something like "preference given to horses with $0 earned in any race. Second preference given to maiden winners only. Any winners of races other than maiden or maiden claiming races, not eligible." Something like that would be perfect.

Look, you don't want to give it away. You want to make them earn it. Affirmed had to beat Alydar three times. Sunday Silence would have had to beat Easy Goer three times. Alysheba over Bet Twice three times. I think ideally, you'd want to believe that at some point in the three races, a TC winner would have had to beat the best challenger out there. He didn't get that chance in the Derby.

exactly. keeping good horses out to guarantee a win would be more detrimental. it would be a hollow victory and the 'winner' would be a paper tiger. people aren't dumb-they'd know what they had seen was a fraud. that would be worse than the type of stuff we had yesterday. the preakness had more buzz than i've seen in years, since in years' past so many skipped the second race to freshen for the belmont. having rachel will create buzz for the race in three weeks. will she or won't she? will the derby winner show up to try again? it's great stuff.

OK. Fair enough. I may have gone too far. I see your point about the drama of the TC drought. But if it's over with the Preakness...

This is what my buddy sent me this morning:

Mine That Bird needed an extra 1/8th to get past Calvin Borel - guess you'll have to wait to win em over next year Brav, cuz who cares about the Belmont now

And this guy is a semi-horse racing fan! That is, he gets interested for about six weeks out of the year.

And maybe that's what's really distressing me.

perhaps you should explain to him that races are just as good, as exciting, when two good ones face off with just one trophy on the line. or even when it's just a 10k purse...

You're thoughts are just what I needed to hear. Thank you for slapping me back to reality. I'm changing my avatar to honor you and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

who's that? certainly not the danzig i met in ky a few years ago!!

:tro:

Having a Triple Crown winner will not save horse racing.

Having a Triple Crown on the line does more for horse racing than most other events in the game throughout the year. Last year is a good example... Big Brown's Belmont versus Curlin almost all year.

And the thought that a TC winner will dumb-down the following years Triple Crown because "it won't likely happen again" is ridiculous.

That's Glen Danzig. Of heavy metal fame. He's a muscle man with the height of a jockey.

i've read it-maybe plonk wrote it...:D

Bring your friends to the track. Teach them how to bet and have them make a $2 bet and sit back. They'll be fans before you know it.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...e-crown-winner


Now what? Will mainstream America care any longer when a horse attempts to sweep the Triple Crown or will they say, "Well, it's been done, so it's no big deal anymore." As long as it seems an improbable, almost unattainable, quest, people will flock to Belmont Park hoping to be there when it is finally accomplished. Everyone wants to be a part of history.
Following the Triple Crown sweeps of Secretariat, Seattle Slew, and Affirmed from 1973-'78, was there really that much buzz over Spectacular Bid's attempt in '79 or had people become blasé about it and were expecting it to happen again?

i believe his one claim to fame is the song 'mother'. but i got my name from the horse-who is much better looking in my opinion!!

I think I understand the point he was tring to get across. Maybe he's right with most of the steam being taken out of the TC and Belmonts Stakes sails. But yesterday's race was so exciting that maybe some of the people that only watch the TC will be intrigued enough to watch Rachel Alexandra whenever and wherever she runs next.
Maybe it wasn't the best result for the near term (meaning next 3 weeks), but in the long run that race/performance could do nothing but help the game.

You should explain to your friends how some racetracks have slots parlors and table games available and they could go play those while you waste your time throwing your money away on horse racing:D

If RA's not in the Preakness who's to say the pace winds up as fast as it did?

It likely winds up much slower and a lot of the stalker and mid-pack types are less likely to get baked.

Big Drama would have run a ton better without her in there .. and FF, POTN, GQ, and Take The Points all wouldn't have got totally baked as bad as they did .. and Musket Man would have probably had the edge and won .. he also got the setup .. but not as kind as MTB got it.

thing is, the 'need' for a tc winner to save the sport is a falsehood. now, had MTB managed to win it all, he may have helped a bit-but most years, you have a colt who would win-how would having a horse win the tc and get whisked off to stud help the sport at all? it wouldn't. the press needs to quit baking this up as some kind of last ditch effort to save the sport each year. the sport isn't on life support. if, every year, the sport is dying-it makes me wonder how we've survived since affirmed won the belmont. it's certainly the longest death i've ever witnessed. yes, attendance is down. but what about handle? why do we read so much about tracks going down...but you don't see much about tracks like oaklawn, which had a great year this year-and boosted purses? twice.

if you want to grow the sport, take your kids...your family, and your friends. do like i did yesterday, get others to watch, show some excitement. talk it up. hell, i've got folks watching hockey that never did before-and they ask me about horse racing now. i think i'm getting a group together to go to la downs in a couple months.

very true. people are assuming that had rachel not run, mtb would be the obvious winner. but the whole complexion would have changed. and maybe not to his advantage.

i think musket man should not run past 1 1/8th. he's outrun his pedigree, but i think a bit shorter would give him wins instead of shows.

:tro: Nice job Jay, agree 100%

I understand your premise here, I do...but you're wrong in this case. The game does not need a Triple Crown winner to be it's savior. I think that needs to be put out there. In 9 out of 10 cases, if a TC winner did happen, we'd never see him again, ushered off to the shed.

IT IS GOOD FOR THE GAME WHEN THE BEST HORSES KEEP GOING TO POST.

For years, people have been clamoring for someone to actually leave their best horses in training. Someone to not duck a big race to overly coddle the horse. Over the last year, Jess Jackson, as detestable as he may be to some, left the best horse to train as a four yr old, long after his three yr old rivals, Street Sense and Hard Spun had gone home to retirement. Then, he boldy purchased Rachel Alexandra, and put her in the Preakness.

I'd rather someone like that any day of the week over a TC winner. Someone who keeps the best horses out on the track. A guy like Chip Woolley is great for the game. Ford F450 driving, broken legged cowboy, dragging his tough as nails gelding around the country in a van. He might not win a TC, but Mine That Bird is an amazing story, and a great horse. His story is not diminished because he didn't win the TC.

So, like I said, I understand your premise. I think everyone would like to see a Triple Crown winner. But, it's best for everyone that the best horses go to the post in every big race. Jess Jackson should be commended for his bold actions. Not to mention there is no guarantee the race unfolds the way it did w/out Rachel Alexandra.

and read this, in a drf article:

Handle on the day was $86,684,470, up from $73.5 million last year. Attendance dropped from 112,222 last year to an announced crowd of 77,850. The infield, always packed with college-age revelers who have just gotten out of school, was sparse, owing to a new policy instituted by Pimlico officials this year that banned patrons from bringing beer into the infield. Not only did infield fans have to buy beer from the concession stands, but the admission price was raised, too, to $60.

Will you kindly stop making so many posts in a row?

Doug,

Back in the other direction, note that Rachel in the race kept Hull out. So while the pace may not have been as fast without her, it may well have been with Hull...

OK. Now we're talking. I think everyone agrees that it's kind of discouraging to see the best horses rushed off to the breeding shed after their 3-year-old season.

So, my next question -- and keep in mind this is coming from a relatively new horse racing junkie -- is this: Why isn't a rule just made that horses cannot breed until they're 5-years-old, thus ensuring that the best either race through their fourth year or have to sit a year out? It would kind of be like the NBA's rule against going straight from high school to the pros. Both rules would be promoting better competition. There might be a shortage of mares the first few years of this rule, so maybe some kind of set of exemptions could be made, but aside from that, tell me how this would be a bad thing.

(Bracing myself for another go 'round of public scolding.)

And by the way, I never said that we needed a TC winner "to save the game" or be its "savior." This is coming from you guys, who have obviously heard it time and again. I'm simply talking about the mainstream interest in the sport that increases ten-fold when the hunt for a Triple Crown is on.

:rolleyes:

I think we can't underestimate what NBC has done this year regarding visibility. NBC loves and supports racing, and does it better than ESPN ever has. And made a special point this year of proving it, I think.

NBC did tons of commercials on this, starting a good month before the Derby. On Friday, NBC had a constantly-replaying commercial for the Preakness using an obviously little girl's voice (because it's a family thing, kids can watch the horses race and should ask their parents to turn it on).

Borel on Leno was an NBC ad, too (the discussion too carefully crafted to avoid controversy and emphasize the "feel good" aspect).

Look - I've never played golf. But I'm a huge casual golf fan. Read the golf mags, watch on TV every chance I can. Because the commercial bites tell me, "Phil vs Tiger this weekend" - and I want to see that. They give me the superficial knowledge I need to enjoy watching.

As long as we can give the casual non-fan a "Twitter-equivalent" soundbite they can latch on to so they feel halfway knowledgable discussing horse racing ("Filly vs Colt", etc) - they will watch - especially when it's on a major channel and they know it's coming up.

I agree. He was dog-tired and weaving all down the stretch trying to finish yesterday. He's a good, solid horse that deserves some wins.

Northern Dancer was the first race I watched on TV. I saw Secretariat, Seattle Slew, and Affirmed/Alydar (on TV)

The Triple Crown didn't seem to interest casual non-fans until right before the last race. Just that last week or so.

People - the casual sorta fans - remember D. Wayne vs. Baffert, they loved Mrs. Gentner being hugged by Carl, they loved Afleet Alex and the Lemonade Stand, every girl with a jumping pony had a crush on Michael Matz when he first became an Olympic caliber rider - you don't need a Triple Crown.

You need something they can root for or against, that's all. They just need a little superficial knowledge readily available so they can latch onto the big public horseracing events with an opinion and an interest.

Getting them, then, to the racetrack is another thing, as they are lost there. The environment is different without a talking head telling them the story. That's where we come in, taking friends to the track.

And I , as a fan , loved NY Triple Crown winner, the first in history, Tin Cup Chalice last year . What a tragic end to an inspiring story that had many more chapters to be written .

It's rather sad that it took the fact that their (part-)owners are in jail and have to refund megabucks to the clients they bilked to keep two of the best older horses in training - Curlin and Einstein - beyond their 'normal' retirement ages. While Midnight Cry only retained 20% of Curlin and the majority owner (Jackson) has been allowed some leeway, Einstein is 100% owned by Midnight Cry and his net earnings go into escrow. Whether a stallion deal can be worked out for Einstein next year is entirely in the hands of the court; do they try to syndicate privately or sell him publicly at auction? Does the judge (even if he is in Kentucky) know which way would net more for the plaintiffs? Will plaintiffs who think he is worth more than they get tie him up in litigation for years?
I worry about this, because I think Einstein is the sort of stallion we need in the US - sound, versatile, and dead game. By a champion, out of a champion.