Churchill to review Derby starters policy (again)
 

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...tarters-policy

Summary: There could be changes, unless there's too much of a mess, then no.

I'm just not sure what solution they could come to that they haven't considered already.

In the article Mr. Flanery says that they evaluate everything every year.

Too bad some of these places don't schedule online events so they could get input from playahs and fans, etc.

What do you suppose they do in their little meetings where they allegedly consider changing things and making imporvements?

I'm sure they're all sincere in their intentions but really...I think we'll be seeing the same headline ten years from now. :wf

Steve has mentioned on the show that one of the reasons that CDI does not allow an AE list has to do with the ancillary promtional items that are sold in conjunction with the Derby. At the same time there was some concern expressed at the loss of handle when Uncle Mo scratched from the field. From those facts I would deduce that CD puts more value on revenue/profit from those promotional items than they do from the incremnetal revenue generated by 20 instead of 19 starters.

14 starters and i'd be all for an ae list.

with 20 i'm not so worried. the odds a horse with a real chance misses the cut because they're #21 on the earnings list is a lot higher than one with a real chance running into traffic problems.

it's a non-issue.

Assuming that 20 betting interests is as high as the tote board would allow, I suppose that they could have a mutuel field, with the AEs being part of the field. Doesn't help insure the extra betting interest, but allows an excluded horse to get in when circumstances like this year arise.

noooooooooooo!

They look over everything ever year. When I called races there I was told they were reviewing the graded stakes system, which obviously hasn't changed.

24 is the max the tote will allow.

I've also heard it's the promotional stuff... which is the worst excuse ever

Do you think they'll ever lower the number of starters?

I just had a passing conversation about it in the car with someone, nothing serious.

If I were a gambling man, I would put the odds at a reduced number of starters at 99-1.

Well I like a good longshot, but... :wf

Knock on wood, there hasn't been a serious injury or problem as the result of a 20 horse field. 20 vs. 14 horses in terms of handle is massively significant... and more than justifies the difference. It's a no brainer from their perspective.

I love the 20 entries instead of 14 with a mutuel field. The payouts on the exotics have blown up since they went this route a decade or so back.