Quote:
|
Originally Posted by King Glorious
The sport could be helped from a wagering perspective. But what about the quality of the races themselves? Yes, if the good ones switch over, new ones will take their places. But won't the new ones just be ones that weren't good enough to win in the first place. It will be like this year's handicap division. If Curlin, Hard Spun, Lawyer Ron, Street Sense, and Any Given Saturday were still around, I am pretty sure that the top of the division would look better than it's going to look this year. But they are all gone and somebody has to step in and fill the voids and win the races. Doesn't mean they are anywhere near as good as the ones that left us though. I don't look at it as new horses emerging as much as old horses taking advantage of new opportunities.
|
not necessarily. many sports have a season, with last years season really having no bearing on this years.
horse racing really should be considered the same way. we all expect that horses will improve at three, without necessarily having made a mark at two. the same can hold true for the next several years for horses. some late bloomers may well have surpassed their betters from previous years. it would be nice to have them all in the mix to know for sure...but we have no control over that.
mineshaft was nowhere to be found at three, he made quite a mark at four. where did cigar finish in the derby? john henry got better with age, as did the tin man....whether they were better or not, then those who left the scene can be debated, but they still put on a hell of a show.
you and carson hollow weren't world beaters. i doubt either got a nod in eclipse voting at that years end, but their test stake is still mentioned as one of the best races ever. you can have dammed good racing without having a derby winner in the mix.