[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

1987 was one of the greatest 3yo crops of modern time. There were so many good horses, they had to face each other. In fact, they made short work of all the 3yo and up races, too (Polish Navy, part of the lower echelon of the division, took down the Woodward). Using that group as a basis for your argument is preposterous.

The Penn and West Viriginia Derbies also didn't have $750,000 purses back then, either.

As far as the Derby goes, a lot of what you spoke of has to do with the race being a great "waster" of horses, meaning that a lot of horses don't come out the other end after the classics. Trainers with a good 3yo nowadays rightly or wrongly are probably looking beyond the Derby (maybe towards the BC?) and thus make adjustments.

The BC, on the other hand, is a great "waster" of races...

Your are sort of making the point for me. The Penn and WV Derbies are options that weren't there before. At least not real options for top horses. Add in the Indiana Derby and some other races.......there are just more options nowdays for top horses to avoid each other. That's not the fault of the BC that they avoid each other so much that the BC is one of the rare chances to get them all together and thus, a lot of emphasis is placed on the BC results when it comes to time for voting for championships.

Getting back to the Derby, I think that you are avoiding the question. The question is since so much has changed in the way people prepare for the Derby, why aren't people blaming the Derby? The answer is because the Derby hasn't changed. It's been the first Saturday in May for the longest and the only thing that's changed is the way people prepare for it. Same with the BC.