Quote:
|
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I think it's interesting that this article and discussion comes right on the heels of us discussing the importance of having a top horse like Rachel Alexandra participate in the BC. Some really feel that having the top horses at the biggest events is good for the sport because it draws in new fans. Others feel like the big horses keep the fields and the handles down. I remember when the Bulls were dominating the NBA. People tuned in to watch. People loved to watch the Yankees when they were dominating. People tuned in to watch Mike Tyson destroy people. The ratings show that when Tiger Woods is in the running, more people watch than when he's out of it and it's wide open. My preference is to see dominant horses. The reason I watch grade one races and don't care as much for $25k claimers is because I want to see the best. It's why I'll watch the Yankees and not the Columbus Clippers. If I want to wager on a full field of equally matched horses, there are hundreds of races everyday to do that. The money is the same. Brilliance excites me. Equally matched mediocrity doesn't.
|
I would rather watch horses like Bernardini and I know what your saying, but the serious gambler loves how it is now.