Crist on the Farcical World Cup

[Kasept]

As DougS noted elsewhere talking about yesterday, the World Cup did a great job making itself as marginal as the Lanes' End. Steve Crist succinctly sums it up:

Dubai World Crapshoot
CruistBlog

• The richest horse race in history was staged in Dubai earlier today, and it was a $10 million advertisement for how synthetic surfaces can make a complete mess of so-called world-class championship racing. For all that it proved about the quality of the contestants either individually or as a group, the results of the Dubai World Cup might as well have been drawn out of a hat.
  
  
• Tapeta may well be a lovely training surface, and it has gotten high marks among synthetic tracks, but no one can really explain why anyone needs a third type of horse racing to go along with the dirt and turf racing that has defined the sport and its great horses for centuries. The Maktoums' decision to replace dirt with Tapeta at their gaudy new racing palace was a premature guess that these new surfaces might somehow magically combine dirt and turf racing into one globally-accepted footing. That hasn't happened and isn't going to anytime soon, or probably ever.
  
  
• Instead, it remains entirely unclear what this World Cup proved other than Bob Baffert's adage that synthetic tracks make good horses look ordinary and ordinary horses look good.

[johnny pinwheel]

why should it be any different than the last two breeders cups? crapshoots, bunching of horses and results that mean nothing. baffert has been right all along. i'm glad because many times he ships his best stock east. the only so called dirt horse that was hittable was the sprint race because we win it almost every year and that horse was a synthetic lover.

[MisterB]

Every dirt track is different also. Do we cry when they come up sloppy, muddy, cuppy, good. A fast rack in Belmont is different then Saratoga, and so on. I remember Todd and other trainers complaining when Monmouth put in new dirt a couple of years ago, to hard, not deep enough, etc etc. Then we ran the BC on a sloppy sealed track. Conditions are not fair on many playing fields. Plain and simple, Americans don't train on the Tapita, and don't know how to.

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by MisterB

Every dirt track is different also. Do we cry when they come up sloppy, muddy, cuppy, good. A fast rack in Belmont is different then Saratoga, and so on. I remember Todd and other trainers complaining when Monmouth put in new dirt a couple of years ago, to hard, not deep enough, etc etc. Then we ran the BC on a sloppy sealed track. Conditions are not fair on many playing fields. Plain and simple, Americans don't train on the Tapita, and don't know how to.

you just made his point. which is its a third type of game or track. for 10 mil. it was a garbage race.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

you just made his point. which is its a third type of game or track. for 10 mil. it was a garbage race.

So is a sloppy track, we don't need them either. But we send them out on it knowing they can't run a lick on it. Maybe Ramsey sent the wrong horse. We don't train on a sloppy track, so why run on them? We have to.

[Thunder Gulch]

I agree with most of what Crist is saying. I don't care about the DWC nearly as much as the Breeders Cup, but it's a shame that the game's highest levels are often contests decided on who is comfortable running on a given surface instead of who is the fastest animal.

[pweizer]

I have great respect for Mr. Christ but I think he is way off base here. I am no fan of synthetic surfaces and if I had my way they would all be gone. But, I made good money on the world cup races without throwing darts at a board. Anyone reading Pat Cummings excellent work all week would have had to taken a hard look at the World Cup winner. Pat all week long wrote about how Gloria was a stand out in his works and on apprerance. Then factor in that he figured to be lone speed in the race and the fact that he has run well in this race before and it is hard to say he is impossible. The winner of the prior race ran third in the Breeder's Cup turf last November (in fact I used her that day) and has beaten the boys before in group races in Europe. Again, it hardly took a dart to land on her.

A $5 double on these two races returned $1557.

The 99-1 upset that came in the race prior was a turf race. I agree that one was tough to come up with but it wasn't a synthetic surface which produced that crazy result.

Again, I agree with the main argument that it would be better to go back to dirt and turf only. However, I think using the world cup results to make that case is a real reach.

Paul

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by Kasept

As DougS noted elsewhere talking about yesterday, the World Cup did a great job making itself as marginal as the Lanes' End. Steve Crist succinctly sums it up:

Dubai World Crapshoot
CruistBlog

• The richest horse race in history was staged in Dubai earlier today, and it was a $10 million advertisement for how synthetic surfaces can make a complete mess of so-called world-class championship racing. For all that it proved about the quality of the contestants either individually or as a group, the results of the Dubai World Cup might as well have been drawn out of a hat.
  
  
• Tapeta may well be a lovely training surface, and it has gotten high marks among synthetic tracks, but no one can really explain why anyone needs a third type of horse racing to go along with the dirt and turf racing that has defined the sport and its great horses for centuries. The Maktoums' decision to replace dirt with Tapeta at their gaudy new racing palace was a premature guess that these new surfaces might somehow magically combine dirt and turf racing into one globally-accepted footing. That hasn't happened and isn't going to anytime soon, or probably ever.
  
  
• Instead, it remains entirely unclear what this World Cup proved other than Bob Baffert's adage that synthetic tracks make good horses look ordinary and ordinary horses look good.

You would think that someone that has spent hundreds of millions buying Stallion Prospects that were successful DIRT horses, would not be in such a rush to eliminate dirt racing.

Street Sense
Any Given Saturday
Henny Hughes
Hard Spun (could be a great poly/turf sire)
Medaglia D'Oro
Bernardini
Discreet Cat
Offlee Wild
Rockport Harbor

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by Kasept

As DougS noted elsewhere talking about yesterday, the World Cup did a great job making itself as marginal as the Lanes' End. Steve Crist succinctly sums it up:

Dubai World Crapshoot
CruistBlog

• The richest horse race in history was staged in Dubai earlier today, and it was a $10 million advertisement for how synthetic surfaces can make a complete mess of so-called world-class championship racing. For all that it proved about the quality of the contestants either individually or as a group, the results of the Dubai World Cup might as well have been drawn out of a hat.
  
  
• Tapeta may well be a lovely training surface, and it has gotten high marks among synthetic tracks, but no one can really explain why anyone needs a third type of horse racing to go along with the dirt and turf racing that has defined the sport and its great horses for centuries. The Maktoums' decision to replace dirt with Tapeta at their gaudy new racing palace was a premature guess that these new surfaces might somehow magically combine dirt and turf racing into one globally-accepted footing. That hasn't happened and isn't going to anytime soon, or probably ever.
  I wouldn't be so sure about that.
  
  
• Instead, it remains entirely unclear what this World Cup proved other than Bob Baffert's adage that synthetic tracks make good horses look ordinary and ordinary horses look good.

That is a blanket statement that could be applied to turf racing and to a lesser degree perhaps to dirt racing (the lower percentage of close finishes.)
By whose measure is a horse great? Turf racing was here long before dirt racing. Quality Road tries turf and fails miserably making the surface of turf a farce because turf racing makes good horses look ordinary and ordinary horses look good.
Sea The Stars comes to Churchill Downs and never picks up his feet against (name any dirt specialist from last year other than Quality Road or Rachel) Summer Bird perhaps or Mine that Bird, making the surface of dirt a farce because dirt racing makes good horses look ordinary and ordinary horses look great.
Seriously, Bullsbay was maybe a length away from being voted top older male last year. Other than Quality Road or Rachel what American dirt superstar would have validated the world cup if it had been run on dirt?
We sent our champion older male from last year over there on a surface he supposedly likes and he failed. Maybe it's because he is not as good as we believe. Or maybe the surface is to blame.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

What is Gloria De Campeao anyway? Like the 15th best horse in the last 10 years to come from Gavea racetrack in Brazil?

I almost feel like firing up google translator and checking in with that writer from there who wanted congress to get involved because everyone was buying up their good horses.

[pweizer]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

What is Gloria De Campeao anyway? Like the 15th best horse in the last 10 years to come from Gavea racetrack in Brazil?

I almost feel like firing up google translator and checking in with that writer from there who wanted congress to get involved because everyone was buying up their good horses.

Gloria certainly can't compare to the last World Cup dirt champion Well Armed. That's for sure. I am not sure Well Armed was the 15th best horse to race at Santa Anita last year.

Knock the World Cup all you want but it can't all be the surface (which is how this thread got started...

Paul

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by pweizer

Gloria certainly can't compare to the last World Cup dirt champion Well Armed. That's for sure.

I know - Well Armed beat him by 14 lengths last year when he was 2nd to him.

Well Armed never had a chance to run on dirt in America... his connections insisted on running him on synthetic tracks even though they hinder his speedy front running sytle.

It's going to happen every year ... the World Cup will always be a $10 million eyesore from now on ... the surface dictates it.

[freddymo]

I am just surprised Gitano Hernando didn't confirm Abrams thoughts that he was a synth. freak?