4/4 (AQU): Wood (G1); Carter (G1); Bay Shore (G3); Excelsior (G3)

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

that Kempton race makes me sick to my stomach. Churchill should be so embarrassed if that rat keeps Dunkirk outta the derby.

I hope Dunkirk wins the Preakness and Belmont so Churchill can shove it!

Yeah that'll happen.

I'm pretty sick of the whining about the graded earnings requirement. Yeah it's flawed, but its objective (or at least its effect) is getting horses to run more often. In a sport with endless kvetching about how top horses never run, I would think it's a good thing that you don't get into the Derby unless you run your way in.

And I've yet to see a better alternative. Guaranteeing spots to the first two finishers of the final preps? Isn't that basically already what happens? It's rare that a horse has no previous graded earnings when they run second in one of those races.

Like someone said earlier, Pletcher didn't have to run in that allowance. Instead he could've found an easy graded spot if he thought his horse was so great. He made that decision and I don't want to hear now how poor Dunkirk has been robbed by the system.

[Travis Stone]

Win/In stuff on the Derby trail is a moot discussion as a winner of a prep never gets excluded. The flaw, in my opinion, is that races in July 2008, at 5 furlongs or whatever, are treated the same as the Florida Derby... that just doesn't make sense.

There are some viable alternatives:

* Discount 2YO graded earnings
* Points system based upon grades, eliminating the $ factor
* DerbyTrail.com vote

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Win/In stuff on the Derby trail is a moot discussion as a winner of a prep never gets excluded. The flaw, in my opinion, is that races in July 2008, at 5 furlongs or whatever, are treated the same as the Florida Derby... that just doesn't make sense.
There are some viable alternatives:

* Discount 2YO graded earnings
* Points system based upon grades, eliminating the $ factor
* DerbyTrail.com vote

I say count half of 2yo earnings.

OR

Count 100% of Grade 1 earnings... 75% of grade 2 earnings and 50% of grade 3 earnings.

May be too much math for the people at Churchill to understand though.

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I say count half of 2yo earnings.

OR

Count 100% of Grade 1 earnings... 75% of grade 2 earnings and 50% of grade 3 earnings.

May be too much math for the people at Churchill to understand though.

Even though the graded stakes system is flawed to begin with, I think this idea has some legs.
If there was a point system, it could be something like this, with the 3-yo stakes essentially being worth double the 2-yo stakes races.

2-year old graded stakes races
Grade 1
1st 8 points
2nd 4 points
3rd 2 points

Grade 2
1st 6 points
2nd 3 points
3rd 1 point

Grade 3
1st 3 points
2nd 1 points
3rd 0 points

3-year old graded stakes races

1st 16 points
2nd 8 points
3rd 4 points

Grade 2
1st 12 points
2nd 6 points
3rd 2 point

Grade 3
1st 6 points
2nd 2 points
3rd 1 point

[slotdirt]

I'd be genuinely interested in learning how the system mentioned above would guarantee Dunkirk an entry in the Derby, because if my math is remotely right, it still wouldn't.

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I'd be genuinely interested in learning how the system mentioned above would guarantee Dunkirk an entry in the Derby, because if my math is remotely right, it still wouldn't.

It's not supposed to.
It would only make a horse like Big Drama, who won a Grade 3 as a 2-year old, a lot less "automatic" to make the field because of purse money.

[Mike]

I've tried to smarten up with my picks from yesterday. Not going with Giant Oak(pass the race), and I'm not going with Yano, I'm making a conservative exacta box of Capt. Candyman Can/Gato Go Win.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Yeah that'll happen.

I'm pretty sick of the whining about the graded earnings requirement. Yeah it's flawed, but its objective (or at least its effect) is getting horses to run more often. In a sport with endless kvetching about how top horses never run, I would think it's a good thing that you don't get into the Derby unless you run your way in.

And I've yet to see a better alternative. Guaranteeing spots to the first two finishers of the final preps? Isn't that basically already what happens? It's rare that a horse has no previous graded earnings when they run second in one of those races.

Like someone said earlier, Pletcher didn't have to run in that allowance. Instead he could've found an easy graded spot if he thought his horse was so great. He made that decision and I don't want to hear now how poor Dunkirk has been robbed by the system.

Good for you about being sick of the whining. i'm happy for you.


its more like the fans will be robbed of seeing one of the best horses compete in the best race. I could care less about Pletcher or any trainers unless Chuck or Gary gets a real good 3yo one day.

I dont think it would bother me so much if it wasnt for the stupid Kempton Park race rule. Hopefully the horse finished last in the Blue Grass and the owners opt not to run in the Derby. Or maybe he wins and belongs in the race but I SERIOUSLY doubt that.

And I think there are flaws in allowing summer 2yo stakes money to be equivalent to major prep money. Maybe they should count half of the 2yo money? That would be more fair IMO.

Also, IMO Dunkirk has a serious shot at winning the Preakness or Belmont..