Five New Grade I Races in 2007; Two Others Drop to Grade II

I also believe that all Grade I's arent equal. Are you to tell me that Seek Gold is equal to Invasor or Barbaro. I think we should have fewer Grade I's. However, I also recognize that there needs to be Grade I's for different type of horses. We need a Grade I for those horses who sprint, can go 1 1/16, 1 1/8 and 1 1/4. We need turf as well. I think three Grade I's per "group" if perfect.

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I also believe that all Grade I's arent equal. Are you to tell me that Seek Gold is equal to Invasor or Barbaro. I think we should have fewer Grade I's. However, I also recognize that there needs to be Grade I's for different type of horses. We need a Grade I for those horses who sprint, can go 1 1/16, 1 1/8 and 1 1/4. We need turf as well. I think three Grade I's per "group" if perfect.

Dumb idea, and would only weaken racing further. All you would be doing is further strengthening the hold that the BC has on racing.
You'd be taking away the little incentive that owners and trainers have now to campaing top horses, and they'd run three times a year as opposed to 5-6.
Do you even think about what you write?

[Pointg5]

Of course he doesn't...

I wonder how much of an effect not only the BC races have ruined racing, but Dubai as well, although lately the effect seems to be minimal, mainly our 2nd tier horses go or horses at the end of their careers looking for a big paycheck....

I started following racing back in late 1998, so I don't have much of a frame of reference for how often horses raced at one time...

Originally Posted by oracle80

Dumb idea, and would only weaken racing further. All you would be doing is further strengthening the hold that the BC has on racing.
You'd be taking away the little incentive that owners and trainers have now to campaing top horses, and they'd run three times a year as opposed to 5-6.
Do you even think about what you write?

I disagree with you 100%. Do you ever think about what you write? You are speaking of the very top horses. Which there are only about 2-4 top horses in each division each year. If you have less Grade I races then you will get larger fields therefor making it harder for the elite to win. We wouldnt see the JCGC with a 4 horse field if you know you only have 3 chances to get your horse a Grade I win. Supply is low therefore demand to be in those races is high. Come on, think with your big head before you speak.

Originally Posted by eurobounce

I disagree with you 100%. Do you ever think about what you write? You are speaking of the very top horses. Which there are only about 2-4 top horses in each division each year. If you have less Grade I races then you will get larger fields therefor making it harder for the elite to win. We wouldnt see the JCGC with a 4 horse field if you know you only have 3 chances to get your horse a Grade I win. Supply is low therefore demand to be in those races is high. Come on, think with your big head before you speak.

Your just not that bright if you cant see that fewer opportunities that mean anything means fewer races by top horses.
Supply isn't low, purse money is. Graded status is the only motivation they have to run at all, you take that away and you can just forget the whole thing.
You really don't get the business at all.

Originally Posted by oracle80

Your just not that bright if you cant see that fewer opportunities that mean anything means fewer races by top horses.
Supply isn't low, purse money is. Graded status is the only motivation they have to run at all, you take that away and you can just forget the whole thing.
You really don't get the business at all.

No obviously you are not very bright. The key is to spur competition all year long.