Liam's Map=Cross Traffic part 2?

[Port Conway Lane]

[quote=RolloTomasi;1042483]

Wrong. Preakness winner Shackleford, Travers/Woodward winner Alpha, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Mast Track, Goodwood winner Well Armed, Travers winner Golden Ticket, Donn winner Hymn Book, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Rail Trip, Haskell winner Verrazano all had credentials for the Classic.

This is contrary to your point that there are bad horses in the mile. Or are you claiming that because the winners of the mile were bad horses that the race was bad, or the field quality was bad? Or that the good horses in the mile were placed at the wrong distance? I fail to follow your reasoning, it is contradictory.

Ok. So how do you know Goldencents, Gayego, Vineyard Haven, The Factor, Pyro, Jersey Town, Caleb's Posse, and Aikenite wouldn't have won the Sprint?

First of all two of those won the mile so they have no regrets. As for the others who knows? The fact is you named multiple horses in the same year that should have run in the sprint. My point is that not all of the ones you named could have won in the same year. So yes I could say that some of the ones you mentioned would not have won, take your choice.

And just because they "all couldn't have won", does that justify the ducking and diving?

The mile gives trainers an option to run their horses at a distance that may fit their horse best. Are you telling me that American racehorses are either a
6 furlong sprinter or a 1 1/4 mile router with nothing in between?

The fact that the race carries instant Grade 1 status when it should not, has Breeder's Cup attached to its name when it is no more than a glorified undercard race is what detracts from the Classic, because one or maybe two Classic and Sprint horses looking for an easier race--the antithesis of what the BC should be about--inevitably reroute to it.

Back to the horses you named at the top. For whatever reason the connections chose to run in the mile. It doesn't mean that the absence of the mile would ensure their participation in the Classic.(especially Verrazano)

It is a bad race, and the results of the runnings thus far prove the point.

Prove what point?? You named both quality runners and others that weren't.
Bad horses winning and Quality horses winning. Bad horses losing to good horses and vice versa. What exactly makes it a bad race and how do the results prove anything?

[cakes44]

I love the BC dirt mile. Also, I doubt there will ever be many people arguing to get rid of the Turf Mile and still keeping the Turf Sprint.

[RHT2004]

I said this in the AP thread, but are we sure Honor Code is pointing to the Classic? His next race is the Kelso.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by RHT2004

I said this in the AP thread, but are we sure Honor Code is pointing to the Classic? His next race is the Kelso.

YES.. He won Whitney you think he would try the mile and 70yard mile? It's his last race

[Jasper131]

Liam's Map to the Dirt Mile, which is terrible for the Breeders Cup. A horse of his caliber should be going in the Classic...I hope the BC people look at this as a reason to discontinue the Dirt Mile which would further strengthen the Classic and the Sprint, its two foundation dirt races.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Jasper131

Liam's Map to the Dirt Mile, which is terrible for the Breeders Cup. A horse of his caliber should be going in the Classic...I hope the BC people look at this as a reason to discontinue the Dirt Mile which would further strengthen the Classic and the Sprint, its two foundation dirt races.

what about honor code going to the classic instead of the mile? doesn't that hurt this whole argument?
mile races on dirt are a stud maker, the bc wants a met mile/type race.
and when a big turf euro comes over and runs in the classic.....does anyone complain it's watering down the turf race?

[Jasper131]

Originally Posted by Danzig

what about honor code going to the classic instead of the mile? doesn't that hurt this whole argument?
mile races on dirt are a stud maker, the bc wants a met mile/type race.

Honor Code going to the Classic HELPS this argument since he is almost certainly going to be better at a mile than he is at a mile and a quarter. And yet his connections are still eschewing the AAA race for the big league race because they know it will be better for the long-term value of the horse if he were to win. Honor Code's connections are doing a) the smart thing for the horse's long-term value and b) the best thing for the sport/event.

And the BC cannot have a Met Mile type race when a) the best horses in the country run in the Classic [a problem that the Met Mile does not face since the only race you have to skip to run in it is the Foster] and b) they have run exactly two one-turn BC Dirt Miles anyway.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Danzig

mile races on dirt are a stud maker, the bc wants a met mile/type race.

This is an old cliche that is decidedly false. Perhaps, because breeders nowadays prefer speedy precocious types they might want to push for milers as stallions doesn't mean those races are "stud makers". In fact, what is there, all of 3 Grade 1 at a flat mile for 3yo and up in North America on the dirt?

Let's see what recent stallions (with offspring of racing age) have been "selected for" by winning these races:

Met Mile:
Quality Road, Divine Park, Corinthian, Silver Train, Ghostzapper, Pico Central, Aldebaran, Swept Overboard, Exciting Story, Yankee Victor.

Cigar Mile:
Jersey Town, Kodiak Kowboy, Tale of Ekati, Daaher, Discreet Cat, Purge, Lion Tamer, Congaree, El Corredor

Dirt Mile:
Albertus Maximus, Corinthian

A handful of useful types, but not exactly lighting the world on fire. Ghostzapper is probably the best of the bunch, but he started out very slow.

Meanwhile, the stronger miler type stallions like Distorted Humor, Elusive Quality, Speightstown, More Than Ready, Tale of the Cat, War Front, Henny Hughes, Munnings, Street Boss, and Midnight Lute certainly didn't win and with few exceptions rarely competed in those top mile races that are such great "stud makers". They focused on sprints and the odd middle distance race here and there.

and when a big turf euro comes over and runs in the classic.....does anyone complain it's watering down the turf race?

No. The assumption can be made that the top Euro horses are superior to anything the US produces (in fact, most of our top turf horses are ex-second string Euros). The configuration and quality of NA turf courses are enough to keep most away. If Coolmore and Godolphin (basically the only two that toss a turf horse onto the dirt) want to produce the "perfect stallion", its quite telling they tend to use the BC Classic and not the Dirt Mile.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

This is contrary to your point that there are bad horses in the mile. Or are you claiming that because the winners of the mile were bad horses that the race was bad, or the field quality was bad? Or that the good horses in the mile were placed at the wrong distance? I fail to follow your reasoning, it is contradictory.

I didn't say there were only bad horses in the Dirt Mile. The point has always been that the Dirt Mile "dilutes" the other races. And in and of itself it also tends to be a diluted race, just as I explained earlier, as it showcases older, tailing off runners, midwest Derby winners, and one or two top class horses ducking the main competition.

These are supposed to be championship events, not simply decent races.

First of all two of those won the mile so they have no regrets. As for the others who knows? The fact is you named multiple horses in the same year that should have run in the sprint. My point is that not all of the ones you named could have won in the same year. So yes I could say that some of the ones you mentioned would not have won, take your choice.

The connections Goldencents and Caleb's Posse arguably cost themselves Eclipse awards by avoiding the Sprint.

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

The mile gives trainers an option to run their horses at a distance that may fit their horse best. Are you telling me that American racehorses are either a
6 furlong sprinter or a 1 1/4 mile router with nothing in between?

For the most part, racing in the US (and on dirt) is delineated very simply between sprinters and routers. Does that mean the Classic needs to be 10f? Not necessarily. It could be 9f, especially considering the impact that the desire for speed and precocity by breeders has had on the industry.

How many Grade 1 races exist that are a flat mile and for open 3yo and upwards? For that matter, is there a Champion Miler Eclipse?

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

Back to the horses you named at the top. For whatever reason the connections chose to run in the mile. It doesn't mean that the absence of the mile would ensure their participation in the Classic.(especially Verrazano)

Yeah, the Preakness winner, the Travers winner, the Hollywood Gold Cup winner, the Woodward winner fit and race ready all would have opted out of the Classic on racing's "biggest day".

Prove what point?? You named both quality runners and others that weren't.
Bad horses winning and Quality horses winning. Bad horses losing to good horses and vice versa. What exactly makes it a bad race and how do the results prove anything?

The results prove it because no Eclipse champions have won the Dirt Mile and only one prior Eclipse champion even bothered to compete in it.

Simply put, the BC races should be deep quality fields from top to bottom. Races that bring together aging, tailed off runners, perennial also-rans, Grade 2 types, and a ducking and diving top class horse do not belong on the main card.

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

[Jasper131]

Along the same lines, there should be more than a $500,000 difference in purse between the Sprint ($1.5 mil) and the Dirt Mile ($1 mil), in my opinion.

[Port Conway Lane]

[quote=RolloTomasi;1042495]

I didn't say there were only bad horses in the Dirt Mile. The point has always been that the Dirt Mile "dilutes" the other races. And in and of itself it also tends to be a diluted race, just as I explained earlier, as it showcases older, tailing off runners, midwest Derby winners, and one or two top class horses ducking the main competition.

The connections of the horses who "departed" the other 2 races must not have thought too highly of their chances. This probably has much more to do with their horses ability at a given distance rather than "ducking". Again, absence of the Mile doesn't force the hand.

For the most part, racing in the US (and on dirt) is delineated very simply between sprinters and routers. Does that mean the Classic needs to be 10f? Not necessarily. It could be 9f, especially considering the impact that the desire for speed and precocity by breeders has had on the industry.

How many Grade 1 races exist that are a flat mile and for open 3yo and upwards? For that matter, is there a Champion Miler Eclipse?

Basically you are saying there are only 14 qualified male routers in the country worthy of competing at the BC.
I disagree.

Yeah, the Preakness winner, the Travers winner, the Hollywood Gold Cup winner, the Woodward winner fit and race ready all would have opted out of the Classic on racing's "biggest day".

but they were aging, tailed off runners, perennial also-rans, Grade 2 types, and a ducking and diving top class horse who didn't belong anyway.

The results prove it because no Eclipse champions have won the Dirt Mile and only one prior Eclipse champion even bothered to compete in it.

Not surprising as eclipse champions are not a dime a dozen. Year in and year out you'll be lucky to get 3 on the whole 2 day event.

The connections Goldencents and Caleb's Posse arguably cost themselves Eclipse awards by avoiding the Sprint.

Maybe,maybe not. Eclipse awards is what they is, and if either horse could have won the eclipse then according to your criteria the quality of the mile isn't as bad as you make it out to be. Championship Event.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

The connections of the horses who "departed" the other 2 races must not have thought too highly of their chances. This probably has much more to do with their horses ability at a given distance rather than "ducking". Again, absence of the Mile doesn't force the hand.

They don't stand a chance in the Sprint or the Classic...so they should have a marquee race called the BC Can't Sprint Can't Route Blinkers Only Ring Bit Tongue Tie Distance Dependent on Track Configuration Dirt Race.

Brilliant.

Basically you are saying there are only 14 qualified male routers in the country worthy of competing at the BC.

That are in form at any one time? I'd say there are less.

You wanna let us in on who these 14 qualified male routers (some of whom can't run in the Classic because they actually can't route according to you) are exactly?

but they were aging, tailed off runners, perennial also-rans, Grade 2 types, and a ducking and diving top class horse who didn't belong anyway.

Again, you are ignoring the whole argument. A horrible race that sports a big purse draws away two or three in-form, top class routers and sprinters away from the main championship races. Of course, in order to have a full field, it has to be populated by decidedly non top class horses, and hence no longer serves as championship event.

Not surprising as eclipse champions are not a dime a dozen. Year in and year out you'll be lucky to get 3 on the whole 2 day event.

This is made up. The Classic alone generally draws 1-2 Eclipse champions. The Dirt Mile? None.

Maybe,maybe not. Eclipse awards is what they is, and if either horse could have won the eclipse then according to your criteria the quality of the mile isn't as bad as you make it out to be. Championship Event.

More filth. Goldencents and Caleb's Posse did not in fact win a championship. So no, the Dirt Mile has produced no champions in 8 runnings.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

They don't stand a chance in the Sprint or the Classic...so they should have a marquee race called the BC Can't Sprint Can't Route Blinkers Only Ring Bit Tongue Tie Distance Dependent on Track Configuration Dirt Race.

Brilliant.



That are in form at any one time? I'd say there are less.

You wanna let us in on who these 14 qualified male routers (some of whom can't run in the Classic because they actually can't route according to you) are exactly?



Again, you are ignoring the whole argument. A horrible race that sports a big purse draws away two or three in-form, top class routers and sprinters away from the main championship races. Of course, in order to have a full field, it has to be populated by decidedly non top class horses, and hence no longer serves as championship event.


This is made up. The Classic alone generally draws 1-2 Eclipse champions. The Dirt Mile? None.



More filth. Goldencents and Caleb's Posse did not in fact win a championship. So no, the Dirt Mile has produced no champions in 8 runnings.

We can go back and forth. It's become tiresome. The bottom line for you is that "This is a championship event and should be treated as such."

The bottom line is that connections will run where their horses fit best. If it's not the BCM for LM then maybe it's the Cigar Mile. Or wait for the Donn. Obviously they want no part of the BCC (if what has been stated is fact) so to remove the BCM to "force" them to run where most people may want to see him run wouldn't go over to well. Personally I don't give a rat's behind if you feel the quality of the BCM is subpar. It's an exciting race to watch and wager.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

We can go back and forth. It's become tiresome. The bottom line for you is that "This is a championship event and should be treated as such."

Oh, you're done changing the goal posts and arguing points irrelevant to the "bottom line" that the race, as a Breeder's Cup event, should be held to championship standards? Good news.

Personally I don't give a rat's behind if you feel the quality of the BCM is subpar. It's an exciting race to watch and wager.

This echoes exactly what I said in my original post: "It is a great undercard race..."

Thanks for finally coming around.

[Port Conway Lane]

[quote=RolloTomasi;1042543]

Oh, you're done changing the goal posts and arguing points irrelevant to the "bottom line" that the race, as a Breeder's Cup event, should be held to championship standards? Good news.

I'm tired of arguing that your almighy opinion is fact based.

This echoes exactly what I said in my original post: "It is a great undercard race..."

Thanks for finally coming around.

Same deal, just because you said it doesn't make it fact.

Tell me how eliminating the mile will get LM into the classic. That is the point.