Three New BC Races

#1 12-10-2007, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Yeah pretty much. I mean what a horror, more races with big fields filled with horses from all over the country and possibly the world. Races which will have huge pools in which to bet into. I mean it is sooooo baaaad for the game. The negativity around here is unbelievable.

Extra races that will reduce the pools on Saturday. Outstanding.

otisotisotis · #2 12-10-2007, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Extra races that will reduce the pools on Saturday. Outstanding.

i don't think that's the case.

miraja2 · #3 12-10-2007, 08:04 PM

While this is obviously an issue that makes me mad, the REAL problem is that over the last couple years there haven't been enough G1 quality horses to fill the BC races that already existed. I think if the BC had expanded this rapidly in an era with an abundance of really good horses in training, the reaction might not have been quite as strong.
The fact that they are choosing to do this in an era where it makes so little sense, enhances the stupidity of the decision in my opinion.

otisotisotis · #4 12-10-2007, 08:06 PM

there aren't enough G1 quality horses to fill any race it seems.

SniperSB23 · #5 12-10-2007, 08:20 PM

No one said these will be G1 races. If they make these G1 races then it is a terrible decision by the Graded Stakes Committee and I will be upset by it. For the Breeders Cup to add these races though doesn't bother me at all even if I think they are wasting their money. At least they picked races they could add that won't dilute the current fields. And it will be three more interesting races to handicap.

miraja2 · #6 12-10-2007, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

No one said these will be G1 races. If they make these G1 races then it is a terrible decision by the Graded Stakes Committee and I will be upset by it. For the Breeders Cup to add these races though doesn't bother me at all even if I think they are wasting their money. At least they picked races they could add that won't dilute the current fields. And it will be three more interesting races to handicap.

Well...that's true. 12f races are my absolute favorite races to handicap and bet.
But regardless of what grade they receive, having races called "Breeders' Cup Races" filled with allowance horses bothers me.

otisotisotis · #7 12-10-2007, 08:53 PM

maybe they're alw. horses because they just haven't found the right spot!

SniperSB23 · #8 12-10-2007, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

Well...that's true. 12f races are my absolute favorite races to handicap and bet.
But regardless of what grade they receive, having races called "Breeders' Cup Races" filled with allowance horses bothers me.

As long as they aren't G1 I think there is a distinction and I don't care what they want to call them. I mean there are terrible races throughout the year with Breeders Cup in their name already.

Riot · #9 12-10-2007, 08:22 PM

How about if, along with appropriate earnings, a committee starts reviewing all horses that want to enter the Kentucky Derby, and chose to allow only the horses that are determined to be of true Grade 1 caliber?

SniperSB23 · #10 12-10-2007, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riot

How about if, along with appropriate earnings, a committee starts reviewing all horses that want to enter the Kentucky Derby, and chose to allow only the horses that are determined to be of true Grade 1 caliber?

Too subjective. Everyone has a different opinion of what a true G1 caliber horse is.

Hickory Hill Hoff · #11 12-10-2007, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

While this is obviously an issue that makes me mad, the REAL problem is that over the last couple years there haven't been enough G1 quality horses to fill the BC races that already existed. I think if the BC had expanded this rapidly in an era with an abundance of really good horses in training, the reaction might not have been quite as strong.
The fact that they are choosing to do this in an era where it makes so little sense, enhances the stupidity of the decision in my opinion.

Yeah, then they retire early, to me that's a bigger problem.

#12 12-10-2007, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

i don't think that's the case.

Check the numbers for this year.

philcski · #13 12-10-2007, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Check the numbers for this year.

Check the weather this year, Pillow. That was most definitely the driving factor in handle. It was so wet it made wagering next to impossible.

#14 12-10-2007, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philcski

Check the weather this year, Pillow. That was most definitely the driving factor in handle. It was so wet it made wagering next to impossible.

Yeah I forgot it was sunny and 80 on Friday.

Hickory Hill Hoff · #15 12-10-2007, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Yeah I forgot it was sunny and 80 on Friday.

Not in these parts.

philcski · #16 12-10-2007, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Yeah I forgot it was sunny and 80 on Friday.

I so wish it was. Who knows what the handle was Friday in perspective? We have no frame of reference. The number sounded decent but they might do $50 million at Santa Anita next year. We shall see.

otisotisotis · #17 12-10-2007, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Check the numbers for this year.

1 year doesn't make it a case study.

#18 12-10-2007, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

1 year doesn't make it a case study.

You should make fortune cookies. Really enlightening stuff.

We'll just have to wait and see. I'll book any wager that says handle on Saturday in 2008 will increase from 2006's handle on BC day.

otisotisotis · #19 12-10-2007, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

You should make fortune cookies. Really enlightening stuff.

We'll just have to wait and see. I'll book any wager that says handle on Saturday in 2008 will increase from 2006's handle on BC day.

I applied, but they said you were doing an admirable job.

Gotodubai · #20 12-10-2007, 09:21 PM

Just a quick question for everyone to think about. Where is the BC going to get the new purse money? Do they have any NEW sponcers? Seems like they have lost more corporate sponcers over the years then then they have now(Bud, Mobil,etc.). Not just the "Trade" sponcers I mean real money. They do not pay for any travel or expences for the conections, and shipping of horses. With the percentages they get most tracks loose money hoisting the races on even one day, and now two days. And Greg A. can you tell us what track will be host in 2009? Nobody's bidding. TV ratings down, ticket prices up again?