Kentucky Derby Field Size to be Studied

[Pedigree Ann]

1974 was the first year that the Derby field went over 20 runners, as I recall. Everybody and his cousin wanted to run a horse in the 100th Kentucky Derby and some pretty decent horses didn't get a clear run; the winner would have paid boxcars if he hadn't been coupled with the Blue Grass winner (he had no 3yo stakes wins, only a 2nd in the Florida Derby).

Beyond the Derby fever factor that the press does its best to drum up, I believe that the limited campaigns of horses these days does a lot to make for an oversized field; the 3yos haven't run enough for us and their owners to know whether they really belong.

Consider the 1969 Derby field. Coming into the Derby were 4 horses who had won/placed in multiple major preps - Majestic Prince (Santa Anita Derby, San Jacinto, San Vicente), Arts and Letters (Blue Grass, Everglades), Top Knight (Flamingo, Florida Derby, 2yo champ), and Dike (Wood Memorial, Gotham). Only 4 others ran and they finished 4th, 6th, 7th and 8th. Horses who got beaten up in multiple preps, even if they had won one here or there, didn't bother to show up for a further drubbing.

[ELA]

The story, while being accurate, is also taking much out of context. First, this one isolated item was part of numerous recommendations that the panel has made. It was not stressed, discussed or made to be a key point. Second, the so called "study" of field size was referenced in a summary and did not mention Eight Belles at all. Was her breakdown the catalyst? Here goes the debate.

This was a several hour symposium that touched upon many very crucial issues that impact our sport and industry. Focusing on just this very one serves a very limited purpose.

In my opinion, from watching the entire symposium, this one item was positioned as perhaps the least important recommendation made in that the others were elaborated on and discussed in more detail and more detail was provided in other parts of the discussion.

Eric