Churchill deal steals 2010 BC from Belmont

Quiet Chris · #1 09-02-2008, 07:54 AM

The Breeders Cup at Churchill is much better than the BC at Belmont. Churchill fills up and has a great atmosphere. Belmont could easily be 40 degrees and freezing with the winds. Throw in a home Giants or Jets game on the Sunday and the Yankees or Mets in the World Series and the BC doesn't even get any coverage.

slotdirt · #2 09-02-2008, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet Chris

The Breeders Cup at Churchill is much better than the BC at Belmont. Churchill fills up and has a great atmosphere. Belmont could easily be 40 degrees and freezing with the winds. Throw in a home Giants or Jets game on the Sunday and the Yankees or Mets in the World Series and the BC doesn't even get any coverage.

Um, were you there for the 2006 Breeders Cup? Coldest day ever.

Quiet Chris · #3 09-02-2008, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Um, were you there for the 2006 Breeders Cup? Coldest day ever.

I was there and it was like 50 degrees. Invasor won too.

I have been to the Breeders Cup at Belmont in 1995 and it was the most pathetic day ever. There was nobody there and it was terrible weather.

ELA · #4 09-02-2008, 08:47 AM

Sure, NYRA got screwed. We can argue all day about recourse, ramifications, and what should and shouldn't be done. In the end, it's just more cannibalization.

The BC is looking out for the BC and is not working with the industry. What else is new.

Eric

slotdirt · #5 09-02-2008, 09:16 AM

All I know is the 2006 Breeders Cup at Churchill was the worst run horse racing event I've ever attended in terms of organization, teller lines, and concessions. And it was butt cold that entire week in Kentucky.

dellinger63 · #6 09-02-2008, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

All I know is the 2006 Breeders Cup at Churchill was the worst run horse racing event I've ever attended in terms of organization, teller lines, and concessions. And it was butt cold that entire week in Kentucky.

I couldn't disagree more. Maybe I got lucky but had NO PROBLEMS either at the teller lines or concessions including Carolina BB-que. Weather was brisk but certainly better than Arlington's BC and well above freezing.

GBBob · #7 09-02-2008, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

All I know is the 2006 Breeders Cup at Churchill was the worst run horse racing event I've ever attended in terms of organization, teller lines, and concessions. And it was butt cold that entire week in Kentucky.

Did you go to Lone Star for BC? THAT, was bad

slotdirt · #8 09-02-2008, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GBBob

Did you go to Lone Star for BC? THAT, was bad

I did not, but I have been to Churchill numerous other times for other big racing days.

philcski · #9 09-02-2008, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

All I know is the 2006 Breeders Cup at Churchill was the worst run horse racing event I've ever attended in terms of organization, teller lines, and concessions. And it was butt cold that entire week in Kentucky.

Disagree completely, other than the weather (which was cold, but not brutal... what do you expect in the first week of November though?) Other than that, and the horrific job of Denman's first attempt at calling the BC, it was a fantastic experience. Churchill handles crowds better than anyone else. I personally am looking forward to 2010.

Scav · #10 09-02-2008, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philcski

Disagree completely, other than the weather (which was cold, but not brutal... what do you expect in the first week of November though?) Other than that, and the horrific job of Denman's first attempt at calling the BC, it was a fantastic experience. Churchill handles crowds better than anyone else. I personally am looking forward to 2010.

If that was handling crowds, that I experienced this year at the Derby, COUNT ME OUT!!!

GBBob · #11 09-02-2008, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philcski

Disagree completely, other than the weather (which was cold, but not brutal... what do you expect in the first week of November though?) Other than that, and the horrific job of Denman's first attempt at calling the BC, it was a fantastic experience. Churchill handles crowds better than anyone else. I personally am looking forward to 2010.

I'm with you Phil and I loved that weather...sweatshirts and good for racing. Lines brutal, but it's always that way on BC day. Better than the sauna at Lone Star

reese · #12 09-04-2008, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quiet Chris

I was there and it was like 50 degrees. Invasor won too.

I have been to the Breeders Cup at Belmont in 1995 and it was the most pathetic day ever. There was nobody there and it was terrible weather.

Talk about ANCIENT HISTORY

who cares now?
I've been to two BC at Belmont since then and they were A-OK.

I see you fail to mention the last BC at SA...100degree heat, fires everywhere, ashes covering LA. I'm sure the horses just loved runnung in that polluted air...

10 pnt move up · #13 09-02-2008, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

So you went once, in a rainstorm and based a decision on that?

Isnt that problematic though, if you are trying to attract fans to your "super bowl" and that is their first exposure its a tough sell for the sport?

parsixfarms · #14 09-02-2008, 11:01 AM

Actually, the weather the day of the 1995 Breeders Cup wasn't bad at all. The temperatures was in the 60s; however, there were torrential rains the day and night before, leaving the track a sea of slop and the turf courses a bog.

The Breeders Cup at Churchill in 1991 was one of the coldest days that I have ever been to the track - and that includes trips to Aqueduct in the winter. And the site lines at Churchill for the typical fan are downright horrible.

IMO, the "best" Breeders Cup site, for fans and horsemen, had been Gulfstream Park, but unfortunately Magna's changes to that facility prevent it from hosting the event any more.

Payson Dave · #15 09-02-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

It's sort of unavoidable though isn't it? How can you foresee rain years in advance? Most meteorologists can't even predict rain a few hours ahead of schedule. Unless you are saying have the BC where there is never a chance of rain. I'm not sure such a place exists.

????Dubai????

Antitrust32 · #16 09-03-2008, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

????Dubai????

Turf Paradise!

miraja2 · #17 09-02-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

It's sort of unavoidable though isn't it? How can you foresee rain years in advance? Most meteorologists can't even predict rain a few hours ahead of schedule. Unless you are saying have the BC where there is never a chance of rain. I'm not sure such a place exists.

I've been saying for years that they should move the BC to a dome.
Would racing indoors be kind of stupid, pointless, and essentially a bunch of crap? Yup.
That's what would make it perfect for the Breeders' Cup.
If I can somehow convince those in power that horses would be somehow safer racing indoors, I predict the Metrodome will be the proud home of the 2011 BC.

10 pnt move up · #18 09-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

It's sort of unavoidable though isn't it? How can you foresee rain years in advance? Most meteorologists can't even predict rain a few hours ahead of schedule. Unless you are saying have the BC where there is never a chance of rain. I'm not sure such a place exists.

Well they dont blow bowl games in Michigan do they? Its not fair but maybe a warm weather place should be mandatory to help the sport. What are the chances november in new york is not freezing cold and or raining?

10 pnt move up · #19 09-02-2008, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

They could run the Breeders Cup on the equator, it's not going to help the sport at all.

aint no debate there....horse racing is dead other then a gambling component.

ELA · #20 09-02-2008, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

They could run the Breeders Cup on the equator, it's not going to help the sport at all.

With the state of the sport and industry -- sadly -- you are correct. In hearing Charlie Hayward's comments, of course I agree and say there is credibility in NYRA looking at "potential alternatives" so to speak. If NYRA does not get the BC in 2010, in an ideal world (yes, ideal), hopefully by 2010 VLT's will be up and running in NY and perhaps there will be VLT revenue and benefits realized. Could NYRA get tough and look to put together some sort of "Championship" series or day? Sure they could.

However, and I am not saying it shouldn't be looked at or done, that could be a short-term thinking and short-term benefits. It could also be more divisive, perhaps short-term and long-term. Somewhere, the cannibalization has to stop for there to be change and improvement. We all have seen what the "what's in it for me and only me" thinking has done to our sport and industry.

Perhaps this latest midnight hour, backroom, cloak and dagger deal can be used as a catalyst for change, a paradigm shift, and maybe -- just maybe -- the BC, the NTRA, the Jockey Club, the RCI, and other bodies can for once work together. Sure it's a lot to ask. It's perhaps impossible to vision. But there is often one with a vision.

Eric