10/3 (KEE): First Lady & Alcibiades (Gr. I's)

[blackthroatedwind]

The most interesting thing about the 2YO stakes at Keeneland this weekend is that they are further ( and probably unnecessary ) proof that Keeneland now has two turf courses and no " main " track, so to speak. Look at who won the Alcibiades and look at the travesty that is the Breeder's Futurity on Saturday ( and then compare it to the loaded Champagne ). Keeneland has forced genuine dirt horses to go elsewhere and is rewarding either turf horses or mediocrities. Look at the field for the Spinster for even more proof.....if you somehow need it.

If people like to bet Polytrack, that's great, and I don't criticize that. However, to suggest it bears any resemblence to dirt racing, and to equate the accomplishments of horses in major races on that surface to those that succeed in major dirt races is absolute folly.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The most interesting thing about the 2YO stakes at Keeneland this weekend is that they are further ( and probably unnecessary ) proof that Keeneland now has two turf courses and no " main " track, so to speak. Look at who won the Alcibiades and look at the travesty that is the Breeder's Futurity on Saturday ( and then compare it to the loaded Champagne ). Keeneland has forced genuine dirt horses to go elsewhere and is rewarding either turf horses or mediocrities. Look at the field for the Spinster for even more proof.....if you somehow need it.

If people like to bet Polytrack, that's great, and I don't criticize that. However, to suggest it bears any resemblence to dirt racing, and to equate the accomplishments of horses in major races on that surface to those that succeed in major dirt races is absolute folly.

It's worse than folly. It's downright silly. I had a debate on the other forum with people actually saying that the synthetics played pretty formful at SA last weekend. Seriously. They said that was proof that the synthetics were fair and allowing the best horses to win. To an extent, that was true. But they left out the important part. It played formful to horses that had already established synthetic form. It didn't show us anything as far as how horses that perform well on real dirt would do. We already knew Zenyatta, Street Hero, Cost of Freedom, Well Armed, Street Boss, and Stardom Bound could run over the synthetics because they have been doing it. We already knew that Hystericalady hated the stuff as evidenced by her record over it compared to her record over dirt. So what did we see over the weekend? More of the same. Yet they are somehow arguing the point that the stuff plays fair and allows the best horses to win. It allows the best synthetic horses to win. Not the best dirt horses.

[blackthroatedwind]

Right, and that's all OK, as long as people don't mix it in with dirt racing. If they want to mix it in with anything, it should be turf, as it does what turf racing does in a general sense, which is reduce the margins between horses, and overall reward mediocrity. Of course there are extreme counterexamples.....but this is exactly what both surfaces do overall.

[Bobby Fischer]

Good points BTW.

We had a GI yesterday, and literally no one else got the trip, other than the winner. I think some blame has to be put on the trainers, because this is not a new phenomenon.
I am adding Dream Empress to the watch list, hopefully she is a favorite next time.

With the Breeders Futurity today there is more of a noticable effort to enter horses that are suited for the track. Maybe some of this is due to the more "instant" returns in value with having a colt win a GI? Maybe the fillies don't have enough related synth preps for this kind of race, and it baffles the trainers to think to enter a turf router in a "main track event"...?
The uncoupled entrie(s)lol for John Best skew things a little, but overall there is some turf and synthetic experience in the Futurity.