Tips/Thoughts on Breeders' Cup tickets this year?

[blackthroatedwind]

In the Land of the Blind the One Eyed Man is King.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

In the Land of the Blind the One Eyed Man is King.

At least the one eyed man can see over the dashboard without a booster seat

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

At least the one eyed man can see over the dashboard without a booster seat

I was referring to Steve Crist......

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I was referring to Steve Crist......

The one eyed man can often be blinded by excessive hair in the face...

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The one eyed man can often be blinded by excessive hair in the face...

The one eyed man doesn't have to worry about his eyes being bigger than his stomach.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

The one eyed man doesn't have to worry about his eyes being bigger than his stomach.

A 12 eyed man wouldnt be a match for my stomach

[CSC]

Owner's don't have an obligation to run anywhere they don't desire, I think it is just a wish to some of the interested observers of the game to have someone step fwd and take risks in the game, to add some juice to the game. All I know is we would have never had a great story as in Seabiscuit/War Admiral match race if they ran today. Since everyone optically speaking mostly seems interested in protecting their horse's reputations these days.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by CSC

Owner's don't have an obligation to run anywhere they don't desire, I think it is just a wish to some of the interested observers of the game to have someone step fwd and take risks in the game, to add some juice to the game. All I know is we would have never had a great story as in Seabiscuit/War Admiral match race if they ran today. Since mostly everyone optically seems interested in protecting their horse's reputations these days.

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

Originally Posted by ELA

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

Talk about a bunch of nonsense. It's a business that is dying.

It's like the Jets owners being pissed at fans because they won't accept the inflated seat license and season tickets in the new stadium. They conpletely overlook the fact that the product they've had on the field the last 30 years has sucked...it's the fans fault!

[CSC]

Originally Posted by ELA

I hear you, and in part I agree. However, I think this is taken to an extreme. We have seen, time and time again, fans, the general public, whatever you want to call it -- hold owners accountable to some nonsensical standard. Tafel with Street Sense, Jackson with Curlin, and the list goes on and on. Another aspect that is nonsensical is the person who emphatically states "If I owned . . . I would . . ." -- yeah, just like people who say if they won the lottery . . . It's an extreme sense of entitlement, feeling cheated, and holding people to some standard that doesn't exist. It often seems like much more than a wish, and it's BS.

Taking risks in the game cost money. It has a price attached to it. Some people don't know and don't understand the price. Others do. It's also not about the money sometimes. It is about whatever the owner wants it to be about. This has always been a business of self expression. As they say, nobody will ever have everybody like it. I have never critisized an owner like Tafel or Jackson because they didn't want to race in a particular race. I never would say they weren't sportsmen or they cheated the fans or anything of the like. The decision not to run is often used as blame for the state of the sport and business. I think the people that blame might be to blame.

Eric

I hear you and I don't disagree with anything you said, On the subject of Curlin he has very little to lose in my mind, if he runs and wins he goes out a hero, if he loses an excuse is already in place, the track is to blame. I don't see how running in the BC Classic is a bad business or sporting decision, it defies logic to me.

[Danzig]

well of course owners have every right to run their horses where they wish, good of the game or not. after all, we all know the best thing for the game would be for the best horses to remain in training, when owners know the best thing for themselves is to make money and stay in the game-hence the quick route to the shed when they get a top horse.
but, for the same owners to take umbrage when fans and media don't give the kudos to those horses for staying in against weaker competition (zenyatta for example), they've got no one to blame but themselves. zenyatta could take hoy, she could get her praises sung to the heavens should she take on the boys, but she 'deserves' to stay vs females according to her owners. no, if he wants her to be considered as being great, then she has to PROVE it, not just make everyone assume.
that filly has beaten her peers time and again, and has the best three year old and best older horse coming west to run on an untried surface. i think they are wrong for skipping the chance to put her where she really deserves to be. this nonsense that fillies shouldn't run vs boys is absolutely ridiculous.
as for zarkava, i think they're doing the right thing with her. as for curlin, i appreciate jackson for taking him west. we all know curlin would have been gone long ago but for the legal issues...but so what. jackson could very well have remained on the east coast, and i don't think anyone would blame him.

and of course if the bc folks are unhappy with a possible watered down product, it's their own fault for giving owners too many choices for those two days. rather than adding all the other racing, they should have increased the purse for the classic. but then, we all know it's handle they're after, and the bc gets all handle for all bc races. they're killing the golden goose imo.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by Danzig

well of course owners have every right to run their horses where they wish, good of the game or not. after all, we all know the best thing for the game would be for the best horses to remain in training, when owners know the best thing for themselves is to make money and stay in the game-hence the quick route to the shed when they get a top horse.
but, for the same owners to take umbrage when fans and media don't give the kudos to those horses for staying in against weaker competition (zenyatta for example), they've got no one to blame but themselves. zenyatta could take hoy, she could get her praises sung to the heavens should she take on the boys, but she 'deserves' to stay vs females according to her owners. no, if he wants her to be considered as being great, then she has to PROVE it, not just make everyone assume.
that filly has beaten her peers time and again, and has the best three year old and best older horse coming west to run on an untried surface. i think they are wrong for skipping the chance to put her where she really deserves to be. this nonsense that fillies shouldn't run vs boys is absolutely ridiculous.
as for zarkava, i think they're doing the right thing with her. as for curlin, i appreciate jackson for taking him west. we all know curlin would have been gone long ago but for the legal issues...but so what. jackson could very well have remained on the east coast, and i don't think anyone would blame him.

and of course if the bc folks are unhappy with a possible watered down product, it's their own fault for giving owners too many choices for those two days. rather than adding all the other racing, they should have increased the purse for the classic. but then, we all know it's handle they're after, and the bc gets all handle for all bc races. they're killing the golden goose imo.

Racing has it's collective head up it's ass and they prove it every chance they get. The ADW situation is still a problem and I don't know what has been done or not done, just know I can't wager many tracks online. TwinSpires is taking Telephone bets Only for Santa Anita (Oak Tree). Slightly less inconvenient. I wonder since the Breeder's Cup is it's own deal if I will be able to advance wager online this year since it is at SA. not taking a day off work for the lesser Friday filly/ mare championships.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

In the Land of the Blind the One Eyed Man is King.

Great book.