Derby AE List

[Thunder Gulch]

Having an AE list is overkill in a field that is going to be 20 most of the time. It's like having the NCAA tournament teams argue about the "last 4 out". How many times is a legit contender not going to make the field anyway? The graded earnings system isn't perfect, but I haven't heard many alternatives that provide better fields. When a late bloomer misses on earnings, too bad. Get them started earlier and win a graded race. It doesn't take many to be #20 on the list.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Having an AE list is overkill in a field that is going to be 20 most of the time. It's like having the NCAA tournament teams argue about the "last 4 out". How many times is a legit contender not going to make the field anyway? The graded earnings system isn't perfect, but I haven't heard many alternatives that provide better fields. When a late bloomer misses on earnings, too bad. Get them started earlier and win a graded race. It doesn't take many to be #20 on the list.

they should not let 2 yo graded earnings count. it's done elsewhere. it's a new season, they should start from scratch.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by Danzig

they should not let 2 yo graded earnings count. it's done elsewhere. it's a new season, they should start from scratch.

Like I said, the graded earnings requirement isn't perfect. You can modify it for 2yo starts and weight it more strongly for 8f or more if you like, but I still feel no sympathy or regret for the #21 and #22 horses on the list every year.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Like I said, the graded earnings requirement isn't perfect. You can modify it for 2yo starts and weight it more strongly for 8f or more if you like, but I still feel no sympathy or regret for the #21 and #22 horses on the list every year.

oh, i don't either. there's usually a couple of hot horses late before the derby that don't get in-and more often than not, they fade from view anyway. you won't get a perfect system, you can't please everyone.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Having an AE list is overkill in a field that is going to be 20 most of the time. It's like having the NCAA tournament teams argue about the "last 4 out". How many times is a legit contender not going to make the field anyway? The graded earnings system isn't perfect, but I haven't heard many alternatives that provide better fields. When a late bloomer misses on earnings, too bad. Get them started earlier and win a graded race. It doesn't take many to be #20 on the list.

Actually your analogy isnt that great. the last 4 in the NCAA tourney almost never challenge for a title nor are favs but for the Derby it is possible for one of the favs to not get in when you have so many lightly raced horses, fillies with big earnings and so many 2nd rate races with huge purses.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Actually your analogy isnt that great. the last 4 in the NCAA tourney almost never challenge for a title nor are favs but for the Derby it is possible for one of the favs to not get in when you have so many lightly raced horses, fillies with big earnings and so many 2nd rate races with huge purses.

Name a couple who actually wanted in that had a shot. It's possible, but the occurrence is so infrequent that it's ridiculous to change the rules for that once a decade horse.

[justindew]

In my opinion, this is the bottom line:

In the horse racing industry (as well as many, if not all other industries) no one does anything unless they have proof the move will help rather than hurt business. It seems like people in this industry are more risk-averse than most businessmen, but I guess I have no proof of that.

For one reason or another, correctly or incorrectly, CD feels an AE list is not the best move for business. My theory is that this refusal has to do with advance wagering and bettor confusion.

As for the Derby Draw, it generates revenue.

[joeydb]

Risk averse, yes, but I think you're giving them too much credit in implying that they are always looking for new ways of doing things. Many of the horse racing state offices and management appear to be suffering from the same stagnation that plagues many beaurocracies, whether they be governmental or corporate.

A previous post suggesting the ordering of the post draw by earnings level sounds like an idea worth trying.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

In my opinion, this is the bottom line:

In the horse racing industry (as well as many, if not all other industries) no one does anything unless they have proof the move will help rather than hurt business. It seems like people in this industry are more risk-averse than most businessmen, but I guess I have no proof of that.

For one reason or another, correctly or incorrectly, CD feels an AE list is not the best move for business. My theory is that this refusal has to do with advance wagering and bettor confusion.

As for the Derby Draw, it generates revenue.

Actually this business is way less risk averse than normal businesses. The tracks are the only ones who are risk averse and that explains a lot in how they have stagnated.

CDI may feel that an AE is not a good move for business but that certainly doesnt mean they are right.

The Derby draw generates revenue? Are they selling tickets now?

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Actually this business is way less risk averse than normal businesses. The tracks are the only ones who are risk averse and that explains a lot in how they have stagnated.

CDI may feel that an AE is not a good move for business but that certainly doesnt mean they are right.

The Derby draw generates revenue? Are they selling tickets now?

I was referring to the tracks. My fault for not being clear.

I know that UPS once sponsored the draw. Can't remember if CD sold sponsorship rights last year.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Actually this business is way less risk averse than normal businesses. The tracks are the only ones who are risk averse and that explains a lot in how they have stagnated.

CDI may feel that an AE is not a good move for business but that certainly doesnt mean they are right.

The Derby draw generates revenue? Are they selling tickets now?

The Derby draw is televised, so I'm sure ESPN is paying something. Even if it's not much, it is and hour worth of publicity.

There is also a lot of activity around the draw which gets people out into businesses spending money.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by justindew

In my opinion, this is the bottom line:

In the horse racing industry (as well as many, if not all other industries) no one does anything unless they have proof the move will help rather than hurt business. It seems like people in this industry are more risk-averse than most businessmen, but I guess I have no proof of that.

For one reason or another, correctly or incorrectly, CD feels an AE list is not the best move for business. My theory is that this refusal has to do with advance wagering and bettor confusion.

As for the Derby Draw, it generates revenue.

Derby Barbie, Emo concert at Arlington Million Day last year from an unknown singer, Matrix, Over-Under, Derby Party, Chief Party Officer, Kempton Park Challenge.

I wonder what proof they had that the above moves would help business.

If they just lowered takeout a bit and sat on their asses they would do a better job at increasing business.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

Name a couple who actually wanted in that had a shot. It's possible, but the occurrence is so infrequent that it's ridiculous to change the rules for that once a decade horse.

They changed the rules this year to let a totally undeserving horse from England in. One more slot taken from a deserving horse. I am not saying that ther are a huge number of horses that have missed being in the 20 but as people are more apt to run fillies, and slot tracks keep adding money to fairly insignifigant races especially as two year olds, the deserving (ie, better horses) will see their numbers dwindle further. Imagine the handwringing if a horse misses the cut, there are 2 scratches and that horse goes on to easily win the Preakness, Belmont, Travers, BC Classic....Then the rules will certainly change but using hindsight as usual. AE's are not a foreign concept the other 364 days of the year.

[Linny]

The fact is that there are now effectively 19 slots in the gate and the rules are set and understood. Trainers/owners know the rules and if they don't want to be left on the sidelines they need to start accumulating graded earnings as early and often as possible. If it means taking a late October maiden breaker from Belmont to Delta for the Jackpot, so be it. Skip the $200k Remsen and go to Delta or the CashCall Futurity. If your horse is a Dunkirk or Imperial Council with allowance wins but no graded $$$, if you put you stock into one graded race and lose, you are probably watching come Derby Day. (It lookes like Shug will give IC 2 graded races so he's got a better shot than Dunkirk.)

Every year someone comes along sobbing about how X is SO GOOD but probably wont get in because of the rules. The same rules apply to all. It's not the rules that kept him out. It's the inability, for whatever reason to rack up enough graded earnings that kept him out. Remember, if Smarty Jones was third in the Ark. Derby he probably wouldn't have gotten to the Derby at all. That was pretty risky. If Dunkirk runs 3rd in the Fla Derby he probably wont make the field this year. Last year I liked Denis of Cork and he damn near got left off because his owner's "racing manager" sent his closer into a race on a speedway and he finished off the board. If they had failed to get in it was no one's fault but the connections.

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

They changed the rules this year to let a totally undeserving horse from England in. One more slot taken from a deserving horse. I am not saying that ther are a huge number of horses that have missed being in the 20 but as people are more apt to run fillies, and slot tracks keep adding money to fairly insignifigant races especially as two year olds, the deserving (ie, better horses) will see their numbers dwindle further. Imagine the handwringing if a horse misses the cut, there are 2 scratches and that horse goes on to easily win the Preakness, Belmont, Travers, BC Classic....Then the rules will certainly change but using hindsight as usual. AE's are not a foreign concept the other 364 days of the year.

AE's are not a foreign concept to the other 364 days, but 20 horse fields are. I just don't believe that the last one in takes away a spot from a deserving horse because the 20th one in isn't all that deserving.

As for lightly raced late bloomers. Everyone knows the rules and has the same opportunity to chase inflated 2yo purses. I'm not against modifying the rules to weight the graded earnings for 3yo dirt routes, but I'm not clamoring to call one deserving when he runs 3rd in one G1 race. Win one and you are in.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Thunder Gulch

AE's are not a foreign concept to the other 364 days, but 20 horse fields are. I just don't believe that the last one in takes away a spot from a deserving horse because the 20th one in isn't all that deserving.

As for lightly raced late bloomers. Everyone knows the rules and has the same opportunity to chase inflated 2yo purses. I'm not against modifying the rules to weight the graded earnings for 3yo dirt routes, but I'm not clamoring to call one deserving when he runs 3rd in one G1 race. Win one and you are in.

Deserving? It isnt about deserving, it is about getting the best horses in the gate. if three Fillies cross enter and scratch and we get a Kempton horse every year you are down to 16 deserving horses. The idea that not many good horses are left out is too simplistic for me especially as Slot tracks add more high dollar races. How long till Philly adds a big money race? I'd rather see the gate full.