I'll be the First to ask?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

It would certainly be exciting, but with the exception of purse money, I don't really see the benefit of it. She can go against a shorter field while being the overwhelming favorite and likely win for fun, or she can enter a field of 19 others to increase the chances of something going wrong trip-wise.

Doesn't seem like it'd really do a whole lot value-wise for her to win the Derby as opposed to the Oaks.

Take the easy money, prove dominance in the group, and then make decisions from there -- it's not like the Oaks is bush league or anything.

I dont know that purse money or increasing her value would be the reason to go to the derby.

If I were the owner, I'd run in the Derby because, well, the Derby is the Derby and the Oaks is the Oaks...

The Derby is the one race everyone wants to win, and its more special IMO, to do it with a filly. There is much more history in that than a filly winning the Oaks.

Why not try if you have a horse you think can really compete?