Satish and the Breeders Cup...

[Ogygian]

I am curious if Satish or if anyone else has the figures on the Breeders Cup that Satish references during the show. The handle, attendence, field size...etc since the cups beginnings. I am one that understands his line of thinking in regards to having a permanant home and would love to see the stats to back up his idea.
I understand most people don't like change, it was evident by the callers yesterday (it was frustrating to listen to Satish constantly being interupted while making a point). Satish calls it like it is and doesnt sugarcoat anything, which is greatly appreciated.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Ogygian

I am curious if Satish or if anyone else has the figures on the Breeders Cup that Satish references during the show. The handle, attendence, field size...etc since the cups beginnings. I am one that understands his line of thinking in regards to having a permanant home and would love to see the stats to back up his idea.
I understand most people don't like change, it was evident by the callers yesterday (it was frustrating to listen to Satish constantly being interupted while making a point). Satish calls it like it is and doesnt sugarcoat anything, which is greatly appreciated.

He doesn't mention stats, but there's a decent write up on bloodhorse.com today. The thing I appreciated being pointed out is that it's impossible for the Breeders' Cup organization to make money when the event is held at Churchill. It's easy to forget the tracks are hosting the event, and as such, have their own fiduciary interests, not those of the BC, in mind.

[banter]

Originally Posted by Ogygian

I am curious if Satish or if anyone else has the figures on the Breeders Cup that Satish references during the show. The handle, attendence, field size...etc since the cups beginnings. I am one that understands his line of thinking in regards to having a permanant home and would love to see the stats to back up his idea.
I understand most people don't like change, it was evident by the callers yesterday (it was frustrating to listen to Satish constantly being interupted while making a point). Satish calls it like it is and doesnt sugarcoat anything, which is greatly appreciated.

I agree with the bold section. Callers should have let him speak his piece and wait for their turn to respond. On the other hand, Mr. Sanan did his share of interrupting as well. Some of those spirited interruptions included his viewpoint that the Lone Star and Monmouth BCs were "disasters." Coming from a member of the BC board, that word choice struck me as injurious. I'm confident that Mr. Sanan didn't intend to be injurious, but there it is. So this is the thanks Lone Star and Monmouth get for hosting the BC, which they were proud to do, even though it cost them financially to do so? Think about how the organizers of those events must feel; the word "disaster" implies that all their hard work was not only meaningless but detrimental to the sport.

Lots of us have attended and enjoyed BC days at the smaller venues. The weather and racing at Lone Star were splendid. Who could attach the word "disaster" to a day that saw outstanding wins by Ashado, Ouija Board, Ghostzapper, Better Talk Now, Singletary, and Speightstown (among others)? And although the weather at Monmouth was wretched, the racing was anything but, with spectacular runs by Curlin, Midnight Lute, Ginger Punch, Kip Deville, War Pass, Indian Blessing, and English Channel (among others). I'll never forget those races, and I thought the events themselves were well-organized. What's more, I enjoyed my trips. Variety is nice.

Mr. Sanan's heart and passion for racing are evident. I think he's spot-on when he discusses racing's broken business model, and he has some terrific marketing ideas. I just don't like this one about the permanent host site.