Saratoga maiden policy...

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What happens when a 2 yo turf race going 2 turns is taken off of the turf? They move the distance back to 7f making it a sprint. What if no one scratches? What if they have MTO's?

Limiting sprint races on the dirt to 8 horse fields is just another politiclly correct move that makes no sense, sends the wrong message and serves to make racing cards less playable to some degree especially if there are a few scratches.

The reasoning that they gave is embarrassing...

I am wondering if another reason is that it will create more 2 year old winners (40 entries now creates 5 winners instead of 4) thus giving their graded stakes fields a boost. We all know that when you win a MSW with a 2 year old, the next logical step now days is a G2.

[parsixfarms]

With field size limited to eight horses, you can pretty much guarantee that all the 2YO races on dirt will be front-loaded in the card.

[Calzone Lord]

Things are becoming easier at all levels.

Look at some of the trainers at the cheap New York track, Finger Lakes this meet:

James S. Acquilano (82-40-14-10) 49% wins
Chris J. Englehart (122-50-34-11) 41% wins
Jeremiah C. Englehart (81-31-16-14) 38% wins
Charlton Baker (80-28-13-13) 35% wins
James T. Wright (31-10-12-5) 32% wins and 71% in exacta.
Michael S. Ferraro (62-17-12-12) 27% wins


You'll see races where five horses in the same race have different trainers winning at over 30% for the meet.

It's like a capitalism VS communism debate -- but in pro sports -- communism works better.

The Super Bowl winner is punished and has to draft 32nd overall. They have to play the tougher schedule next year. The team with the worst records draft highest and play an easier non conference schedule.

Ever since horse racing has drifted further and further away from handicaps -- it has resulted in softer, easier racing...where the best horses and trainers are no longer devalued by a competitive balance.

Handicaps are a huge part of what made trainers run horses. They were also stiff punishments that would truly devalue dominant horses at all class levels.

A horse like Rapid Redux would have been giving 45lbs away in the old days. A horse like Zenyatta would have had had to carry three bowling balls more in her saddle than she did in those narrow wins over terrible females like Rinterval and Anabaa's Creations. She gave just 4lbs to those horses.

After the 3yo classics, you have very few weight for age events. Horses had to either retire or run ... and defeats were absolutely inevitable and sometimes even welcomed early on by trainers of top horses coming back to keep their imposts under control for the more important races.

A lot of times, the goal was to win by as narrow a margin as comfortably possible and to make it look like the jockey was busier than he was. Sometimes the jockey would even still be selling it after the race. They'd pretend like they can't carry the saddle because it's too heavy and Hollywood it up.

The small-fry trainers with the cheap horses would run the living sh!t out of their horses.

[ateamstupid]

This is a joke, right? The circuit that can't get more than 5-6 horses to run in its Grade 1's is taking steps to limit field size?

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

This is a joke, right? The circuit that can't get more than 5-6 horses to run in its Grade 1's is taking steps to limit field size?

Horseplayers lose again.

I'm sure the minimal amount of handle they will lose will be more than made up for by the Slots Monster.

[hud8118]

from one who watches and studies the 2 year old maiden races looking for future opportunities...this decision will certainly reduce my play...will be fewer horses with trips and those who get them will be more obvious and less hidden, thus reducing their future odds...more horses = better opportunities for trip handicapppers, especially the subtle trips and hidden positive efforts in larger fields...just don't like this decision at all!!!!!!

[parsixfarms]

If I recollect correctly, until recent years (when there has been such a premium placed on field size), the 5F races at Saratoga were limited to eight starters, and 5.5F races were limited to 10 starters. My sense is the prior limitations were for safety and fairness reasons (much like when 8.5F races on the inner turf at Belmont were limited to eight starters).

Limiting field size in 6F and 7F races at Saratoga doesn't make much sense to me.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Scav

I am wondering if another reason is that it will create more 2 year old winners (40 entries now creates 5 winners instead of 4) thus giving their graded stakes fields a boost. We all know that when you win a MSW with a 2 year old, the next logical step now days is a G2.

Perhaps they dont want a NY bred trainer winning the title again so they are creating more races for Pletcher to win...only kidding....sort of...

[Alan07]

@ncthorseracing: Del Mar, TOC agree to limit 2-year-old races to 10 starters one day after Saratoga announced they would limit starters to 8.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Alan07

@ncthorseracing: Del Mar, TOC agree to limit 2-year-old races to 10 starters one day after Saratoga announced they would limit starters to 8.

total grandstanding move, they cant hardly fill the straight mdn races past opening week.

[Gaelic Storm]

I thought this was an effort to get more 2 year old winners and card some N1X Alw races and get bigger fields in the 2 year old stakes later in the meet.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Gaelic Storm

I thought this was an effort to get more 2 year old winners and card some N1X Alw races and get bigger fields in the 2 year old stakes later in the meet.

I think people are over thinking this. I dont think the extra few races will make any dent in the later winners races mostly because the same handful of trainers are likely to win additional 2yo maiden races anyway. It is a really weak PR ploy that serves to diminish one of the key elements of Saratoga's meet and is another example of the racing establishment's desire to deemphasize 2yo racing (Derby selection process, CDI not taking entires on 2 yo's till they are calendar year 2yo, etc.).

Of course there are high profile cheerleaders for these moves but too much bs that is written about this sport demanding change misses the extremely important point that changes are just as likely to be negative (some would say far more likely to be negative based on recent history) as they are positives. As usual instead of a comprehensive plan of attack, taking a comprehensive and frank look at the issues causing the weakness of the product that we are putting on the track on a daily basis, we are capping maiden fields for some nonsensical gibberish about safety and quality. NYRA is hardly alone but they have the tools (purses, facilities, quality horses, strong statebred program) to create a better product unlike the crapfests being put on so many other places.