Santa Anita gets 2008 Breeders Cup

[hi_im_god]

is it possible they would level the purses between the classic and the turf? the only real problems i've seen stated here are "i haven't figured out how to handicap this stuff" and "the turf horses will run for more money in the classic".

the first one is a personal problem. the second one is something someone needs to think through. i think if the new surface is as kind as hollypark there may be a preference for it among overseas shippers vs. the usual good (hard) conditions on sa grass.

it really is a different world now isn't it?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

Hate California all you want, but I will be at the 2008 Breeders Cup for 2 days in wonderful Califorinia Sunshine while most of you will be locked up for the winter. Warm sunshine or freezing ass snow. No brainer for most.

I'll be there too!...and Scuds is coming, and MMSC will be ensconced in the Finish Line box seats to root for the Euros!

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by copying

All this bitchin' and moanin' -- "I've lost interest", "I won't play!" -- come Fall of '08, all these whiners will be on here with their "2,8/4,11,5/4,7/all posts. When RM wins 5 races, Ateam will proclaim "that's horrible racing." When Funnycide wins, we'll hear, "see, glorified claimers out there!"

When it's all said and done, we'll see the usual headlines: Another record handle, so and so upsets, a spill, blah, blah, blah....

From what I've seen on this board, most are gamblers and will bet any horse, anywhere if they think money is to be made.

Nah, broski, I haven't bet a So. Cal. track since the summer, and don't intend to anytime soon. Thanks for singling me out, though.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

I'll be there too!...and Scuds is coming, and MMSC will be ensconced in the Finish Line box seats to root for the Euros!

My dude Scuds hasn't seen the light of day in eight years, I doubt he's risking turning into a bat just because the Breeders' Cup is in town.

[Bobby Fischer]

pedigree could become a factor depending on how the surface turns out.

Last year we had two turf horses in the BC Classic who didn't stand much of a chance. Both out of the sire Danehill. At Hollywood cushion-track, they would have run better races and wouldn't have been automatic tosses.

I don't like any Grade 1 race being run on polytrack. On the bright side the payoffs could be very nice.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

My dude Scuds hasn't seen the light of day in eight years, I doubt he's risking turning into a bat just because the Breeders' Cup is in town.

I will take the 5th on that one! You never know....

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

pedigree could become a factor depending on how the surface turns out.

Last year we had two turf horses in the BC Classic who didn't stand much of a chance. Both out of the sire Danehill. At Hollywood cushion-track, they would have run better races and wouldn't have been automatic tosses.

I don't like any Grade 1 race being run on polytrack. On the bright side the payoffs could be very nice.

That's a good point. Every year, the Danehills are automatic tosses in the dirt races, and now they probably will have to be considered.

[Hawk]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

I don't like any Grade 1 race being run on polytrack.

How have you been able to formulate this opinion?

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by Hawk

How have you been able to formulate this opinion?

I feel it is a different surface and a fair share of high class dirt horses may not perform as well on polytrack.
When we have a Grade 1 polytrack race that usually means that it was formerly a Grade 1 dirt race. Mainly I like the dirt races and as a fan/observer don't want to see them go .

[PPerfectfan]

Originally Posted by Honu

wooohoooo i cant wait , last time it was a S.A. we ran 7 and won 4 maybe in 2008 we can make it 5.

And I will be there with bells on. Might even bring ya some special cajun cocktails. I done put in my reservations at the "Brown Hotel"!!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

We just ran the B.C. on an incredibly biased track,and most everybody still didn't seem to mind much.You pathetic losers just read the lady say her horses' legs hold up better on it,but you want them to run on the more dangerous surface(a surface that they can't seem to ever get fair on B.C. Day, anyways.) EITHER YOU GIVE A SHT ABOUT THE HEALTH OF THESE HORSES ,OR YA JUST DON'T.We actually have no choice out here,we get pathetic field sizes if we were to just keep running on dirt.That's just a fact.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Joey,I gotta better chance of going out for dollar day this Saturday than I do of going to B.C. 2008. I WENT TO THE 1ST ONE AT HOLLYWOOD PARK.I don't care much about it anymore.People get their horses ready for their one shot to win a B.C. race,and the track is so far out of whack that only half the field(front,back,outside,or inside) has a chance to win.That is pathetic.

[whodey17]

Turf horses dont necessarily run well on Poly. Look at Wait A While. Then you also have some horses who can run on dirt and Poly. Look at Street Sense and Quay. Then you could also use Hard Spun as an example as well. The reason why bettors like Keeneland is because of the payoffs that are happening over there. Also, I like the races. I dont care how fast they run the quarter in, and then they sprint home. I think that is more exciting than watching a horse go to the lead and stay there (so called merry-go-round race) like Sinister Minister. The only problem I have is that it will be less than a year since the track surface will be put down. Other than that, it will be a success.

[Danzig]

i do wonder one thing....

how does the graded stakes committee justify refusing grade one status to new races, due to not being run under the same conditions for two years (since they're new) but all graded races now on poly, rather than dirt, remain at their current status--but turf moved to dirt due to weather loses its status for that race?

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by whodey17

Turf horses dont necessarily run well on Poly. Look at Wait A While.

Yes, and look at the horses who beat Wait A While.....

Do you realize that the top three finishers in the Commonwealth all exited one-mile races on the turf?

Wait A While, had far and away the best dirt form of anyone in her race last Saturday.

Hollywood Park's Cushion track surface isn't much better than the hideious polytrack at KEE. To me, that's not the same horse racing I grew up with and have been a fan of for all my life.

I can understand using the surface in the North-East, at cheaper tracks that are sensative to weather....from what I've seen so far, it doesn't belong anywhere else in my personal opinion.

But hey, the interests of the horseman/commerical breeders always trump what the fans and the betting public want.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

But hey, the interests of the horseman/commerical breeders always trump what the fans and the betting public want.

Don't the interests of the horses matter at all. What you seem to be saying is that certain segments of "the betting public" are more concerned with their pocketbook and their subjective enjoyment of the races than the welfare of the horse - and the safety of the horses should be relegated below the "wants" of the bettors.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Don't the interests of the horses matter at all. What you seem to be saying is that certain segments of "the betting public" are more concerned with their pocketbook and their subjective enjoyment of the races than the welfare of the horse - and the safety of the horses should be relegated below the "wants" of the bettors.

What drives me nuts is that everyone automatically assumes "Dirt = bad, Polytrack = good" when it comes to horses' health. And while, yes, it's proven that artificial surfaces are easier on the horses, I don't see a ton of breakdowns in NY racing, and I think it's because the dirt tracks are much deeper than they are anywhere else. I just feel that any track that has a lot of injuries or breakdowns goes "Oh, that's it, we've gotta get polytrack" and takes the easy way out rather than actually using some brainpower and figuring out how to improve the dirt surface.

The bottom line is that, like it or not, the betting public's needs and wants come before the horses' safety. I'm sorry, you might not like hearing it, but it's the cold reality of a gambling-driven sport. If everyone suddenly stopped betting polytrack races, the tracks would have to either figure out a way to make it play more like dirt, or rip it up all together. Do I think it should be that way? Ideally, no. Am I advocating ripping up all polytrack? No. But if you think the wave of tracks moving to artificial surfaces isn't partly or wholly influenced by the fact that people still bet Turfway and Keeneland when they switched, I think you're delusional.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Don't the interests of the horses matter at all. What you seem to be saying is that certain segments of "the betting public" are more concerned with their pocketbook and their subjective enjoyment of the races than the welfare of the horse - and the safety of the horses should be relegated below the "wants" of the bettors.

If the horseman really cared about the welfare of the horse---perhaps they would stop over-medicating them.

If the commerical breeders really cared about the welfare of the horses---perhaps they'd put more emphasis on breeding for soundness.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

What drives me nuts is that everyone automatically assumes "Dirt = bad, Polytrack = good" when it comes to horses' health. And while, yes, it's proven that artificial surfaces are easier on the horses, I don't see a ton of breakdowns in NY racing, and I think it's because the dirt tracks are much deeper than they are anywhere else. I just feel that any track that has a lot of injuries or breakdowns goes "Oh, that's it, we've gotta get polytrack" and takes the easy way out rather than actually using some brainpower and figuring out how to improve the dirt surface.

The bottom line is that, like it or not, the betting public's needs and wants come before the horses' safety. I'm sorry, you might not like hearing it, but it's the cold reality of a gambling-driven sport. If everyone suddenly stopped betting polytrack races, the tracks would have to either figure out a way to make it play more like dirt, or rip it up all together. Do I think it should be that way? Ideally, no. Am I advocating ripping up all polytrack? No. But if you think the wave of tracks moving to artificial surfaces isn't partly or wholly influenced by the fact that people still bet Turfway and Keeneland when they switched, I think you're delusional.

JOEY,how many more times we gunna have to see the hype -build up to the B.C., and then see the track is whack? I am over these biased dirt tracks on B.C. day.On that one day,I want it to be an unbiased track...o.k.? If the Artificial tracks are 'biased" against certain horses,atleast you know that going into the day.You don't have to wait until 3-4 races in.Even if ya see the bias 3-4 races in,people are gunna tell ya there ain't a bias.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

If the horseman really cared about the welfare of the horse---perhaps they would stop over-medicating them.

If the commerical breeders really cared about the welfare of the horses---perhaps they'd put more emphasis on breeding for soundness.

Those are separate questions. I agree that these are legitimate issues, but they do not mean that we should disregard the positive impact that Polytrack that has upon the horses' welfare.