Haskin's piece from today ...

[The Indomitable DrugS]

It's a long equine name dropping piece about 3yo's that were excluded from the 23 horses selected in the Derby future wager betting field.

Here's a quote ...

The reason they are up in arms over the decision-making is that they feel several of those chosen are less -- or at least no more -- worthy of inclusion than they are.

They came to the sad conclusion that all one had to do to be considered a Derby contender was to run an outrageously fast Beyer speed figure going six furlongs or shorter, which many handicappers feel may be more of a negative than a positive.

When selecting the 23 horses for this bet ... I would seriously hope the only thing taken into consideration would be 'how much money might this horse take from the betting public?'

That is why horses like This One's For Phil, Notonthesamepage, and Silver City obviously deserve to be included ... while a horse like a Terrain probably doesn't.

About Terrain - he writes -

How could he be excluded after his 2-year-old accomplishments; also back in training.

Terrain was 5th beaten 12.5 lengths in the Delta Downs Jackpot in his most recent start. That race came after 3 synthetic track Graded Stakes defeats in which he basically picked off the tried horses - but never threatened the winner at any point. Without a start in '09 - that horse simply isn't taking much money.

I agree with some of his points about the morning line ... but I really cringe everytime I see anything that suggests "overall accomplishments" should dictate the horses selected.

After Big Brown won that allowance race that was rained off of the turf in his comeback last year .. of course you had hundreds of 3yos more accomplished .. but obviously Big Brown was going to take more money in a future bet than almost all of them.

It's pretty amazing that they can put together a future exacta wager .. but you're still only limited to 23 individual selections.