Which (if any) 3-yr-olds will run next year?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Good point about the risk of the untimely ending, but I don't agree with your conclusion. Anguish is part of the game. The Barbaro saga did nothing to hurt horseracing. Horseracing got more good press that year than any year in the past 20.

You may be right about some owners sitting out rather than paying higher insurance, but I'm skeptical of that.



I'd certainly agree that keeping horses in training isn't going to single-handedly solve all the problems. But I do think a fan base is important, and it's not easy to have a fan base in a sport where the stars disappear as soon as they become familiar.



Didn't Funny Cide bring fans and attention to Finger Lakes when he ran his swan song race? Of course it would have helped if Funny Cide had raced at his earlier level a la Kelso or John Henry. But even with his diminished talent, he was a popular draw.

Anyway, as always I appreciate and respect your thoughts.

--Dunbar

You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.


If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are not suggesting that breakdowns are good or beneficial are you?

I'm saying that the spector of a breakdown is not a reason to rush a healthy horse off to the breeding shed. And I'm saying that Barbaro's breakdown brought the sport more positive press than any other event of the last 20 years.

In general, I don't think the occasional loss of a top horse to a breakdown will hurt the sport enough to offset the benefit of keeping the stars in training.

Fan base of betting customers is important...regular fans are not. Sorry but if you just just watch the sport and dont bet or participate you are really not important. Unlike other sports which have tv contracts that pay big bucks, ticket sales income and merchandising, all of which a regular fan will partake in, we only have betting as a revenue source. So if you dont bet, why should the industry care about you? You as a nonbetter or owner are not adding to the sport in any manner.It is one of the biggest problems that the industry faces is that its leaders for so long tried to sweep the gambling aspect under the rug instead of promoting it. Even now they hire marketing people who seemingly fail to understand the demographic that they should be going after.

I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.

If Funny Cide was a colt, what would he have been worth after the Triple Crown? $25 or 30 million?
If Funny Cide were a colt and campaigned for 2 more years with the same results, what would he be worth as a 5 year old? $5 million?

You do the math.

Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I'm saying that the spector of a breakdown is not a reason to rush a healthy horse off to the breeding shed. And I'm saying that Barbaro's breakdown brought the sport more positive press than any other event of the last 20 years.

In general, I don't think the occasional loss of a top horse to a breakdown will hurt the sport enough to offset the benefit of keeping the stars in training.



I agree with some of this. But I don't know how you distinguish the fans that end up being bettors from the fans that are simply fans. I was a fan from the time I was a kid, but didn't start seriously betting the horses until maybe 15 years ago. I'm one of the very few sports bettors I know who also bets horses.

In my mind, the industry should work on establishing a fan base. The betting fans will emerge from that fan base fairly naturally.

You are also ignoring the impact that a larger fan base would have on TV revenues. The current viewership of broadcast racing is a joke.



Okay, here's the math. I assume in most cases a deal would be cut at some point during the 3-yr-old year. Deals were cut with Street Sense and Hard Spun earlier this year before they finished racing. There's no reason that a deal couldn't be cut that includes another year of racing. Yes, the deal would be for less than what would be offered for immediate breeding. But I don't think it would be hugely less. And under the idea that Genuine Risk and I put forward, there would be no alternative but to wait anyway.

--Dunbar

Barbaro's story while unique in its effects will be the exception rather than the rule. If GW had been Street Sense the outcry in the US would be much more severe. We as an industry have no way to defend or spin breakdowns that will be acceptable to the general public. The more the public gets familar and attached to a horse the worse the kickback will be if there is a tragedy associated with him.

Almost every sports gambler that I know plays horses but maybe I am the exception to the rule because of where I live and where i grew up.


The farms will not allow their investments to contine to run and possibly decrease in value. Once a horse reaches a peak value there is no reason to risk them losing that value especially considering insurance premiums. If they sit out a year they sit out a year. Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Plus if other jurisdictions dont adopt the same rules what keeps them from shuttling them elsewhere until they are 5?

Seems to me if you didn't allow any horses to race in the country that were offspring of stallions under five and didn't allow any horses to stand here if they stood in another country before they turned five that it would decrease the stallion prospect enough in value to not make much sense for the majority of stallion prospects to stand elsewhere for that one year.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Seems to me if you didn't allow any horses to race in the country that were offspring of stallions under five and didn't allow any horses to stand here if they stood in another country before they turned five that it would decrease the stallion prospect enough in value to not make much sense for the majority of stallion prospects to stand elsewhere for that one year.

It would also lead to issues when dealing with Southern Hemisphere horses. It is an interesting idea but there are too many problems associated with it. Capping the number of foals per year does the same thing without all the complications. You need to find a way to decrease the value of the stallions a bit without to help the entire market. By capping the number of foals, you will increase the quality of books of mares to the top stallions by eliminateing the lesser mares. That in turn means many mares currently being overbred will need to find a lesser stallion which in turn will lead to lesser mares at the bottom of the chain finding racing a better option.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It would also lead to issues when dealing with Southern Hemisphere horses. It is an interesting idea but there are too many problems associated with it. Capping the number of foals per year does the same thing without all the complications. You need to find a way to decrease the value of the stallions a bit without to help the entire market. By capping the number of foals, you will increase the quality of books of mares to the top stallions by eliminateing the lesser mares. That in turn means many mares currently being overbred will need to find a lesser stallion which in turn will lead to lesser mares at the bottom of the chain finding racing a better option.

How about foals by stallion age? If you want to stand a 3yo he can only cover 20 mares. If you want to stand a 4yo he can only cover 50 mares. Then you have a set amount for 5yos and up. You could easily factor in Southern Hemisphere horses that way by setting a number for the SH horses by age. If you truly have a horse that can't race and want to stand him at stud as a 3yo or 4yo you could on a limited basis but if you have a horse capable of racing there is less incentive to send him to the shed while limited to a book of 50.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

How about foals by stallion age? If you want to stand a 3yo he can only cover 20 mares. If you want to stand a 4yo he can only cover 50 mares. Then you have a set amount for 5yos and up. You could easily factor in Southern Hemisphere horses that way by setting a number for the SH horses by age. If you truly have a horse that can't race and want to stand him at stud as a 3yo or 4yo you could on a limited basis but if you have a horse capable of racing there is less incentive to send him to the shed while limited to a book of 50.

That is still too complicated. Cap the number at 90 for any age and you will lower the value of the stallion but they will still be valuble. They may raise the prices a bit to compensate but the market will not bear a wholesale rise in stud fees, they are overvalued now. You cant destroy the breeding industry because thousands of horses are owned and raced by those same people. Racing horses will be the first thing they will cut out.The 2 industries need to be more aligned and by nudging the value of stallions down it will have a trickledown effect on the whole breeding industry which should help the racing side. But doing things radically wont help. The fact is that many of our biggest owners are involved because they are trying to hit a homerun with a stallion deal. You have to still have that carrot to dangle or they will go elsewhere which will not be a good thing for anyone. But if the top were lowered while still being lucrative the same effect of them leaving should not be felt.