Three New BC Races

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Riot

I'm not convinced of that, I think it's an assumption that won't play out. But we'll both just have to see.

It obviously will reduce field size. There is no doubt about that. The addition of three new races this year already decreased field size.
If someone had a really top notch 2yo turf filly this year they could either take a shot against the boys in the juvenile turf OR try the dirt in the juvy fillies. Not next year. They can enter her in a BIG money 2yo turf race for fillies instead.
Saying that it won't reduce field size is nonsensical. People could disagree on how big of an impact it will have....but it will certainly have an impact.

[Bobby Fischer]

I am not a fan of synthetic surface at major tracks, however if the 2008 BC is managed even half way decent, it should be a huge success as far as field size.

The surfaces have been around for a few years now and trainers are catching on.
In 2008 you will get all the standard BC horses , + several polytrack specialists, + extra foriegn turf horses to run on synthetic.

I don't think we will see negative effects until we move back to a dirt surface for a few years. I think a BC with a synthetic surface lowers the quality of the sport, but field size should increase.

The Classic should absolutely have a fully loaded gate in 2008. If not then someone isn't doing their job.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

I am not a fan of synthetic surface at major tracks, however if the 2008 BC is managed even half way decent, it should be a huge success as far as field size.

The surfaces have been around for a few years now and trainers are catching on.
In 2008 you will get all the standard BC horses , + several polytrack specialists, + extra foriegn turf horses to run on synthetic.

I don't think we will see negative effects until we move back to a dirt surface for a few years. I think a BC with a synthetic surface lowers the quality of the sport, but field size should increase.

The Classic should absolutely have a fully loaded gate in 2008. If not then someone isn't doing their job.

If the dollar doesn't recover a little, the incentive for horses from across the pond to come over is diminished. Some will certainly still do it (as they did this year) but probably not as many as in past years.

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If the dollar doesn't recover a little, the incentive for horses from across the pond to come over is diminished. Some will certainly still do it (as they did this year) but probably not as many as in past years.

Yes, that will have an impact. The owners always have to weigh which races they ship to and consider things like economics, bloodstock, prestige...
Some of these outfits seem to ship a couple horses over and participate each year.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by miraja2

It obviously will reduce field size. There is no doubt about that. The addition of three new races this year already decreased field size.
If someone had a really top notch 2yo turf filly this year they could either take a shot against the boys in the juvenile turf OR try the dirt in the juvy fillies. Not next year. They can enter her in a BIG money 2yo turf race for fillies instead.
Saying that it won't reduce field size is nonsensical. People could disagree on how big of an impact it will have....but it will certainly have an impact.

Didn't the Juvenile races all vastly oversubscribe this year? I am sure that was a major factor in the decision to add the juvenile fillies turf race. So now instead of 22 entries in the juvenile turf we will only get 16. Either way we will wind up with a full field.

[Riot]

It obviously will reduce field size. There is no doubt about that. The addition of three new races this year already decreased field size.

2007 Friday:
F & M sprint - 10 entries - 14 allowed
Juv turf 1 mile - 12 entries - 12 allowed
Dirt mile - 9 entries - 14 allowed

2007 Saturday:
Juv Fillies - 14 entries - 14 allowed
Juv colts - 13 - 14 allowed
F & M turf - 12 entires - 14 allowed
Sprint - 11 entries - 14 allowed
Mile - 14 entries - 14 allowed
Distaff - 12 entries - 14 allowed
Turf - 8 entries - 14 allowed
Classic - 9 entries - 14 allowed

Here's the 2007 lists, including nominations under the Division click http://www.breederscup.com/content.aspx?id=28964

Who clearly moved from Saturday to Friday at time of entry? Seriously, let's figure it out to see how fields were affected by adding Friday.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Riot

2007 Friday:
F & M sprint - 10 entries - 14 allowed
Juv turf 1 mile - 12 entries - 12 allowed
Dirt mile - 9 entries - 14 allowed

2007 Saturday:
Juv Fillies - 14 entries - 14 allowed
Juv colts - 13 - 14 allowed
F & M turf - 12 entires - 14 allowed
Sprint - 11 entries - 14 allowed
Mile - 14 entries - 14 allowed
Distaff - 12 entries - 14 allowed
Turf - 8 entries - 14 allowed
Classic - 9 entries - 14 allowed

Here's the 2007 lists, including nominations under the Division click http://www.breederscup.com/content.aspx?id=28964

Who clearly moved from Saturday to Friday at time of entry? Seriously, let's figure it out to see how fields were affected by adding Friday.

Just La Traviata and she'd probably be crippled right now if she'd have tried to take on the boys.

[Riot]

Easiest way is to look at the entries for the three Friday divisions (cannot cut and paste it off the website, sorry) - and see what horses more properly belonged in a Saturday race.

If they didn't really belong in Saturday, then they were right to enter on Friday.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by miraja2

It obviously will reduce field size. There is no doubt about that. The addition of three new races this year already decreased field size.
If someone had a really top notch 2yo turf filly this year they could either take a shot against the boys in the juvenile turf OR try the dirt in the juvy fillies. Not next year. They can enter her in a BIG money 2yo turf race for fillies instead.
Saying that it won't reduce field size is nonsensical. People could disagree on how big of an impact it will have....but it will certainly have an impact.

The 2 year old turf races and turf sprint will be oversubscribed every year. The juvy and juvy fillies will always fill with a large field. You could make a case the "marathon" may steal a horse from the classic but if they are willing to run in a $500k races as opposed to a $5 million dollar race they may not be a viable contender anyway.

[Danzig]

this is the third time i believe since the bcs inception that races have been added.
have any of them proved to be a mistake as yet? of course the ones just run have only run once, so hard to say there....

[King Glorious]

Before they started the F/M Turf, there were quite a few female turf runners that ran in and did pretty well in the open turf events. Included on that list are such runners as Miesque, Ridgewood Pearl, Estrapade, Miss Alleged and Hatoof. So they more than proved that they could hold their own in the open events, which the Europeans pretty much knew anyway because they don't hold the same reservations as Americans do when it comes to racing females against males. But there were also several that would skip the BC because they didn't want to take on that big a challenge and would instead point to a later race like the Matriarch. A horse like Discreet Cat may have missed the BC altogether if there was no Dirt Mile this year. Some might argue that these new races dilute the fields. I don't think they do. I think that the prime contenders for most races will still go in the races they were contenders for. No horse is going to skip the $5 million Classic for the $1 million Dirt Mile or $500k Marathon if they are a prime contender for the bigger purse. I'm ok with adding more races that don't take away from the other races because it increases the chances that more of the stars of the game will be present. I wonder if having a Dirt Mile in 1994 would have brought Holy Bull to the BC? A BC with him there, even in the Dirt Mile instead of the Classic, would have been better than it was not having him there at all.

[blackthroatedwind]

You're forgetting that Holy Bull wasn't nominated and for that reason he skipped the BC as both a 2YO and 3YO. In fact, he concluded his 2YO season in one of the Calder Stakes, the In Reality.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You're forgetting that Holy Bull wasn't nominated and for that reason he skipped the BC as both a 2YO and 3YO. In fact, he concluded his 2YO season in one of the Calder Stakes, the In Reality.

That's right. I had forgotten about that. I still wonder though if maybe a little more consideration would have been given to it at the end of his 3yo season, seeing how good he had become. I think that had he gone as a 2yo, he would have still been second choice to Dehere and possibly even third choice. I don't know how much the purse was for the In Reality was back then (I believe it's $400k now) but the odds were much more in his favor to collect that winning check than if he had gone to the Juvenile. As a 3yo, he would have been the overwhelming favorite and for a much bigger purse had he gone to the Classic so I'm not sure if his not being nominated was the sole reason or if the fact that I don't think Croll ever felt that 10f was his best distance PLUS they would have had to pay to do it, is what kept him out.

[blackthroatedwind]

It was actually a $400K race back then.

He wasn't going in any BC as a 3YO. He ended his year with the Woodward and didn't even go to the Jockey Club Gold Cup ( which was an even weaker field that the Woodward ). If he wanted to run in a big Mile race he could have gone in the, then, NYRA Mile.....where at least that day he would have had trouble beating Cigar.

[Riot]

That argument is settled....or perhaps you didn't see the fields for the races this year.

Settled? I'm still waiting to measure exactly what the impact of three new Friday races this year had on Saturday.

See the fields? I posted the fields for 2007, above. Waiting on more than one comment, and I would seriously like to hear yours.

What horses out of the below five races do you think left the Saturday races for Friday (they had to be eligible for Saturday), and what race did they end up in on Friday, instead?

F & M turf - 12 entries - 14 allowed
Distaff - 12 entries - 14 allowed
Sprint - 11 entries - 14 allowed
Turf - 8 entries - 14 allowed
Classic - 9 entries - 14 allowed

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Danzig

this is the third time i believe since the bcs inception that races have been added.
have any of them proved to be a mistake as yet?

Yes.
Of course, in my opinion, every single race in the Breeders' Cup is a mistake. But the more they add, the worse it gets.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Yes.
Of course, in my opinion, every single race in the Breeders' Cup is a mistake. But the more they add, the worse it gets.

let me re-word that question
have any races been removed from the card? any had trouble filling? any reduced in status after gaining a graded rating?

as for the bc and the races leading up to it, you see the same thing in the spring classics. every three year old race is a derby prep, and every race after the belmont is a prep for the bc. i don't agree with it...but then, you have people who say any race other than the tc races shouldn't be a grade one. can't have it both ways. if each race should stand on its own merits, you can't then say it should have a reduced standing.

the worst thing about the bc is the fact they named it the 'world championships'. it's not that at all.

[sumitas]

Because of the BC initiative for a "marathon" division this is the perfect year to return the Jockey Club Gold Cup to 16F, as it used to be. I surmise this move could very well place the JCGC back to elite status. Group Plan was the last to win at that distance, 1975 in 3:23.20. Trained by The Chief.

Among many notables to win the JCGC at that distance, 1921 - 1975, was Kelso, winning a mind boggling 5 in a row from 1960-1964. He set the race record in 1964 at 3:19.20... Forego won in 1974 in 3:21.20.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jockey_Club_Gold_Cup

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Danzig

let me re-word that question
have any races been removed from the card?

Give me a break. Just because something was introduced, and never removed, does NOT mean it must be a good thing. I'm sure we can all think of about 1 billion things in the world that have been introduced and not removed. By your logic those are all good ideas, because if they weren't....somebody would have removed them!
A thing's mere existence does not prove the worthiness of that existence.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Give me a break. Just because something was introduced, and never removed, does NOT mean it must be a good thing. I'm sure we can all think of about 1 billion things in the world that have been introduced and not removed. By your logic those are all good ideas, because if they weren't....somebody would have removed them!
A thing's mere existence does not prove the worthiness of that existence.

what i was asking about was whether any race in the bc card ever was a failure, or removed after being added. that would indicate that they have made errors and corrected them. what races are a failure on the bc card, but remain?