Rachel Alexandra (116 Beyer for Haskell)

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by justindew

Part of me would love to see Rachel Alexandra skip the Breeders' Cup and run somewhere else on the same day. Then I'd like to see the Breeders' Cup go away forever, and have its disappearance somehow attributed to Rachel Alexandra skipping it.

As many problems as the BC admittedly has, anyone who complains about why horse racing is so fractured and can't gain any national traction, probably should look to you for an answer. Taking your toys and running away won't solve anything, but all the dirt lovers who insist they love racing lose all credibility when they promote splintering what little base we have. No one outside the industry will notice if RA doesn't run in the BC, but if promoted in the right way, a whole lot more of the public would be aware if she did run.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by GBBob

As many problems as the BC admittedly has, anyone who complains about why horse racing is so fractured and can't gain any national traction, probably should look to you for an answer. Taking your toys and running away won't solve anything, but all the dirt lovers who insist they love racing lose all credibility when they promote splintering what little base we have. No one outside the industry will notice if RA doesn't run in the BC, but if promoted in the right way, a whole lot more of the public would be aware if she did run.

My problem with the BC really has nothing to do with the dirt/synthetic issue. It's what the BC has done to the entire racing calendar that bothers me.

[randallscott35]

I wouldn't be surprised if she matched her Oaks number with that effort in terms of Thorograph. It was that good. I was more impressed with this race than the Oaks actually.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by justindew

My problem with the BC really has nothing to do with the dirt/synthetic issue. It's what the BC has done to the entire racing calendar that bothers me.

That's a different and legitimate conversation. I fear I am veering into stubborness showed by a rare few over this, but I can't help myself. Horse racing's best interests are served by RA running in a BC race...there is no minute agenda that can overcome this big picture reality.

I have spoken

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by GBBob

That's a different and legitimate conversation. I fear I am veering into stubborness showed by a rare few over this, but I can't help myself. Horse racing's best interests are served by RA running in a BC race...there is no minute agenda that can overcome this big picture reality.

I have spoken

I really think you are overestimating the promotability of the BC to non-racing fans.

[SniperSB23]

I'd rather see Golidkova, Zenyatta, and Rachel square off in the BC Mile than any of them race on the synthetic. At least on the turf they'd prove something on a surface with historical significance.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I really think you are overestimating the promotability of the BC to non-racing fans.

And I really think you are underestimating the potential of RA to non-racing fans..If it wasn't her specifically I wouldn't take up this fight, but racing as an industry has waited forever for a real positive to market the sport and all the hatred of you know what should take a back seat for what is best for the sport. Mr and Mrs Joe Blow won't know what surface she is running on, but if The Today Show has a feature on her, and if marketed right they would, then they just might watch...and that's a start. We are all way too close to the industry sometimes to take a step back and realize our biggest star not running in our second biggest race can't be a good thing.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by GBBob

And I really think you are underestimating the potential of RA to non-racing fans..If it wasn't her specifically I wouldn't take up this fight, but racing as an industry has waited forever for a real positive to market the sport and all the hatred of you know what should take a back seat for what is best for the sport. Mr and Mrs Joe Blow won't know what surface she is running on, but if The Today Show has a feature on her, and if marketed right they would, then they just might watch...and that's a start. We are all way too close to the industry sometimes to take a step back and realize our biggest star not running in our second biggest race can't be a good thing.

And what happens if she loses? Pretty anti-climatic and the people go away.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by GBBob

but racing as an industry has waited forever for a real positive to market the sport and all the hatred of you know what should take a back seat for what is best for the sport.

Zenyatta will beat her to a pulp on that surface...

I'd empty my pockets on Euphony against RA on a synthetic track. She'd have no chance with Euphony .. not that Euphony is that much horse.

She will probably run a lot better than Big Brown did in the Belmont .. but I'm convinced that using RA running in the Breeders Cup to market the sport won't turn out so hot when she runs dreadful and excuses start to fly.

Excuses that will sound very pathetic to those who don't fully understand a complex sport.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Zenyatta will beat her to a pulp on that surface...

I'd empty my pockets on Euphony against RA on a synthetic track. She'd have no chance with Euphony .. not that Euphony is that much horse.

She will probably run a lot better than Big Brown did in the Belmont .. but I'm convinced that using RA running in the Breeders Cup to market the sport won't turn out so hot when she runs dreadful and excuses start to fly.

Maybe Byk can talk Jess into giving her back to the super talented Hal Wiggins if they decide to go to SA.. lol

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Zenyatta will beat her to a pulp on that surface...

What are we basing this on, concretely?

You know what I'd really like to see? All those 'fast' horses all you POLY FOBES drool over, you know, those kickback specialist sprinters, on the SA downhill turf course in a 6.5F race. Let's see if they're 'fast' enough to wire on that surface. Nothing wrong with earning a win, whether you're 'fast' or not, is there?

I have other suggestions as well, for the athletically 'challenged' but 'fast' dirt darlings.

Just ask.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I really think you are overestimating the promotability of the BC to non-racing fans.

True.

I was at the Breeders Cup last year.

Seriously, I heard at least five or six people who were obviously in SoCal on business and decided to lay over and come to the Breeders Cup.

I guess they were at least regular racing fans.

I overheard their ends of conversation with friends from home with their excited brag that they were at Santa Anita and "at the Breeders Cup!"


Each and every time, they needed a follow up conversation to explain what the Breeders Cup and it's significance was all about.

For the record, I'm very glad I was there.

I suspect that most of you who diss Santa Anita live in states that elected Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barrack Obama and John Kerry.

Our Governor can kick the arse of all your current and prior elected officials. Except for perhaps Hillary Clinton.....

And we have Bo Derek on OUR state racing board.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by GBBob

That's a different and legitimate conversation. I fear I am veering into stubborness showed by a rare few over this, but I can't help myself. Horse racing's best interests are served by RA running in a BC race...there is no minute agenda that can overcome this big picture reality.

I have spoken

While I respect your opinion, I disagree.

Ending the BC forever with one devestating blow is not a minute agenda.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by justindew

While I respect your opinion, I disagree.

Ending the BC forever with one devestating blow is not a minute agenda.

But Justin...it won't

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by justindew

My problem with the BC really has nothing to do with the dirt/synthetic issue. It's what the BC has done to the entire racing calendar that bothers me.

The BC hasn't done anything to the racing calender. Your issue should be with the trainers out there that keep the top horses from meeting more often during the year so that the only time top horses all get together is in the BC and because there are so few opportunities to see them matched up, Eclipse voters place too much emphasis on the BC result. The BC was at the same time of the year back in the 80's and 90's when horses raced more and faced each other more. It's what the trainers and voters have done, not the BC.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The BC hasn't done anything to the racing calender. Your issue should be with the trainers out there that keep the top horses from meeting more often during the year so that the only time top horses all get together is in the BC and because there are so few opportunities to see them matched up, Eclipse voters place too much emphasis on the BC result. The BC was at the same time of the year back in the 80's and 90's when horses raced more and faced each other more. It's what the trainers and voters have done, not the BC.

Yes king, but it is what connections have done in response to the existence of the BC that has, in part, caused this to happen. Therefore if the BC didn't exist, their response wouldn't exist either.
I am not an anti-poly guy, but this idea that they simply must run their horse in some BC race is what bothers me. Why? Connections are supposed to pick out races that make sense for their horses....right? If they don't think running on poly makes sense for their animal....they shouldn't do it. If they like dirt and want to send a message that they want the BC on dirt....they should do that too.
As for the argument that it would be good for the sport to run her because tv ratings would be up, in a BC-less world wouldn't tv ratings also have been up if she ran in some races in the fall like the JCGC (which in a BC-less world wouldn't have become just a "prep" race).
Basically I am in favor of almost any move by any person that makes the Breeders' Cup even a little bit less important.

[miraja2]

As for the filly, I think Summer Bird, Munnings, and Papa Clem are all pretty decent horses, and the ease with which she dispatched them all yesterday was quite impressive.
She's the real deal.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Yes king, but it is what connections have done in response to the existence of the BC that has, in part, caused this to happen. Therefore if the BC didn't exist, their response wouldn't exist either.

Trainers used to run their horses 3-5 times or more on a regular basis when prepping for the TC. Having your last prep more than four weeks out was unheard of. Look at how they do it now. More and more are using only two prep races and it's not even unusual to have a couple of horses coming in with layoffs of five weeks or longer. The training and racing philosophy has changed. Do you blame the Derby for the changes in the way horses are prepared for it? If not, why do you blame the BC for the way that horses are prepared for it? The BC existed when Cigar was running 10 times in 1995. It existed when Personal Ensign and Alysheba were running their ninth races of 1988. It existed when Easy Goer was running his 11th race of 1989. Hell, it was just two years ago when Curlin's BC was his ninth race of the year. If you want to blame anyone, blame the trainers, blame the Eclipse voters, blame the sheets guys (who tell these trainers that horses need more and more time between starts and have created this less is better approach). The BC is not at fault.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The BC hasn't done anything to the racing calender.

This is way off. The Breeders' Cup has essentially forced the hand of racetracks to schedule their big races in three or four week span to allow for (at least) three or four weeks to the Breeders' Cup. The result is a clustered racing calendar and lost-in-the-shuffle stakes. Once prominent races have been pinched and torn and pulled as a result. Furthermore, racing ends after the first week of November. What would be so wrong with pushing back the BC to say, Thanksgiving weekend, and giving racetracks another three weeks to work out a coherent schedule of preps and promotion?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

This is way off. The Breeders' Cup has essentially forced the hand of racetracks to schedule their big races in three or four week span to allow for (at least) three or four weeks to the Breeders' Cup. The result is a clustered racing calendar and lost-in-the-shuffle stakes. Once prominent races have been pinched and torn and pulled as a result. Furthermore, racing ends after the first week of November. What would be so wrong with pushing back the BC to say, Thanksgiving weekend, and giving racetracks another three weeks to work out a coherent schedule of preps and promotion?

where would you hold it? Everyone is going crazy about SA, hollywood is poly/gone soon, GP has the wrong facility, AP is poly, NY and KY are way too cold. Maybe if Brunetti were to croak and a sane person were to take over and you made Hialeah the standing location for the BC could you do this. But of course vampires never die and brunetti will live forever.