Rachel Alexandra (116 Beyer for Haskell)

[freddymo]

I think Chuck's point at its roots is obvious..Clearly, the more good publicity the better and if Rachel were to run in the BC it would be a higher rated telecast.. Unfortunately, Chuck's simpliest view fails IMO to address the real issues. Poly is a third surface..I am not against a third surface, I don't think there is ANYTHING wrong with it. I just think it needs to be treated as such. You want a poly champship? I do I love racing i have no issue watching and betting 9 Poly races with big fields and quality horses. I just don't think its fair to make dirt horses run on poly when it isn't in their best interest or the sports.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by freddymo

I think Chuck's point at its roots is obvious..Clearly, the more good publicity the better and if Rachel were to run in the BC it would be a higher rated telecast.. Unfortunately, Chuck's simpliest view fails IMO to address the real issues. Poly is a third surface..I am not against a third surface, I don't think there is ANYTHING wrong with it. I just think it needs to be treated as such. You want a poly champship? I do I love racing i have no issue watching and betting 9 Poly races with big fields and quality horses. I just don't think its fair to make dirt horses run on poly when it isn't in their best interest or the sports.

The BC overall hasn't showed to be very powerful in television ratings - I think it would have been more beneficial to televise the Haskell. You're asking people to tune into 6 hours of tv vs. an hour max for the Haskell. Plus if Rachel runs in the Ladies Classic it's on a friday when most people are at work and Saturday has it's own conflict with other sports.

As for the rest of your post - I completely agree.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

The BC overall hasn't showed to be very powerful in television ratings - I think it would have been more beneficial to televise the Haskell. You're asking people to tune into 6 hours of tv vs. an hour max for the Haskell. Plus if Rachel runs in the Ladies Classic it's on a friday when most people are at work and Saturday has it's own conflict with other sports.

As for the rest of your post - I completely agree.

More to my point..I guess Chuck seems to think that Mrs. Crabtree is going to watch Randy Moss(who I love) and Bailey talk for 6 hours about how Rachel didn't vet out intially or how her running style isn't condusive to poly???.. The ratings would be better with Rachel that is a given but how that influences the future health of the sport is VERY hard to calculate. In fact the negative publicity may just be more beneficial..

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

The BC overall hasn't showed to be very powerful in television ratings - I think it would have been more beneficial to televise the Haskell. You're asking people to tune into 6 hours of tv vs. an hour max for the Haskell. Plus if Rachel runs in the Ladies Classic it's on a friday when most people are at work and Saturday has it's own conflict with other sports.

As for the rest of your post - I completely agree.

Hasnt been powerful in the ratings compared to what? The rest of the fall racing schedule? Or the zero rating it would get if it wasnt run? You arent asking people to tune in for 6 hours of covewrage iof they are interested in RA, just as the Super Bowl doesnt require the viewer to watch the pregame show. You are just missing the point that if she were to continue to win she would be a huge story going into the BC, especially so if Zenyatta and her were to meet in the Classic. Instead we will get neither and that isnt the fault of the Breeders Cup, it is the fault of the owners.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hasnt been powerful in the ratings compared to what? The rest of the fall racing schedule? Or the zero rating it would get if it wasnt run? You arent asking people to tune in for 6 hours of covewrage iof they are interested in RA, just as the Super Bowl doesnt require the viewer to watch the pregame show. You are just missing the point that if she were to continue to win she would be a huge story going into the BC, especially so if Zenyatta and her were to meet in the Classic. Instead we will get neither and that isnt the fault of the Breeders Cup, it is the fault of the owners.

I understand your point, but for the connections of this filly and perhaps other connections as well, doesn't it seem at least a little bit odd to have such a large % of this country's major stakes races on one surface throughout the year, and then have the "must-go-to" championship event on an entirely different surface? Two years in a row?
As I've said before, I don't consider myself a poly-hater, but if they schedule the BC on poly, I don't see why anyone can, or should, complain if the connections of a dirt horse decide not to run there. The same would apply to poly horses if they run the BC on dirt.
I just think the addition of what effectively is a third surface to the game has made the idea of a horse racing 'championship' weekend even more of a farce, because the BC doesn't accurately reflect anything close to a real championship.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I understand your point, but for the connections of this filly and perhaps other connections as well, doesn't it seem at least a little bit odd to have such a large % of this country's major stakes races on one surface throughout the year, and then have the "must-go-to" championship event on an entirely different surface? Two years in a row?
As I've said before, I don't consider myself a poly-hater, but if they schedule the BC on poly, I don't see why anyone can, or should, complain if the connections of a dirt horse decide not to run there. The same would apply to poly horses if they run the BC on dirt.
I just think the addition of what effectively is a third surface to the game has made the idea of a horse racing 'championship' weekend even more of a farce, because the BC doesn't accurately reflect anything close to a real championship.

Sportsmen dont let trivial matters get in the way of their sportmanship.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hasnt been powerful in the ratings compared to what? The rest of the fall racing schedule? Or the zero rating it would get if it wasnt run? You arent asking people to tune in for 6 hours of covewrage iof they are interested in RA, just as the Super Bowl doesnt require the viewer to watch the pregame show. You are just missing the point that if she were to continue to win she would be a huge story going into the BC, especially so if Zenyatta and her were to meet in the Classic. Instead we will get neither and that isnt the fault of the Breeders Cup, it is the fault of the owners.

Sorry Chuck, but it comes down to the fact that they believe the BC is not a right fit for Rachel and it's it's their choice to make. As a horseman you make a choice every single day with your horses and I'm sure you've been wrong and you've been right.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Sorry Chuck, but it comes down to the fact that they believe the BC is not a right fit for Rachel and it's it's their choice to make. As a horseman you make a choice every single day with your horses and I'm sure you've been wrong and you've been right.

Please spare me the "its their horse routine". The guy basks in the glory of his "sporting gestures" (like running a horse in a race where she is 1/2) and yet he boycotts the BC? This isnt about what is right or wrong for the horse. It is about Jess, it always is. Why you dont see that I cant imagine.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Please spare me the "its their horse routine". The guy basks in the glory of his "sporting gestures" (like running a horse in a race where she is 1/2) and yet he boycotts the BC? This isnt about what is right or wrong for the horse. It is about Jess, it always is. Why you dont see that I cant imagine.

Even if it totally about Jess, which it very well may be, who cares. Your running her were see is 1/2 argument is bizarre at best. He ran a filly (3) in a race against whatever wanted to show up. Who wouldn't she be 1/2 against Fn Einstein on grass or Commentator after 12 weeks of rehab and a 1 turn mile with her getting the rail?? Again were do did you want her to go and didn't Jackson get Monmouth to boast the purse to attract as many as he could?.. Chuck Summer Bird is a nice colt, is has a bright future.. The derby winner could have run.. Drama could have run 1.25 is better the 750k especially for a gelding.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Even if it totally about Jess, which it very well may be, who cares. Your running her were see is 1/2 argument is bizarre at best. He ran a filly (3) in a race against whatever wanted to show up. Who wouldn't she be 1/2 against Fn Einstein on grass or Commentator after 12 weeks of rehab and a 1 turn mile with her getting the rail?? Again were do did you want her to go and didn't Jackson get Monmouth to boast the purse to attract as many as he could?.. Chuck Summer Bird is a nice colt, is has a bright future.. The derby winner could have run.. Drama could have run 1.25 is better the 750k especially for a gelding.

He ran her in a logical spot where she was an overwhelming favorite. That is not sporting, it is logical. Running her against this collection of boys is not exactly a stretch. Freddy, no one ran because of the extra 250k. While running her in the Preakness was not a slam dunk, this was.

[Revidere]

Brought my daughter out there after she finished 2nd in her equitation event.

Here is how I captured it:

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Hasnt been powerful in the ratings compared to what? The rest of the fall racing schedule? Or the zero rating it would get if it wasnt run? You arent asking people to tune in for 6 hours of covewrage iof they are interested in RA, just as the Super Bowl doesnt require the viewer to watch the pregame show. You are just missing the point that if she were to continue to win she would be a huge story going into the BC, especially so if Zenyatta and her were to meet in the Classic. Instead we will get neither and that isnt the fault of the Breeders Cup, it is the fault of the owners.

"Hurry up Gladis, the race is coming up" "What race, you know the two fillies that are better then the boys".."Oh I like the grey one #2 he is so pretty" Give me a break Chuck this is not anything that is important to the future of racing..

The reasons Gladis likes football is she picked the Bears to beat the Dolphins in the office pool and if The Bears win by 3 she wins 210 bucks and that mean Mr Moskowitz doesn't win again..Or she lives in Chic and its always better in town after Da bears win..That is the fringe fan the hardcore fan the sports' fan male or female doesn't care they will always be a fan..

T

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

"Hurry up Gladis, the race is coming up" "What race, you know the two fillies that are better then the boys".."Oh I like the grey one #2 he is so pretty" Give me a break Chuck this is not anything that is important to the future of racing..

The reasons Gladis likes football is she picked the Bears to beat the Dolphins in the office pool and if The Bears win by 3 she wins 210 bucks and that mean Mr Moskowitz doesn't win again..Or she lives in Chic and its always better in town after Da bears win..That is the fringe fan the hardcore fan the sports' fan male or female doesn't care they will always be a fan..

T

Hold on, you are saying that marketing the sport is worthless to the future of racing?

[SniperSB23]

The only way you can make the Breeders Cup a successful television event is to have it at two tracks with staggered post times so that a race is going off every 15 minutes (like the Sunshine Millions). Owners, trainers, and jockeys will all fight this so it will never happen. Even when I get people to watch horse racing and they start to get interested, as soon as they see it is another half hour to the next race they go find something else to do. If you have a race going off every 15 minutes they may actually stick around and watch. With the current structure it is never going to draw new fans as it makes for a terrible televised event.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

The only way you can make the Breeders Cup a successful television event is to have it at two tracks with staggered post times so that a race is going off every 15 minutes (like the Sunshine Millions). Owners, trainers, and jockeys will all fight this so it will never happen. Even when I get people to watch horse racing and they start to get interested, as soon as they see it is another half hour to the next race they go find something else to do. If you have a race going off every 15 minutes they may actually stick around and watch. With the current structure it is never going to draw new fans as it makes for a terrible televised event.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

The only way you can make the Breeders Cup a successful television event is to have it at two tracks with staggered post times so that a race is going off every 15 minutes (like the Sunshine Millions). Owners, trainers, and jockeys will all fight this so it will never happen. Even when I get people to watch horse racing and they start to get interested, as soon as they see it is another half hour to the next race they go find something else to do. If you have a race going off every 15 minutes they may actually stick around and watch. With the current structure it is never going to draw new fans as it makes for a terrible televised event.

I don't think it's a bad idea, but I think you are punishing the loyal fans who watch and play all year round just to cater to a fan base that probably won't watch another race until the derby. I enjoy watching and playing the entire day. I look at it as a second Super Bowl. Plus, I still miss stuff with 45 minutes in between races now I will only have about 15. Lets face it a day at the track is a day at the track. It should not be made into a 2 hour made for TV special.

Oh yeah, Awesome pics Rev. Thanks for posting.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

I think Chuck's point at its roots is obvious..Clearly, the more good publicity the better and if Rachel were to run in the BC it would be a higher rated telecast.. Unfortunately, Chuck's simpliest view fails IMO to address the real issues. Poly is a third surface..I am not against a third surface, I don't think there is ANYTHING wrong with it. I just think it needs to be treated as such. You want a poly champship? I do I love racing i have no issue watching and betting 9 Poly races with big fields and quality horses. I just don't think its fair to make dirt horses run on poly when it isn't in their best interest or the sports.

No that isnt the biggest issue. The biggest issue is that the sports biggest star and probably best horse should run in its biggest non triple crown race. Horseracing will again get slammed because unlike you guys the general public and sportwriters dont understand or care about the internal issues. They want to know why we cant get our **** straight especially with a horse who has already handled the artificial surfaces before. Regardless of Sightseeks assertions the fact that Lukas ran Winning Colors in the Derby and Preakness never earned him the "sportsmans" praise. He just wasn't afraid to run fillies against colts in spots that they fit in. And yes I'm sure she did garner a lot of eextra attention because she was a filly. While I am a believer that we have larger issues in the treatment of our core customers than any "sporting" related issue, saying that the tv coverage of the BC isnt a positive or that the public wouldnt turn on to see a super filly is stupid.

Jackson skipping the BC isnt going to change anything.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No that isnt the biggest issue. The biggest issue is that the sports biggest star and probably best horse should run in its biggest non triple crown race. Horseracing will again get slammed because unlike you guys the general public and sportwriters dont understand or care about the internal issues. They want to know why we cant get our **** straight especially with a horse who has already handled the artificial surfaces before. Regardless of Sightseeks assertions the fact that Lukas ran Winning Colors in the Derby and Preakness never earned him the "sportsmans" praise. He just wasn't afraid to run fillies against colts in spots that they fit in. And yes I'm sure she did garner a lot of eextra attention because she was a filly. While I am a believer that we have larger issues in the treatment of our core customers than any "sporting" related issue, saying that the tv coverage of the BC isnt a positive or that the public wouldnt turn on to see a super filly is stupid.

Jackson skipping the BC isnt going to change anything.

Oh the scary sports writers who focus on racing 20 minutes a year are going to write nasty uninformed and mostly unread editorials.. Imagine that.. Come on bro if you are going to rep something can you get a little more into it then Bill Rhoden is going to tell America racing sucks!
The real reason trainers don't run fillies against colts is because 99% of the time they aren't good enough to beat them and financially it doesn't make sense. When the sport does have a filly that truly is extraordinary we do tend to see them against colts. There just isn't a SUPER filly every year. If you had a colts like Easy Goer and Sunday Silience or maybe even Hard Spun, Street Sense, and Curlin you might not even have seen Rachel against those types..

The sport needs Zenyatta vs. Rachel on dirt at 9f's period. This Breeders Cup is a dead issue..The b team from Europe is going to win whatever it needs to. You are trying to make chicken salad from Chicken sheat.. Poly is a third surface..It shouldn't be treated as dirt. Dirt horses shouldn't be forced to run on it.. Why not just run all the races on grass?

Running Rachel on Pro ride is not in the best interest of Rachel and running her on it doesn't prove or help anything.. You want some half assed grass horse that is 6 and a Group 2 winner to come her and beat Rachel on the line?? For what to prove it isn't her best surface?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Oh the scary sports writers who focus on racing 20 minutes a year are going to write nasty uninformed and mostly unread editorials.. Imagine that.. Come on bro if you are going to rep something can you get a little more into it then Bill Rhoden is going to tell America racing sucks!
The real reason trainers don't run fillies against colts is because 99% of the time they aren't good enough to beat them and financially it doesn't make sense. When the sport does have a filly that truly is extraordinary we do tend to see them against colts. There just isn't a SUPER filly every year. If you had a colts like Easy Goer and Sunday Silience or maybe even Hard Spun, Street Sense, and Curlin you might not even have seen Rachel against those types..

The sport needs Zenyatta vs. Rachel on dirt at 9f's period. This Breeders Cup is a dead issue..The b team from Europe is going to win whatever it needs to. You are trying to make chicken salad from Chicken sheat.. Poly is a third surface..It shouldn't be treated as dirt. Dirt horses shouldn't be forced to run on it.. Why not just run all the races on grass?

Running Rachel on Pro ride is not in the best interest of Rachel and running her on it doesn't prove or help anything.. You want some half assed grass horse that is 6 and a Group 2 winner to come her and beat Rachel on the line?? For what to prove it isn't her best surface?

The problem with the modern race fan is your last statement. For some reason fans have bought into the bs that a great horse never loses. The fact is that the great horses are the ones that accomplished great things. If Rachel Alexander were to win the BC on the "third surface" against whatever they throw at her she actually would have a claim to being a historically great horse unlike Curlin who was never more than a good three year old and decent handicap horse regardless of the BC result. If she were to lose you are going in with a built in excuse. If she were to win she would be a legend. And no she isnt one yet by beating a couple of 2nd rate Birdstones and a three horse field.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The problem with the modern race fan is your last statement. For some reason fans have bought into the bs that a great horse never loses. The fact is that the great horses are the ones that accomplished great things. If Rachel Alexander were to win the BC on the "third surface" against whatever they throw at her she actually would have a claim to being a historically great horse unlike Curlin who was never more than a good three year old and decent handicap horse regardless of the BC result. If she were to lose you are going in with a built in excuse. If she were to win she would be a legend. And no she isnt one yet by beating a couple of 2nd rate Birdstones and a three horse field.

And Zenyatta ,who you have to love is, Is Personal Ensign an all time great because she won the Whitney? I didn't suggest she was an all time great yet and if Jess Jackson did who cares, he thinks Curlin was the end all..
So Rachel runs in either the Travers or Woodward beat colts or older AGAIN for the 3rd time and now we need to see some Group 2 winning gelding beat her on Pro Ride or she wins and everyone says all she beat was a couple of Birdstones and a washed up G2 euro slug.. Your kidding right you want it both ways.. Look IF she beats the colts in the Travers and or the real men in the Woodward whomever they are or aren't she will have been the best the sport had on DIRT in 2009.. Were she stacks up vs. Seattle Slew, Secretariat, Affirmed Spectular Bid Cigar Winning Colors or Personal Ensign will always be debateable. None of that is important it's only important to watch her do well vs. the best the sport has on her best surface.. If you feel that she HAS to try Pro Ride again you have to be of the opinion that she has to try grass as well it the same friggin argument.