Is This Really the Best We Have?

Originally Posted by King Glorious

There are, however, numerous grade two and three races. Would the list be any better with Seek Gold? Absolutely not. That was the point. U could basically pick any horses after the top two and put them on the list. Why is Good Reward on there and he hasn't even won a stakes race? Why him and not Second of June? Why no Perfect Drift or Magnum? None of them would make the list any better either though. I understand u like Sun King and u know I love Surf Cat but neither of them belong on this list. Both of them belong on the top 10 sprinter list but not this one. U say that u can throw whatever garbage u want into the last three spots. I say u could throw it into the last eight spots.

I'm just saying that when u consider it was just two years ago when we had Ghostzapper, Roses in May, Perfect Drift, Pleasantly Perfect, Medaglia d'Oro, Peace Rules, Saint Liam, and Southern Image.......and just last year when we had Lava Man, Rock Hard Ten, Saint Liam, Borrego, Perfect Drift, Commentator, even Ghostzapper for one race........u see that this year the depth of talent is severly lacking. It's not so much to say that the horses on the list are BAD horses but I think the only reason that some of them are even able to make it is because the upper level talents of the game are taken away earlier and earlier and we are being left with less and less every year.

I really don't see the point of this thread to be honest with you.
I think its pretty obvious that yeah, this is the best we have. Watchmaker can't invent make believe horses to put on a list. He has to work with whats out there.
And anyone who hasn't realized by now that with the gruel of the tri crown, combined with the financial reasons to retire has coupled to form a weaker older divsion each year, well I can't help you.
This is how it is. Nothing beyond a radical shift in purse money or breeding fees is gonna change this.
End of story.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I really don't see the point of this thread to be honest with you.
I think its pretty obvious that yeah, this is the best we have. Watchmaker can't invent make believe horses to put on a list. He has to work with whats out there.
And anyone who hasn't realized by now that with the gruel of the tri crown, combined with the financial reasons to retire has coupled to form a weaker older divsion each year, well I can't help you.
This is how it is. Nothing beyond a radical shift in purse money or breeding fees is gonna change this.
End of story.

U are missing the point then. Maybe that's my fault. I admitted as much that Watchmaker got this list right, for the most part. There just aren't any horses that are really much more deserving than the ones that are on there. And yes, I understand that this is the best we have. The point here is that the upper levels of the sport have slipped so bad that this is what we are left with. There are reasons why this has happened, a couple which u pointed out. What I'm saying is that there has to be something that can be done to change this tide. There has to be something that can be done to get us back to the days when there will be 10 actual GOOD horses on the list instead of two good ones and eight other fill-ins. Is it so bad to want more from the game? I mean, u don't even have to win a single race (Good Reward) to be a top 10 horse nowdays? A single grade three win (Park Avenue Ball and Flower Alley) can make u top 10 nowdays? No route wins at all (Sun King) can make u top 10 nowdays? A horse that is the reigning BC SPRINT champion and hasn't even run a route race this year (Silver Train), unless u count the Met Mile as a route, is top 10?

Originally Posted by King Glorious

U are missing the point then. Maybe that's my fault. I admitted as much that Watchmaker got this list right, for the most part. There just aren't any horses that are really much more deserving than the ones that are on there. And yes, I understand that this is the best we have. The point here is that the upper levels of the sport have slipped so bad that this is what we are left with. There are reasons why this has happened, a couple which u pointed out. What I'm saying is that there has to be something that can be done to change this tide. There has to be something that can be done to get us back to the days when there will be 10 actual GOOD horses on the list instead of two good ones and eight other fill-ins. Is it so bad to want more from the game? I mean, u don't even have to win a single race (Good Reward) to be a top 10 horse nowdays? A single grade three win (Park Avenue Ball and Flower Alley) can make u top 10 nowdays? No route wins at all (Sun King) can make u top 10 nowdays? A horse that is the reigning BC SPRINT champion and hasn't even run a route race this year (Silver Train), unless u count the Met Mile as a route, is top 10?

Like I said, if you have some really great horses who are wned by Sheiks, owned by billionaires, or owned by millionaires whose thrill of racing outweihs their common sense and judgement, then you are all set.
No rational guy with any brains is gonna turn down a breeding offer in the 10's of millions to race for a best case scenario in which he weighs losing a lot of money vs losing only a little money.

[King Glorious]

I guess this is my problem with this. Remember back when baseball went on strike and they used replacement players? Well, even though they were giving us a lesser product, ticket prices remained the same. There was still a home run leader, an rbi leader.....everything stayed the same except the product was of lesser talent. Kind of the same thing with racing. There will still be a Derby winner, a Met Mile winner, a BC Classic winner every year. But it seems like more and more, the quality of the overall product is decreasing. And because so many people just sit and say "we should be lucky that we have a Bernardini this year" and are content with the continuous garbage that they are feeding us, there is no incentive for them to ever change anything. It won't be until we start demanding a better product that things will start to change. Why does everyone seem so content with the way things are and just resigned to accept that this is all we are going to get?

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I guess this is my problem with this. Remember back when baseball went on strike and they used replacement players? Well, even though they were giving us a lesser product, ticket prices remained the same. There was still a home run leader, an rbi leader.....everything stayed the same except the product was of lesser talent. Kind of the same thing with racing. There will still be a Derby winner, a Met Mile winner, a BC Classic winner every year. But it seems like more and more, the quality of the overall product is decreasing. And because so many people just sit and say "we should be lucky that we have a Bernardini this year" and are content with the continuous garbage that they are feeding us, there is no incentive for them to ever change anything. It won't be until we start demanding a better product that things will start to change. Why does everyone seem so content with the way things are and just resigned to accept that this is all we are going to get?

Until the breeders start breeding for quality instead of "cheap speed", we won't see the quality improve. The breeders won't do that because that isn't what sells. Just my two cents.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

There will still be a Derby winner, a Met Mile winner, a BC Classic winner every year. But it seems like more and more, the quality of the overall product is decreasing. And because so many people just sit and say "we should be lucky that we have a Bernardini this year" and are content with the continuous garbage that they are feeding us, there is no incentive for them to ever change anything. It won't be until we start demanding a better product that things will start to change. Why does everyone seem so content with the way things are and just resigned to accept that this is all we are going to get?

The more horseracing becomes a "business", the less joy there is in it, for fans and competitors alike. When people that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars retire horses because "they have residual value" or "nothing left to prove" you are heading down the wrong path. The biggest problem with expensive and talented horses is that the connections are afraid to lose. It is the biggest difference between racing now and 20 years ago. One of the reasons that the Pletchers of the world "space " so much is to try to find the softest spot possible, to try to keep the horses and his personal record intact. Not that I blame them, because they are playing by the rules that the owners and breeders have set. Breeders lowered their standards in the late 70's to early 80's to produce more horses to keep up with the first bloodstock boom. In doing so they accepted more flawed horses, soundness, bleeding, conformation, etc. Now with huge stallion books that problem is even greater but the bloodstock machine which sucks in hundreds of millions of dollars per year needs to continue to be fed. So a filly that has a race record of 2 wins in 4 starts is bred to a stallion that made nine starts and the market will continue to buy those types of horses.

Sorry to sound so pessimistic but horseracing is really becoming a soulless "sport"

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The more horseracing becomes a "business", the less joy there is in it, for fans and competitors alike. When people that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars retire horses because "they have residual value" or "nothing left to prove" you are heading down the wrong path. The biggest problem with expensive and talented horses is that the connections are afraid to lose. It is the biggest difference between racing now and 20 years ago. One of the reasons that the Pletchers of the world "space " so much is to try to find the softest spot possible, to try to keep the horses and his personal record intact. Not that I blame them, because they are playing by the rules that the owners and breeders have set. Breeders lowered their standards in the late 70's to early 80's to produce more horses to keep up with the first bloodstock boom. In doing so they accepted more flawed horses, soundness, bleeding, conformation, etc. Now with huge stallion books that problem is even greater but the bloodstock machine which sucks in hundreds of millions of dollars per year needs to continue to be fed. So a filly that has a race record of 2 wins in 4 starts is bred to a stallion that made nine starts and the market will continue to buy those types of horses.

Sorry to sound so pessimistic but horseracing is really becoming a soulless "sport"

This is exactly the way I feel. I couldn't have written it better myself. And the best part in it was when u said "not that I blame them". It's hard to blame them but that doesn't mean we have to like it.

[SniperSB23]

The only idea I have ever heard that could help solve the problem is to not allow any horse to stand stud until they were 5 years old. Unfortunately there is about as good a chance of that happening as there was for Bluegrass Cat running as a 4yo.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

This is exactly the way I feel. I couldn't have written it better myself. And the best part in it was when u said "not that I blame them". It's hard to blame them but that doesn't mean we have to like it.

I know a lot of blame is placed on trainers and though I have to admit I may be a bit biased the problem really lies with the owners. All these huge syndication deals and high profile yearling and 2 year old prices has many owners with stars in their eyes.

Quick story. Friend of mine has been the business as an owner on a serious level for 3 years. Says to me the other day "You know what my goal is in horseracing? Sell one of those 3 million dollar yearlings." I said to him what happened to trying to win big races and having fun. He said "I cant compete with the Arabs or Pletcher's owners, but maybe I could sell them an expensive horse". I told him that sounds more like horse breeding than horse racing.
The moral of the story is that this guy and many other owners are trying to come up with valuble breeding stock rather than racehorses. And the way the game is played, racing them once they have accomplished something, even one graded win or placing(with mares) is just too risky to their way of thinking.

[Linny]

If the point of the thread was to point out the lack of depth in the older horse division, I get it. I don't see how that lack of depth makes Watchmaker an idiot. There's no reason to involve him in the discussion. I often disagree with his choices and their order on the lists but hey, it's one man's opinion.

As for Sun King, he's coming off a close second and a decent third (against the bias) in G1 route races.

BTW, I don't know Mike W and he doesn't know me, so I have no dog in this fight.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

U are missing the point then. Maybe that's my fault. I admitted as much that Watchmaker got this list right, for the most part. There just aren't any horses that are really much more deserving than the ones that are on there. And yes, I understand that this is the best we have. The point here is that the upper levels of the sport have slipped so bad that this is what we are left with. There are reasons why this has happened, a couple which u pointed out. What I'm saying is that there has to be something that can be done to change this tide. There has to be something that can be done to get us back to the days when there will be 10 actual GOOD horses on the list instead of two good ones and eight other fill-ins. Is it so bad to want more from the game? I mean, u don't even have to win a single race (Good Reward) to be a top 10 horse nowdays? A single grade three win (Park Avenue Ball and Flower Alley) can make u top 10 nowdays? No route wins at all (Sun King) can make u top 10 nowdays? A horse that is the reigning BC SPRINT champion and hasn't even run a route race this year (Silver Train), unless u count the Met Mile as a route, is top 10?

so if a horse runs in sprints, he's somehow a lesser horse? that's the kind of thinking (that dirt and classic is the ONLY thing in racing) that has kept some outstanding turf horses out of the market here, and has given the euros the ability to get ahead in that division, since they come and buy our best turf prospects at auction and take them home.

we have all kinds of niches in racing. doesn't mean a horse is somehow lesser if he's a speed demon. he's not loaded with stamina, doesn't mean he's not loaded with talent.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Danzig2

so if a horse runs in sprints, he's somehow a lesser horse? that's the kind of thinking (that dirt and classic is the ONLY thing in racing) that has kept some outstanding turf horses out of the market here, and has given the euros the ability to get ahead in that division, since they come and buy our best turf prospects at auction and take them home.

we have all kinds of niches in racing. doesn't mean a horse is somehow lesser if he's a speed demon. he's not loaded with stamina, doesn't mean he's not loaded with talent.

I don't think that is his point. Watchmaker has a separate list for sprinters and for turf horses. This list is more intended for older males in the dirt routing division.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I don't think that is his point. Watchmaker has a separate list for sprinters and for turf horses. This list is more intended for older males in the dirt routing division.

Thank u. Anyone that knows me knows that I am one that says the exact thing that Danzig said. I don't think a horse has to be a dirt router to be the best horse. In fact, it's a well known fact that I'm partial to sprinters and milers and grass horses than I am to dirt routers.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I don't think that is his point. Watchmaker has a separate list for sprinters and for turf horses. This list is more intended for older males in the dirt routing division.

ahh, i see. thanks!!