Derby replaces graded earnings with point system

[Calzone Lord]

Arazi was a 4-to-5 favorite in the Kentucky Derby. I believe he was the last odds-on Derby favorite.

That would be hilarious if a would-be odds on favorite can't get into the race because of how they fixed something that truthfully wasn't broke.

Who are the horses who would have got in under this silly point system, that were otherwise excluded from the Derby because of lack of earnings?

Rachel Alexandra opted for the Kentucky Oaks -- but she is another who would have been excluded.

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Arazi was a 4-to-5 favorite in the Kentucky Derby. I believe he was the last odds-on Derby favorite.

That would be hilarious if a would-be odds on favorite can't get into the race because of how the fixed something that truthfully wasn't broke.

Who are the horses who would have got in under this silly point system, that were otherwise excluded from the Derby because of lack of earnings?

Rachel Alexandra opted for the Kentucky Oaks -- but she is another who would have been excluded.

IMO this looks like a way to make the major contenders race against each other so people become familiar with them and rivalries are formed. It also is an attempt to get rid of the hopeless sprinters and the Delta Jackpot winner.

One tweek should be to let the top 2 fillies enter the derby if they meet certain criteria.

[slotdirt]

3YO's going the two prep route are going to be up against it, that's for sure. Win the Sam Davis and finish third in the Florida Derby? Good luck in the Jim Dandy.

[slotdirt]

I ask this every year, but what surefire Derby winner was excluded from the Derby because of the earnings system? The only answer anybody ever has is Rock Hard Ten, and he wasn't winning the Derby.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I ask this every year, but what surefire Derby winner was excluded from the Derby because of the earnings system? The only answer anybody ever has is Rock Hard Ten, and he wasn't winning the Derby.

Rock Hard Ten only had 20 points under the current system -- even Optimizer and his 23 points would have trumped him.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I ask this every year, but what surefire Derby winner was excluded from the Derby because of the earnings system? The only answer anybody ever has is Rock Hard Ten, and he wasn't winning the Derby.

This whole system goes way beyond who gets into the Derby. It's a bigger idea than just that.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

This whole system goes way beyond who gets into the Derby. It's a bigger idea than just that.

What's the idea?

[Calzone Lord]

I only wish this system was in place in 2002 so Perfect Drift would have won the Kentucky Derby...and I could have cashed my bets on him.

The top 2 finishers in 2002, War Emblem and Proud Citizen, had a COMBINED 20 points going into the Derby.

Or, 3 points less than Optimizer's 23.

[rpncaine]

That everybody know what the criteria is going in and should adapt to it in their campaigns. It will most likely be tweaked before they start, but just like the NastyCar point system, you know what to expect and need to adjust to it.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

What's the idea?

The graded stakes system was never really broken in terms of keeping horses out. No "worthy" horse, at least that I can think of, was ever kept out because of the graded stakes approach.

The build-up to the Kentucky Derby, however, has become somewhat fragmented. Massive purses in November for 2yo's, races like the Hopeful losing their grade, an influx of 2yo turf racing in the summer/fall etc. all have played a role. Those changes have distracted, in some ways, the lead-in to the Derby.

It was also imperfect in terms of how it valued races. Simply put, a turf race in November for 2yo's should not count toward qualifying a horse for the Kentucky Derby, or at least nearly as much as say a 2yo dirt race the same month. And both shouldn't count as much, if not more than, a 3yo race in March going long on the dirt.

It also allowed for a lot of hopeless entrants. That challenge, however, will never go away because the Derby will max out at 20 for a long time because of how big it has become.

So, I think there are two ways to look at this..

- A better way of qualifying horses for the Kentucky Derby.

- A better way of marketing the build-up to the Kentucky Derby, creating more excitement and structure to which fans can better understand what's happening while also bringing added attention to the individual races within the series.

As for the first point: I think this new approach is better, as it will help to make sure the horses going to the gate belong. Will a hopeless sprinter find its way here or there? Sure. Is it perfect? No. But neither was using graded stakes. In fact, any system is going to have flaws.

The latter, however, does a lot more for promoting the sport and growing the race and races surrounding it. NBC has something they can talk about now that makes sense to people outside of horse racing, or those on the fringes.

I know a lot of people laughed at the "Win And You're In" with the Breeders' Cup, because a horse who wins a race like the Whitney is already in, regardless of whatever marketing gimmick is in place. But when you attach the the BC logo and brand to a race three months out, it does an awful lot toward branding, building excitement and interest. It gets people thinking about Breeders' Cup three months before it's even run. Same idea here.

Are the "phases" the right way of describing this? I don't think so. Should the Illinois Derby be on the list? Probably. Should the BC Juvenile be worth more? Yeah, I think so. But ultimately, from a high level, there is a lot of good that can come from this when you step outside the mindset that it's about picking-out the right 20 horses for the race.

[10 pnt move up]

Maybe with a system like this it also pushes trainers to start running their horses a little more often, a two prep season where maybe you have a couple troubled starts after a successful two year old season won't get you in.

[South Beach Luv]

I like the filly angle. Why should graded earnings against only other fillies count towards a race dominated by colts. If you have a good filly and want a shot at the Derby run against the boys to get there.

Azeri and any other filly of years past would of or could have been campaigned differently to get in.

Roman Downs just implements things they know is right. It will be fine.

Hey Roman guards! (80 year olds working on the cheap) Detain that fiend who is trying to watch a race live without paying for a seat! There aren't enough seats! If he sits for free then it's chaos!! Thousands more watching the race live for free instead of inside on a t.v.!!