Three New BC Races

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

As with most things in racing, this is good for owners/trainers, bad for bettors. The BC used to be the one day you could count on big fields and competitive races. Not any more. Of course, nobody cares about bettors anyway.

How it is "bad for bettors?"

The dilution of the fields argument is a tepid one at best.

[cmorioles]

Because now we get smaller fields on the one day we used to be able to count on big fields. Just like the rest of the stakes races, the talent is going to get diluted among more races, period. Less horses in a race means less competition and shorter prices. That isn't bad for bettors?

[Riot]

Because now we get smaller fields on the one day we used to be able to count on big fields.

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.

I don't know about Euro attendance in 2008. Artificial surface presence expands the options for many of them, but they have to add the longer flight across country from NY. The generally-always-firm turf course is attractive to enough horses from Euro to be tempting (they don't all like ground with give in it).

What was the Euro attendence at the last left coast BC, anybody recall?

[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.

[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.

[bogeydaman]

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.

IMO the Juvy filly turf race will have no impact on any field size. All 4 2 year old races will oversubscribe with maiden breakers and NW1 allowance horses. You can make the argument that they already "experimented" with the Juvy Filly turf race in 07. It was the 6th race at Monmouth on BC Friday. The only difference is that the purse was $250K this year and next year it will be $1 million and have the title "world championship" next to it. The only possible difference field might be another shipper or 2 from Europe and a long shot in the 2 year old filly dirt race might take a shot 1st time turf because of the "world championship" title.

[miraja2]

I don't understand people that DEFEND the addition of these races by saying, "It won't take horses away from the other races because there will be plenty of low-level allowance horses to fill all the races." Great.
Either it will take horses away from the other races, or it will be filled with horses that don't belong in the Breeders' Cup. I think it is a pretty bad deal either way, and I think the worst news is, that it will do both.

The problem with the juvy turf race for fillies isn't that it might not fill. It probably will. The point is that if the race didn't exist, the top-notch 2yo turf fillies would be forced into one of the other two races (juvy fillies or juvy turf) or skip the BC altogether. By adding more races, I think it is inarguable that - even if they do have full fields - it probably means less interesting races.