Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Triple Crown Topics/Archive..
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-20-2011, 09:38 AM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
it's not the issue of two year old form, it's the issue of encouraging more starts at three, and having good three year olds in the derby-as opposed to a good two year old who may have been surpassed by his peers a few months later-but he earned enough last season to play this season.
This might make sense theoretically, but where is the evidence that the Derby is regularly inundated with over-the-hill 2yos?

I can think of two offhand that perhaps should not have been in the Derby, those being Capote and Action This Day (who actually didn't run that bad).

Meanwhile horses that were successful in the Triple Crown like Mine That Bird, Giacomo, Funny Cide, Real Quiet, Timber Country, Go For Gin, Sea Hero, Best Pal, Alysheba, Ferdinand, Tejano Run, Lemon Drop Kid, Birdstone, Proud Citizen, A.P. Valentine, Louis Quatorze, and Gate Dancer all possibly could have been held out of the Kentucky Derby because they didn't happen to win a significant prep race.

While I, too, would like to see these horses race a couple of more times before the TC, "encouraging" them to win prep races is not the answer. In fact, the competition to win these lesser races (with overstuffed purse money) is probably one of the reasons why trainers nowadays only bring them out a couple of times before Churchill. How many winning efforts can a typical 3yo horse uncork in a 5-month span?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-20-2011, 09:56 AM
jms62's Avatar
jms62 jms62 is offline
Saratoga
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi View Post
This might make sense theoretically, but where is the evidence that the Derby is regularly inundated with over-the-hill 2yos?

I can think of two offhand that perhaps should not have been in the Derby, those being Capote and Action This Day (who actually didn't run that bad).

Meanwhile horses that were successful in the Triple Crown like Mine That Bird, Giacomo, Funny Cide, Real Quiet, Timber Country, Go For Gin, Sea Hero, Best Pal, Alysheba, Ferdinand, Tejano Run, Lemon Drop Kid, Birdstone, Proud Citizen, A.P. Valentine, Louis Quatorze, and Gate Dancer all possibly could have been held out of the Kentucky Derby because they didn't happen to win a significant prep race.

While I, too, would like to see these horses race a couple of more times before the TC, "encouraging" them to win prep races is not the answer. In fact, the competition to win these lesser races (with overstuffed purse money) is probably one of the reasons why trainers nowadays only bring them out a couple of times before Churchill. How many winning efforts can a typical 3yo horse uncork in a 5-month span?
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein, (attributed)


Rollo... Status Quo isn't working and hasn't for quite some time. You say
"While I, too, would like to see these horses race a couple of more times before the TC, "encouraging" them to win prep races is not the answer. " yet you offer no potential answers.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-20-2011, 10:14 AM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jms62 View Post
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Albert Einstein, (attributed)


Rollo... Status Quo isn't working and hasn't for quite some time. You say
"While I, too, would like to see these horses race a couple of more times before the TC, "encouraging" them to win prep races is not the answer. " yet you offer no potential answers.
Actually, I was the one who started this line of discussion. I suggested that earnings from graded stakes on the turf and synthetic surfaces should not count. The effects would be eliminating the unaccomplished-on-dirt horses from consideration while allowing talented but earnings-challenged runners to make it to the starting gate.

Your points system has been suggested before, but the problem is it still includes irrelevant races like the Blue Grass and Spiral.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-20-2011, 12:31 PM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi View Post
The effects would be eliminating the unaccomplished-on-dirt horses from consideration while allowing talented but earnings-challenged runners to make it to the starting gate.
While not suggesting that the current system is perfect, aside from maybe Dance City, is there any horse that fits this description? For that matter, over the past decade or so, how many horses that were perceived as potentially legitimate contenders were excluded because of insufficient earnings? The only two that I can think of off the top of my head are Sunday Break and Rock Hard Ten.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-20-2011, 07:54 PM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms View Post
While not suggesting that the current system is perfect, aside from maybe Dance City, is there any horse that fits this description? For that matter, over the past decade or so, how many horses that were perceived as potentially legitimate contenders were excluded because of insufficient earnings? The only two that I can think of off the top of my head are Sunday Break and Rock Hard Ten.
Santiva, Sway Away, Anthony's Cross, Shackleford, and Watch Me Go all are on the outside looking in because 3 or 4 turf horses have secured spots. Yet all those have been 1st or 2nd in important prep races on dirt.

As far as previous years, I'd have to take a closer look. It was only recently that they restricted the field to 20 horses, too, so historically there probably haven't been too many "left out" horses.

However, I'm taking the stance that this is an emerging trend (ie turf no-hopers from the poly preps taking up spots in the starting gate), not necessarily one that has taken a firm hold. It was savvy of Tom Albertrani and Mike Maker to capitalize on the turf-friendly nature of the Keeneland main track when gobs of money are up for grabs, but it sucks that they would go ahead and show up for the Derby with very little real hope of winning.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-20-2011, 09:04 PM
parsixfarms parsixfarms is offline
Churchill Downs
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi View Post
Santiva, Sway Away, Anthony's Cross, Shackleford, and Watch Me Go all are on the outside looking in because 3 or 4 turf horses have secured spots. Yet all those have been 1st or 2nd in important prep races on dirt.

As far as previous years, I'd have to take a closer look. It was only recently that they restricted the field to 20 horses, too, so historically there probably haven't been too many "left out" horses.
Would any of those horses be less than 20-1, even in this watered down field?

I believe that the field size restriction has been in place since the 1970s; it's only in the past decade or so, when decisions about entering the Derby seem to be more about "do I qualify" than "do I fit," that a twenty-horse field has become the norm.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-20-2011, 10:38 PM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by parsixfarms View Post
Would any of those horses be less than 20-1, even in this watered down field?

I believe that the field size restriction has been in place since the 1970s; it's only in the past decade or so, when decisions about entering the Derby seem to be more about "do I qualify" than "do I fit," that a twenty-horse field has become the norm.
Yeah, I was confused about the field size issue. I guess they were looking to restrict it even further in the wake of Eight Belles. Had it in my head that there were more than 20 horses a couple of times in the '80s.

Anyways, the main point is that horses like Brilliant Speed and Animal Kingdom don't deserve to be in the race over several other horses just because they won irrelevant races that used to be important preps. If they were viable contenders all along, then they would have been in races like the Fountain of Youth or the Holy Bull. Clearly they were entered in the Kentucky races because of the popular notion that turf form translates to polytrack. Now they get a free ride to Churchill likely to end with a "no factor" running line.

While the horses I mentioned aren't top contenders, at least a couple of them potentially could hit the board. I'm sure bettors, particularly exotics players, would be more interested in those with at least some dirt form than horses that are practically automatic tosses.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.