The Breeders' Cup. Yay or Nay?

[RacingFan1992]

I have reviewed some of the comments regarding this years Breeders Cup and I noticed mixed reviews. Some people were complaining saying that the BC is a joke with others saying Santa Anita is a joke. I want to see how many people would rather go back to how things were before the BC.

[thespaah]

I have reviewed some of the comments regarding this years Breeders Cup and I noticed mixed reviews. Some people were complaining saying that the BC is a joke with others saying Santa Anita is a joke. I want to see how many people would rather go back to how things were before the BC.
What made it ok for me was the ability to chat through posts back and forth while the event was going on.
Just sitting here betting the races isn't enough.
Some of us were trading ideas, giving picks, etc. That's what made it fun for me.

[Valuist]

I can't think of one horseplayer that wants the Breeders Cup eliminated. You can question a few of the recent race additions, but to many players, its their favorite race day of the year. Would anyone honestly rather bet a field of $5000 claimers than a full field of stakes horses? Not me.

[cj]

The BC is a great day for bettors, as good as it gets. If you are right once or twice, you can make a killing.

[FlyinLate]

No chance do I want to see the BC eliminated. Santa Anita, however, failed pretty miserably in my opinion. The racetrack was basically a merry-go-round all weekend which is as frustrating as it gets. Short of the massive collapse in pace of the Juvenile and Judy the Beauty getting up, everything else was won on the front. Additionally, the stewards failed to make the right call and drop Bayern. That wasn't tactical riding, that was brutal...and I'm saying this having bet Bayern.

I sure hope Keeneland does a better job at maintaining a fair track. Santa Anita looked like Gulfstream on Florida Derby Day.

[castaway01]

It's the best day to make money all year. The races are almost always very challenging. Despite any changes to the format over the years, that part of it has never changed.

[Tom]

I would give a day of good betting in favor of having back a better season.
The BC has been bad for racing, imho. Kill it.

[clocker7]

LOL

It's not perfect. But kill the Breeders' Cup and what are you left with? Some lesser races in NY in October and one or two at CD in November?

OK ....

[wa_kiwi]

I was just reflecting on all the drama in 3 of the top races this year. Questionable tactics leading to an inquiry in the Classic, the Distaff won by a trainer who several months ago was on the national news concerning medication, green card, etc. issues and the Dirt Mile won by a trainer who is suspended for drug violations. My god, Jerry Springer couldn't improve on this.

[clocker7]

I was just reflecting on all the drama in 3 of the top races this year. Questionable tactics leading to an inquiry in the Classic, the Distaff won by a trainer who several months ago was on the national news concerning medication, green card, etc. issues and the Dirt Mile won by a trainer who is suspended for drug violations. My god, Jerry Springer couldn't improve on this.
Then watch pro baseball, the NBA, or college football, where all parties possess a purity that you are dying for.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha This is America 2014, for godds sake.

[Tom]

LOL

It's not perfect. But kill the Breeders' Cup and what are you left with? Some lesser races in NY in October and one or two at CD in November?

OK ....

Was good enough for years...back when race horses were race horses.

[foregoforever]

I'd like to see something more like the Aussie Spring Carnival ... top races spread out over several weeks.

How about 3 championship days on successive Saturdays? One in California, one in Kentucky and one in New York. Spread the current races across the three, and add some more ... the Marathon, a 9f dirt race, and a 10f turf race for starters.

Run the 9f dirt and 10f turf on the first Saturday, and the 10f dirt and 12f turf on the last. In other words, arrange the races so that a horse can try for a double. If we ever get horses off Lasix, then running back this quickly shouldn't be a big deal.

Besides spreading out the interest over several weeks and the entire country, it also results in the prep races for the divisions being spread out, so you don't have the 3-week dead zone before the big day.

[clocker7]

Was good enough for years...back when race horses were race horses.
Welcome belatedly to the 21st Century. NY is no longer the center of anything, let alone the sporting universe. :D :D :D

[clocker7]

I apologize to Tom for that last post. Snark to a good guy is not appropriate.

I am actually in league with those who pine for horses with better distance running qualities, and what has happened to the breed over time. But the reality is that 9f horses are what we are saddled with.

Thus, I am relatively at peace with the Breeders' Cup, and the fact that they still host races over 9f. And that this year's crop was fairly durable and could handle 10f and even 12f competently. Maybe not like the past. But better than the recent years, or what is about to come ... sadly.

Cherish the 2011 guys. It's gonna get worse.

[Tom]

No problem, clocker. We all have opinions.
There is much more to life that horse racing.
Much more.

[dilanesp]

A great event. Big crowd, good weather, impressive performances, Rosie's surprise, and a great Classic with drama and controversy.

[JustRalph]

I wouldn't care less if they did away with it.

I'm sure the tracks would come up with some nice alternatives

Btw, Clocker7 if you don't think NY is the center of anything, you never heard of the stock exchange. So much money flows through or is directed by parties in NY that you could argue NY is the real capital of the United States.

[dilanesp]

I wouldn't care less if they did away with it.

I'm sure the tracks would come up with some nice alternatives

Btw, Clocker7 if you don't think NY is the center of anything, you never heard of the stock exchange. So much money flows through or is directed by parties in NY that you could argue NY is the real capital of the United States.

It's obviously a silly hypothetical anyway. The Breeders' Cup is a private enterprise, not a creation of some central horse racing czar. As long as they make money, they will continue putting on Breeders' Cups even if everyone on this website says they are ruining racing.

But having said that, people should not assume that eliminating the BC would restore the previous status quo. A lot has happened since the 1980's, and one of the big things is that NYRA no longer has a virtual monopoly on the fall stakes calendar. Not only would Frank Stronach be offering competing races at Santa Anita, but all the racinos out there would be putting up huge purses to lure big name horses away from New York stakes races.

Further, trainers would have an incentive to duck. This is already a problem with the Breeders' Cup, as the disgrace of Rachel Alexandra showed, but at least MOST top horses are basically forced to run in the BC to secure a year end championship and establish breeding value. But eliminate the BC, and why does anyone think that all the good horses are going to go to New York to run against each other and possibly lose when they can earn big money ducking those races and running somewhere else?

The choice isn't between the BC and the old New York fall racing calendar. It's between the BC and everyone acting like Jess Jackson did and ducking competition. It's between the BC and utter chaos.

[burnsy]

A great event. Big crowd, good weather, impressive performances, Rosie's surprise, and a great Classic with drama and controversy.

If the game was thriving, it would be fine...but its not. The Friday idea is a nightmare, handle and attention will decrease because people work on Friday. That deal with 4 races will continue to lose luster. It was never meant to be at the same track from inception, weather or not, its freaking horse racing. The same track, maintained the same way with unfair advantages pisses people off......whether they win or not. Most people want a fair race, even if they are betting it.

If you think the drama and controversy is a good thing. I didn't go this year but my friend was there. He said people were booing the results after the inquiry. Half the place was pissed off. Many of them had traveled thousands of miles. If that's' good for business, could of fooled me. You haven't been reading this board, blogs or countless other boards, these are racings customers.......it was great, everything is just Rosie (she retired)...the BC is breaking records and people will surely come back for more.............when another tack closes, listen to the crickets and crybabies. Yeah, horse players always bitch. But when they start walking away or holding back, the industry should listen. Another self inflicted wound, then they sit there, repaint it or act like nothings wrong.....it went great..that's the attitude.......... ;)

[castaway01]

If the game was thriving, it would be fine...but its not. The Friday idea is a nightmare, handle and attention will decrease because people work on Friday. That deal with 4 races will continue to lose luster. It was never meant to be at the same track from inception, weather or not, its freaking horse racing. The same track, maintained the same way with unfair advantages pisses people off......whether they win or not. Most people want a fair race, even if they are betting it.

If you think the drama and controversy is a good thing. I didn't go this year but my friend was there. He said people were booing the results after the inquiry. Half the place was pissed off. Many of them had traveled thousands of miles. If that's' good for business, could of fooled me. You haven't been reading this board, blogs or countless other boards, these are racings customers.......it was great, everything is just Rosie (she retired)...the BC is breaking records and people will surely come back for more.............when another tack closes, listen to the crickets and crybabies. Yeah, horse players always bitch. But when they start walking away or holding back, the industry should listen. Another self inflicted wound, then they sit there, repaint it or act like nothings wrong.....it went great..that's the attitude.......... ;)

The situation was hopeless though. If they DQed the horse, half the people would have bitched. They didn't DQ Bayern, and half the other of the people are bitching. No win.

Handle was down a bit (there was one fewer race than last year too), but the Breeders Cup is hardly one of the reasons people are walking from racing. Again, no win---BC has all great races, people complain it's just one weekend a year, the horses never run, the rules are different, etc. Any problems take place, people complain the BC is ruining racing.

People DO just like being miserable. Especially horseplayers.

[dilanesp]

If the game was thriving, it would be fine...but its not. The Friday idea is a nightmare, handle and attention will decrease because people work on Friday. That deal with 4 races will continue to lose luster. It was never meant to be at the same track from inception, weather or not, its freaking horse racing. The same track, maintained the same way with unfair advantages pisses people off......whether they win or not. Most people want a fair race, even if they are betting it.

If you think the drama and controversy is a good thing. I didn't go this year but my friend was there. He said people were booing the results after the inquiry. Half the place was pissed off. Many of them had traveled thousands of miles. If that's' good for business, could of fooled me. You haven't been reading this board, blogs or countless other boards, these are racings customers.......it was great, everything is just Rosie (she retired)...the BC is breaking records and people will surely come back for more.............when another tack closes, listen to the crickets and crybabies. Yeah, horse players always bitch. But when they start walking away or holding back, the industry should listen. Another self inflicted wound, then they sit there, repaint it or act like nothings wrong.....it went great..that's the attitude.......... ;)

1. I was around back in the day. I will tell you that the original business model of the BC was actually quite close to "almost always in California". That's where the money is, because of weather and seating configurations.

That doesn't mean that they have to do it this way, of course. But a lot of people assume that the business model was "move it around" and it really wasn't. 3 of the first 4 were in California. That wasn't an accident. When it started bringing in lots of money, Tom Meeker and Doug Donn started lobbying to get the event, and things changed.

2. I agree Friday is stupid. But it does make them some additional money.

3. I think most of the people who attend BC's and spend all that money on expensive seats, catering, and merchandise do not care about the alleged track bias. They are just like Kentucky Derby attendees-- they like the pageantry. Many of them come every year, and I have actually run into people in California who recognized me from BC's in the east.

4. I think drama and controversy are great. The biggest television rating in the history of the Olympics, winter or summer, was for Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan. Sports feed on controversy-- the Tuck Rule, Don Denkinger, fights at NASCAR races and hockey games. If racing could produce moments that people debated on sports talk radio or around office water coolers, that would be wonderful for the sport.

5. Not that many people booed. I was there. But its understandable why people booed-- people who bet the favorites were hoping for disqualifications. Why is that so hard to understand? Fans boo any decision that harms a favorite or helps a longshot, and cheer any decision that goes the other way.

[Tom]

A great event. Big crowd, good weather, impressive performances, Rosie's surprise, and a great Classic with drama and controversy.

Oh, Rosie.
Well, that changes everything.
I think we should have two BCs a year from now on, until ALL the female riders get pregnant. Why even have betting on the horses, we can bet on the sex of the baby ( and the "husband!")

How did I miss the importance of all that? :rolleyes:

[jahura2]

I have reviewed some of the comments regarding this years Breeders Cup and I noticed mixed reviews. Some people were complaining saying that the BC is a joke with others saying Santa Anita is a joke. I want to see how many people would rather go back to how things were before the BC.
Have always loved the BC but 3 years in a row at SA lessened my interest this year. Looking forward to a change of venue next year and losing that singer who was on right before the Classic.

[appistappis]

go back to the original plan and move it around every year

[Grits]

1. I was around back in the day. I will tell you that the original business model of the BC was actually quite close to "almost always in California". That's where the money is, because of weather and seating configurations.

That doesn't mean that they have to do it this way, of course. But a lot of people assume that the business model was "move it around" and it really wasn't. 3 of the first 4 were in California. That wasn't an accident. When it started bringing in lots of money, Tom Meeker and Doug Donn started lobbying to get the event, and things changed.

You may want to have your facts correct. Details are our friend, and knowing them, before we hit submit is always a good thing. Too, this subject has come up here before.

Mr.Gaines and those who joined in his vision had no intention, whatsoever, of staying in California because:

a. that's where the money is
b. the weather
c. seating configuration (That worked! Hollywood Park's now leveled.)

Doug Donn inherited Gulfstream Park when his father died. Why would he not want the BC held at his racetrack in Hallandale, Florida? Tom Meeker stayed on top as CEO at Churchill Downs for decades beginning back in the early 80s. Again, why would Meeker not want the BC held at the racetrack he ran in Kentucky? Both gentlemen knew this was the original plan.

Where has the Breeders' Cup's largest attendance over the decades occurred, repeatedly, since its inception? California? No. In central Kentucky at Churchill. Handle? Let's don't bring that up. But it, too, is stated at the BC website.

http://www.breederscup.com/history/event-year

http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/from-horsemans-vision-the-breeders-cup-was-born/?_r=0
“Dad had spent years lobbying people to agree on the details and funding for the Breeders’ Cup project. He had support from some, Nelson Bunker Hunt for one, but there certainly was no consensus. Without much ado, Dad called a press conference in the Pegasus room, a small chamber somewhere in the bowels of Churchill Downs. It was just Dad, my mother and me that day, along with a ragtag handful of journalists; I remember the podium and microphone. There were no other breeders, no network executives or representatives of the horse racing industry; just us, when he presented his plan. “Dad was full of big plans for the future,” Tom Gaines continued, “so this press conference didn’t seem like a big deal at the time, but when the horse racing media and the television networks bought into the idea, the project gained momentum, and the rest is history.”

Funding for the Breeders’ Cup, John Gaines reasoned, was to come from having each registered sire donate one stud fee per season to the cause, while each Breeders’ Cup-nominated foal contributed a flat fee to the fund. Gaines cleverly incented owners and racetracks by returning some of the money to increase purses and create prestigious races, while rotating the Breeders’ Cup from track to track to keep local racing associations happy.

[dilanesp]

You may want to have your facts correct. Details are our friend, and knowing them, before we hit submit is always a good thing. Too, this subject has come up here before.

Mr.Gaines and those who joined in his vision had no intention, whatsoever, of staying in California because:

a. that's where the money is
b. the weather
c. seating configuration (That worked! Hollywood Park's now leveled.)

Doug Donn inherited Gulfstream Park when his father died. Why would he not want the BC held at his racetrack in Hallandale, Florida? Tom Meeker stayed on top as CEO at Churchill Downs for decades beginning back in the early 80s. Again, why would Meeker not want the BC held at the racetrack he ran in Kentucky? Both gentlemen knew this was the original plan.

Where has the Breeders' Cup's largest attendance over the decades occurred, repeatedly, since its inception? California? No. In central Kentucky at Churchill. Handle? Let's don't bring that up. But it, too, is stated at the BC website.

http://www.breederscup.com/history/event-year

http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/from-horsemans-vision-the-breeders-cup-was-born/?_r=0

That is not what Gaines, et al., were saying at the time. Meeker publicly campaigned for the '88 BC (and actually said CD should be the permanent site) after having not even bid for the first three. The only acceptable bidder at first was Marje Everett at Hollywood Park.

Had the plan been to move around, 3 of the first 4 would not have been here and Meeker would not have had to publicly campaign for it.

As for profits, the announced crowds are higher at Churchill. But the average ticket price is much lower (60 dollars or so versus 200), because the majority of Churchill's seats have obstructed views. And they sell more stuff and have more events here due to good weather.

We make them the most money.

[Grits]

You have nothing here. The reason being....based soundly on one point. John Gaines' children know more about their father's vision/plan than you did, then. Or now.

This was a fine and a FAIR businessman, so highly thought of. BC has changed, tremendously. It has moved far from its beginnings, due to greed that fuels the organization today. Sure, there's much more money to be made but fools like the clown who spoke last week? The marketing guy who sees only the "Rodeo Drive" crowd as our (the event's) future. Only celebrity and top 1%ers need apply for seats. Where's this crowd the rest of the year??? People are sick of Santa Anita and declining handle is likely the best indicator of this.

[dilanesp]

Gaines' son is, shall we say, retconning? This article from 1986 should give you some idea of what was actually going on. They really didn't want to go to Kentucky in the early days. They wre making more money in California:

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-10-28/sports/sp-8084_1_race-track

[DeltaLover]

As others have already say Breeder's Cup should go back to its original format, less races in a single race card and different location every year are two of the most important changes needed. A completely drug free BC could also be beneficial for it as well as increased purses and more publicity for the gamblers who do not seem to receive any attention from the media.

[dilanesp]

And here's another one (http://articles.latimes.com/1989-11-17/sports/sp-1602_1_breeders-cup-races) , from 1989, after California fell out of favor with the Breeders' Cup. But look at how the early history of the event was recounted:

At the start, cup officials were intent on developing new fans by beefing up racing's generally mediocre television ratings, and they figured that Hollywood Park and Santa Anita, with their guarantees of good weather and large crowds, would do the best job of showcasing the sport.

As I said, I was around back then, and whatever the BC or Gaines' son says now, at the start, the idea was to hold it at least very often in California for reasons having to do with weather and money.

You can certainly argue that it is BETTER if the BC spreads itself around (I think that's wrong, but there's an argument for it). But claiming that was the original intent of the BC was quite wrong-- they wanted to make money and have good weather in October/November, and that meant running in California most of the time. The outlook changed after the money started rolling in and other tracks wanted to get in on the action.

[JohnGalt1]

I did not vote, because I like the BC, but would like all the classic/original BC races on Saturday and Friday run "minor" BC races and Grade 2 and 3 races on Friday like Ky Derby weekend. Fill out Friday with $100k Stakes races if needed.

$40k Optional races should not be run on BC Fridays or Saturdays.

[BlueShoe]

Would anyone honestly rather bet a field of $5000 claimers than a full field of stakes horses?
Would give it serious thought. Make it 20k and would definitely go with the claimers. Contrarian that I am, do not care for and rarely attend "Big Day" race cards with mostly all stake races. BC and the Triple Crown series are stay home days for myself. Have long had problems handicapping stakes races, one of my weaknesses. Mid level claimers are my meat and potatoes.

Was in Laughlin all week, returning late Thursday night. Betting tracks that SoCal otb sites do not offer a welcome change. Stayed home both BC days, Saturday was college football switching to the BC at post time. Might have bet Bayern, will never know, although the expected early duel with Monroe might have kept me away. Went yesterday, closing day at SA. Several of my regular track buddies were missing, likely burned out by two days of BC. :)

[Wickel]

Truth is, I like betting Charles Town, Retama, Evangeline, Delta and our New Mexico tracks better than the big boys. But I voted in favor of keeping the BC. It's our day to celebrate our sport. The pageantry, international competition and the rush of deciphering a very difficult puzzle makes the two days worth their while. Plus, hey, it's our World Series. Our Super Bowl. Our NBA Chamnpionship. Then when it's over, back to Charles Town, Evangeline ...

[garyscpa]

The BC is a great day for bettors, as good as it gets. If you are right once or twice, you can make a killing.

Yep, five great days a year for sure, Triple Crown and BC. A couple of others randomly depending on the cards.