PDA

View Full Version : BC to CD or Bust


maxwell
12-15-2009, 07:46 PM
Steven Crist has reported in the DRF that the BC bigwigs are considering a permanent site to host racing's big day. Crist seems to think CD is the most logical location. This is what I think :

1 : The BC bigwigs are looking for an easy way out a bad situation that they created.

2 : Belmont is better suited trackwise simply because of the size of the racing surfaces.

3 : Moving the BC around was supposed to showcase the sport.

4 : Racing year after year in the north in November is pretty iffy.

5 : I feel it adds a little spice by moving around.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 07:52 PM
Should rotate from CD,Bel,GP. I'd say SA if it was dirt. You HAVE to have DIRT and TURF. Not Turf racing and dirt thats turf and turf horses enter and win the races.
Raven Pass trainer said no way they were running if the 2008 BC was on dirt.

Ian Meyers
12-15-2009, 07:57 PM
Rumor has it the site is SA.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 07:58 PM
Rumor has it the site is SA.
:lol:

joanied
12-15-2009, 08:01 PM
Should rotate from CD,Bel,GP. I'd say SA if it was dirt. You HAVE to have DIRT and TURF. Not Turf racing and dirt thats turf and turf horses enter and win the races.
Raven Pass trainer said no way they were running if the 2008 BC was on dirt.

And maybe Hialeah, if it works out...but, it ain't gonna happen...'they'd' be screaming East coast bias!!!

toussaud
12-15-2009, 08:05 PM
just go to mountineer park and call it a day.

Stillriledup
12-15-2009, 09:12 PM
I like different locales. It gives the fans of the local site the entire year to 'look forward to' the BC in their backyard.

If its at one site, its going to get old and the novelty is going to wear off.

its not going to seem 'as important'.

People criticized rachels connections for not going to the 'super bowl' of horse racing. The NFL (infinitely more successful than horse racing) has a SB at a different locale every year. If its good enough for the NFL, its good enough for horse racing.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 09:15 PM
I like different locales. It gives the fans of the local site the entire year to 'look forward to' the BC in their backyard.

If its at one site, its going to get old and the novelty is going to wear off.

its not going to seem 'as important'.

People criticized rachels connections for not going to the 'super bowl' of horse racing. The NFL (infinitely more successful than horse racing) has a SB at a different locale every year. If its good enough for the NFL, its good enough for horse racing.

Well if the "super bowl" of a sport is the one thing people draw to,the excitement,and the one thing that gets big ratings,then I'd say the Super Bowl of racing is the Kentucky Derby. I always thought that. Everyone's different though.

the_fat_man
12-15-2009, 09:24 PM
2 : Belmont is better suited trackwise simply because of the size of the racing surfaces.



But if there's even a drop of moisture NYRA would insist they take the turf races OFF. (Or, worse, they'd selectively take them off.) Got to save that grass. So, this won't work.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 09:30 PM
But if there's even a drop of moisture NYRA would insist they take the turf races OFF. (Or, worse, they'd selectively take them off.) Got to save that grass. So, this won't work.

Nope,it rained good during the 1995 Belmont BC and all the turf races were fine.

Stillriledup
12-15-2009, 10:01 PM
Well if the "super bowl" of a sport is the one thing people draw to,the excitement,and the one thing that gets big ratings,then I'd say the Super Bowl of racing is the Kentucky Derby. I always thought that. Everyone's different though.


I think the BC is considered more the 'super bowl' because its a 2 day 'festus' of racing. The NFL's super bowl is more about the week leading up to the event as a big party. Also, the Ky Derby is a race restricted to a certain age group, so its not 'super' in that way, its not 'open' to the best horses, whereas the BC is.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 10:08 PM
I think the BC is considered more the 'super bowl' because its a 2 day 'festus' of racing. The NFL's super bowl is more about the week leading up to the event as a big party. Also, the Ky Derby is a race restricted to a certain age group, so its not 'super' in that way, its not 'open' to the best horses, whereas the BC is.

Well they make the first BC day run on a weekday,when people are working. :rolleyes: Also,I remember BC being on national tv. Now it's all on cable,right?. As I said,I guess it peoples opinions. I will always put the Derby as the Super Bowl of racing. It's like a month and a half of non stop covergae for the Derby and who's leading the trail and also the excitement of who could be the next big thing.

cj
12-15-2009, 10:11 PM
I think Churchill would be great.

Belmont runs 1 1/4 race, the Classic, with the start on a turn. It isn't a big deal, but it isn't ideal either. I don't like that the Distaff and both miles would be one turn races either, especially the turf version.

Santa Anita is on a minority surface, so that should be out. Nobody cares about the turf sprint, but running it at 6 1/2 furlongs has been pretty stupid. It also doesn't make sense to cater to an area where the sport is dying a slow death. They can hardly fill a race card these days, so why reward them with the BC?

Somebody mentioned Gulfstream? They can hold more people at Remington. The dirt course is set up terribly for the Distaff.

Churchill, outside of possible weather, is perfect. Besides SoCal, where else can you guarantee good weather in early November? It is the heart of the breeding industry, and this is the Breeder's Cup, no?

I always like the Derby, but it is more of the "pretty horsy" crowd type event. For bettors, I think the BC is the World Series.

castaway01
12-15-2009, 10:19 PM
There's no perfect option, but if they're going to pick a permanent site, Churchill is the best choice.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 10:27 PM
"I always like the Derby, but it is more of the "pretty horsy" crowd type event. For bettors, I think the BC is the World Series"

Well BC is turning out that way too now. Def gotten to that "Pretty horsy" crowd. Not that that's really a bad thing.

Robert Goren
12-15-2009, 10:37 PM
The only place where race tracks are in worse shape than So Cal is Kentucky. Unless they gets slots there is very good chance that CD won't be arround much longer.

cj
12-15-2009, 11:50 PM
The purses at Churchill and Keeneland don't really support that statement. Sure, Turfway isn't much, but it never has been. Ditto for Ellis. Churchill isn't going anywhere, they are just playing possum to try to get slots.

tzipi
12-15-2009, 11:59 PM
Churchill will always around. Same with Belmont and Saratoga. Although it is scary,during the summer Belmont will get just around 5,000 people unless it's a big day. Aqueduct does 1,000 to 1,500. Not that others aren't in the same boat. Scary what has happened. And this was happening before the economy tanked.

gm10
12-16-2009, 04:21 AM
Having a permanent location is a really dumb idea. I would hate that.

Tom
12-16-2009, 07:39 AM
Bad idea - keep it moving.

rrbauer
12-16-2009, 08:43 AM
South Florida? The Europeans will not come if it's held there. Too warm. We've been down that road. I think that if they held it a few weeks earlier that weather in the north would be less of an issue.

Bobzilla
12-16-2009, 09:03 AM
I prefer a rotation. I would think in the interest of geographical fairness a CD, Bel and SA rotation would be the way to go. I know in the minds of some the surface issue in CA should preclude their consideration. A possible upside to having SA as part of a three track rotation might be that certain horses may remain in training for another year with the hopes of making it to the following year's BC. Maybe not, just throwing it out there.

I've never been to the Fair Grounds. I have no idea what their seating capacity is or whether or not this track would be an appropriate setting.

My program from the 2007 BC had a page advertising Sam Houston as a track that would be interested in hosting the BC some year. I was surprised as it didn't strike me as realistic.

1st time lasix
12-16-2009, 09:25 AM
I know Tampa currently doesn't have the needed grandstand...but if they spent some money because it was being awarded to them....then Tampa sure can host. They have had several Superbowls in Tampa. Plenty of hotels/restaurants, airport and good weather. Gulfstream in Miami has eliminated themselves due to the slots. They tore down their grandstand seating for slot room. Not enough seating for a normal Friday and Saturday --although it is a nice facility for the horsemen.

Steve R
12-16-2009, 09:30 AM
I think the BC is considered more the 'super bowl' because its a 2 day 'festus' of racing. The NFL's super bowl is more about the week leading up to the event as a big party. Also, the Ky Derby is a race restricted to a certain age group, so its not 'super' in that way, its not 'open' to the best horses, whereas the BC is.
It's hard to consider the BC a super bowl of anything when only a fraction of the eligible American-raced G1 SWs in most divisions even show up and hardly anybody watches it.

Robert Goren
12-16-2009, 09:33 AM
The purses at Churchill and Keeneland don't really support that statement. Sure, Turfway isn't much, but it never has been. Ditto for Ellis. Churchill isn't going anywhere, they are just playing possum to try to get slots.Last summer CD had a hard time getting horses. Indiana was taking horses that used to run there. Keeneland does seem to have it's act together.

Robert Goren
12-16-2009, 09:36 AM
It's hard to consider the BC a super bowl of anything when only a fraction of the eligible American-raced G1 SWs in most divisions even show up and hardly anybody watches it.It is held in the middle of the football season. Football trumps everything.

nearco
12-16-2009, 09:53 AM
Belmont.
Easy to get to from any where in the world.
Centrally located between the west coast and western Europe.
Has a decent sized turf course, so you can actually run the Mile without having to make two tight 180 deg turns like they have to on those 7f glorified bull rings (all the top mile races in the world are one turn, or straight miles, the BC Mile should be too) and you can run the turf with just two turns.
Has real dirt so people there would be no whining.
Can handle big crowds and has the infrastructure to get people to and from the track.
They could put the 10f chute back in for the Classic, wouldn't be that hard to go across the training track into the infield.

Grits
12-16-2009, 10:08 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, I promise you this. Something to keep in mind. Churchill Downs Incorporated DID NOT rebuild and add on to, almost that entire plant, (saving only those Twin Spires) for the sole purpose of the Kentucky Oaks and the Kentucky Derby weekend.

You can believe this project was undertaken, and the millions spent with the business plan, all along, to bring the Breeders' Cup, permanently, to CD. To central Kentucky. It is the only racing entity (corporation) in the country with the sound, financial wealth and background to be able to do it. There is no other that can compare to their wealth, or their liquidity.

I'd imagine this plan was in place well before the first piece of construction equipment rolled onto the property. All CDI, its business minded/bottom line boys and board members had to do was sit back, watch, then wait--for the two years to unfold over Santa Anita's surface.

Smart and cagey bunch of businessmen, they are.

All of this, as we know, being about business!

Louisville, and Churchill would be a fine choice. CD or Belmont can, both, be cold as sin in late October or early November. But that's ok, Churchill, still, is now better equipped for the crowd.

Quagmire
12-16-2009, 10:13 AM
If they move it permanently to CD they should run some of the races in prime time now that they have the lights.

illinoisbred
12-16-2009, 10:18 AM
If the BC is to settle on 1 location, there's no better choice than Churchill Downs. They can handle the crowd and the airport is nearby. You can see the Twin Spires from the airport.

rwwupl
12-16-2009, 10:34 AM
Paul Moran thinks we should go to Churchill Downs.



http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/columns/story?columnist=moran_paul&id=4742192


Monday, December 14, 2009
BC could seek permanent residence

Exerpt:

There are few options for those who would determine a suitable permanent site.
Running the Breeders' Cup over a synthetic track at Santa Anita once was a lapse in judgment. Twice was frighteningly foolish. American racing is conducted on either dirt of turf, not polymer, shredded tires, wax and whatever else is included in the recipe for a synthetic track. Santa Anita is a wonderful place for racing but there should never be another Breeders' Cup race at a California racetrack unless dirt surfaces are restored.


There is only one logical permanent site: Churchill Downs.

michiken
12-16-2009, 11:30 AM
Why not have at least on BC at Sunland Park? Delta Downs? Fairgrounds? Evangeline or a smaller track that would jump at the opportunity to host the event?

nearco
12-16-2009, 12:38 PM
Why not have at least on BC at Sunland Park? Delta Downs? Fairgrounds? Evangeline or a smaller track that would jump at the opportunity to host the event?

I guess you want to scrap the Turf races if you're going for Sunland and some others, not to mention everyone would get dizzy watching horses make multiple circuits of a bullring like Delta (can they even card a 10f race?).
Hosting 30k+ people and ease of access is kind of an issue in some of those joints too.

Show Me the Wire
12-16-2009, 12:41 PM
I have nothing against CD, but it is not the ideal place for a permanent home. Louisville does measure to L.A. or New York as a cosmopolitan area. If you want to draw international crowds you need international venues. CD has the KD and all the tradition it needs for this specific international event.

stuball
12-16-2009, 12:51 PM
Why the heck don't they change the date to middle of October....Summer races are winding down.
result more tracks that could host the BC in decent weather.
What is the great fascination with November..cold Lovely...

Stuball

Bochall
12-16-2009, 01:06 PM
Steven Crist has reported in the DRF that the BC bigwigs are considering a permanent site to host racing's big day. Crist seems to think CD is the most logical location. This is what I think :

1 : The BC bigwigs are looking for an easy way out a bad situation that they created.

2 : Belmont is better suited trackwise simply because of the size of the racing surfaces.

3 : Moving the BC around was supposed to showcase the sport.

4 : Racing year after year in the north in November is pretty iffy.

5 : I feel it adds a little spice by moving around.


Actually, Crist advocates building a track specifically for the BC and Vegas is his site. Thats a good idea IMO. A tri-oval (like Nad Al Sheba) is the best design as it can accomodate all distances without short run ups to the turn or abbreviated distances (like the F&M Turf). A chute at each of the turns will get the job done.
If we're going to an existing track for a perm. site then i agree that CD is best suited. The 1 1/4m at Bel starts on the turn. Not good for the biggest race of the day.
FG is a non contender: no 1 1/4m chute in the stretch, small grandstand, track not wide enough for 14 starters (esp the turf), staff couldnt handle the crowd. Anyone who's been to FG on a big racing day knows this. Lines at the bar are EASILY 15-20 deep, with only ONE BARTENDER on staff at each bar...NO WAY!
I support the current format of a moveable feast.

Robert Fischer
12-16-2009, 01:08 PM
CD, BEL, SA, GP are ideal

Robert Fischer
12-16-2009, 01:09 PM
also - a variety of surfaces and track quirks benefit the horseplayer because they add complexity and bias.

Jasonm921
12-16-2009, 04:54 PM
I like the Churchill Idea. I think the two day event is here to stay. If this is the case Churchill could run the Friday event in prime time under the lights and the saturday card during the day or if they want they can do that under the lights. The Europeans will still get a moist turf course with chilly weather. They have done well with that turf course. The Breeder's Cup has to find a way to make the prep races in NY and California mean something and to have the drawing power to the general public.

3george3
12-16-2009, 04:58 PM
I love Belmont, but there is just something about racing under the twin spires. I vote for Churchill.

If, and its a big if, the new Maryland owners can ever truly turn things around, a BC at Pimlico could also be fun. But until then, go with CD.

onefast99
12-16-2009, 05:17 PM
Ladies and gentlemen, I promise you this. Something to keep in mind. Churchill Downs Incorporated DID NOT rebuild and add on to, almost that entire plant, (saving only those Twin Spires) for the sole purpose of the Kentucky Oaks and the Kentucky Derby weekend.

You can believe this project was undertaken, and the millions spent with the business plan, all along, to bring the Breeders' Cup, permanently, to CD. To central Kentucky. It is the only racing entity (corporation) in the country with the sound, financial wealth and background to be able to do it. There is no other that can compare to their wealth, or their liquidity.

I'd imagine this plan was in place well before the first piece of construction equipment rolled onto the property. All CDI, its business minded/bottom line boys and board members had to do was sit back, watch, then wait--for the two years to unfold over Santa Anita's surface.

Smart and cagey bunch of businessmen, they are.

All of this, as we know, being about business!

Louisville, and Churchill would be a fine choice. CD or Belmont can, both, be cold as sin in late October or early November. But that's ok, Churchill, still, is now better equipped for the crowd.
Cold as sin for the BC in late October or early November? It was 75 degrees for the BC at Monmouth park in 2007, yes it rained but the weather at the end of October in the Northeast will almost always have a little rain associated with it. Keep the BC moving flip flop between Belmont and CD and let the westcoast take a break from the BC for at least the next 4 years.

gm10
12-16-2009, 05:30 PM
Cold as sin for the BC in late October or early November? It was 75 degrees for the BC at Monmouth park in 2007, yes it rained but the weather at the end of October in the Northeast will almost always have a little rain associated with it. Keep the BC moving flip flop between Belmont and CD and let the westcoast take a break from the BC for at least the next 4 years.
:ThmbUp:

I flew in from London three times in a row. Jersey is ugly but has soul ... Los Angeles is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar.

I certainly won't keep coming over if it's in CD every year - no offence to Louisvillers :-)

macdiarmida
12-16-2009, 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by Grits
Smart and cagey bunch of businessmen, they are.
I give those guys props for some things, but not foresight. They act like any other US business and basically live and plan quarter to quarter. And before 2008, their stock was performing how?

Originally Posted by michiken
Why not have at least on BC at Sunland Park? Delta Downs? Fairgrounds? Evangeline or a smaller track that would jump at the opportunity to host the event?
AFAIK BC scarfs up nearly all the money generated for the BC; their peeps run the show for the two days. In addition to not having turf courses, most small tracks aren’t eligible because they have to accommodate 12-14 horse fields. I’d like to see a bigger variety of host tracks myself.

Churchill Downs in winter rain wasn’t and won’t be fun. Either to be there or bet. Plus you’ll be happy to pay the Ky Derby surcharge for everything in Louisville if you go; like +100%?

maxwell
12-16-2009, 06:12 PM
Bochall,

I took Crist's comment concerning Vegas with a shovelful of salt; a pipedream if I ever heard one. I got the impression he was hugging the twin spires. :D

As we can all see from the various opinions in this thread, the BC issue is a real quagmire!

Grits
12-16-2009, 10:27 PM
I give those guys props for some things, but not foresight. They act like any other US business and basically live and plan quarter to quarter. And before 2008, their stock was performing how?


AFAIK

Right, one's going to launch and complete a multi million dollar construction project using no foresight whatsoever?

Okay, but I've never run my own business minus foresight.

To be quite honest, I don't give a tinker's damn how their stock was performing before 2008. They are, AND have been, by far, the wealthiest and most financially sound of all corporations owning racetracks in the country that would be capable of hosting the Breeders' Cup event. Keeneland excluded, as it is not capable of handling the crowd. Bullrings excluded as well, because as someone said, how many times are they going to have to run in circles to get the 1 1/4 or 1 1/2?

Anything with Stronach's name on it being more sound? . . . . NOT.

By chance, attend the the 2005 Breeders Cup at Belmont? If so, it was about 30 degrees or more colder with the wind chill and the overcast day than at Monmouth. One of the coldest days I recall at a racetrack. EVER.

If one can't afford to attend in Louisville, one can easily play from home, or their nearest OTB.

AFAIK? No earthly idea what the hell this is. More textspeak maybe.

Apologies for the lack of love, its just been one of those worst days, as we sometimes say, "on record". Tonight, they could have the thing in Newfoundland, and I wouldn't care.:faint:

PaceAdvantage
12-17-2009, 06:32 AM
Why mess with a good thing? For 21 years life was simple and the BC was held at a different track each year...yeah it was mostly CD, BEL, SA, HOL and GP, but they threw in a bone every now and then...MTH, LS, WO, AP.

Holding it at the same venue every year will just strip away yet another tradition in racing...why?

Show Me the Wire
12-17-2009, 12:47 PM
I agree not a good idea to settle on one site. However, I undersatnd it would be simpler from a logistic point of view to have one dedicated site.

FenceBored
12-17-2009, 04:00 PM
Satish Sanan talks to Steve Byk about the single site issue starting about around the 8 minute mark.

http://thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/images/stories/audio/121609b.mp3

Won't transcribe any of it (don't have time). Bottom line, no done deal, yet.

Reading between the lines, I come to the conclusion that it is better than even money that the BC will be permanent at Santa Anita (and he puts the probability of SA going back to dirt in the next couple of years as 80%). The major roadblock would appear to be the question of the unsettled ownership of SA.

As to CDI, Mr. Sanan seems to believe that the management of CD is, how shall we say, insufficently deferential to the wishes of the Board of BC Limited.