Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thespaah
I look at it this way. The money is there to attract large fields. If there are not enough G1 winners to go around at that particular period on the calendar, good for the horses of lesser stock. Now there are two more G1 winners.
These events will catch on with connections in the coming years.
Oh, don't forget, the UN Stakes was run at Mth the following day. The fact that there were two G1 races on grass on the same weekend with close geographical proximity, connections had choices. Besides, The UN has much more history and carries prestige as well.
|
Who is the last 3yo that ran in the United Nations or any of the 3 and up races run prior to the Secretariat? It would be the same as wondering why none of the runners in the Derby had won the Donn or the Santa Anita Handicap. (yeah I know they are listed 4 and up) The idea of these races was not to get US Gr 1 turf winners, because there haven't been any other Gr 1 races other than, I believe, the BC Juvenile Turf for the age group. It was to get the US horses that were Gr 1 capable and the internationals who had performed well in Group races. It did ok for a first go around and they were pretty decent groups all in all.
