Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SuperPickle
I met this guy 100 times in other shapes and forms. I know the lyrics.
"I remember when these stands were full... on a WEDNESDAY."
"I remember when a good horse raced every week."
"I remember when the Jockey Club Gold Cup was a prestigous race."
"I remember when a trainer was a horseman first."
"None of these bums could could be Arcaro's valet."
"The Breeders Cup ruined the sport."
|
Of all of them, the complaints about the Breeders' Cup take the cake for me.
Of course the Breeders' Cup isn't perfect. But it does usually put together at least 10 amazingly competitive bettable races that bring together top horses from all over the country, and put them on before 50,000 spectators while bringing in over $100 million in betting.
In contrast, those New York races that Roman so fondly remembers often had short fields and often led to big disputes about year-end championships. Further, even when they didn't, it was usually because some good horse from California (or somewhere else) was ignored because the bulk of the voting was by writers who worked in New York. And while there was a time when there were 50,000 on hand for a big Saturday race at Aqueduct, that was more than 50 years ago; even in the 1970's, most of the big races in New York had seen big drops in attendance.
Some of the other things he's pissed off about I agree with (I especially don't like the infrequency with which good horses race these days). But the Breeders' Cup is one of the few things that this sport has done that was really right.
