Jockey Club Gold Cup moved ti Saratoga Meeting

[thespaah]

This comes as a bit of a shock, but it kind of makes sense.
Per the configuration differences between The Spa and Big Sandy, 10 furlongs starts in the upper stretch at Saratoga and on the Clubhouse turn at Belmont.
NYRA has upped the purse for the JCGC back to $1 Milllion. Also moving to Saratoga from the Belmont Fall Meet is the Flower Bowl.
The Woodward which was switched from Belmont to Saratoga, is now heading back to Belmont.
https://poststar.com/sports/saratoga...c7d2001041d6cc

https://www.nyra.com/saratoga/racing/stakes-schedule/

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by thespaah

This comes as a bit of a shock, but it kind of makes sense.
Per the configuration differences between The Spa and Big Sandy, 10 furlongs starts in the upper stretch at Saratoga and on the Clubhouse turn at Belmont.
NYRA has upped the purse for the JCGC back to $1 Milllion. Also moving to Saratoga from the Belmont Fall Meet is the Flower Bowl.
The Woodward which was switched from Belmont to Saratoga, is now heading back to Belmont.
https://poststar.com/sports/saratoga...c7d2001041d6cc

https://www.nyra.com/saratoga/racing/stakes-schedule/

Seem like a wise preservation move for the JCGC; last year's field was approaching Big Cap status.

This move should reinvigorate the race with most trainers adhering to the silly "I need 6-8 weeks to train up to the BC" mentality nowadays.

Don't think the Woodward will lose too much, not many horses were attempting the Whitney-Woodward double if I recall correctly and if they keep it at 9 furlongs it should still be an attractive "final prep" for the trainers who prefer to run their horses rather than sit in the barn.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Seem like a wise preservation move for the JCGC; last year's field was approaching Big Cap status.

This move should reinvigorate the race with most trainers adhering to the silly "I need 6-8 weeks to train up to the BC" mentality nowadays.

Don't think the Woodward will lose too much, not many horses were attempting the Whitney-Woodward double if I recall correctly and if they keep it at 9 furlongs it should still be an attractive "final prep" for the trainers who prefer to run their horses rather than sit in the barn.

I agree.
This obsession some trainers have with "rest" has become absurd.
I believe the Breeders Cup was a good concept. Its existence created an opportunity for the connections owning the best in the world to have an event to showcase their horses and to show who is the biggest swinging cattle prod on the block.
The BC has transitioned into the event which everyone points their horses. Stakes events across the calendar are reduced to Breeders Cup preps. This has reduced the importance of these traditionally powerful and important events.
Maybe I'm a traditionalist or a stick in the mud....I just believe in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".... Now, I may get flamed for this next comment...Ask me if I care......But I think the Breeders Cup has served its purpose and its time to either radically change the format, or let it go.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Seem like a wise preservation move for the JCGC; last year's field was approaching Big Cap status.

This move should reinvigorate the race with most trainers adhering to the silly "I need 6-8 weeks to train up to the BC" mentality nowadays.

Don't think the Woodward will lose too much, not many horses were attempting the Whitney-Woodward double if I recall correctly and if they keep it at 9 furlongs it should still be an attractive "final prep" for the trainers who prefer to run their horses rather than sit in the barn.

Actually ran the Woodward at 10f last year, I hope they move it back to 9 since 10 is really awkward at Belmont. I like the JCGC to Saratoga for that change, as well as what you said.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by cj

Actually ran the Woodward at 10f last year, I hope they move it back to 9 since 10 is really awkward at Belmont. I like the JCGC to Saratoga for that change, as long as what you said.

I always looked forward to the Woodward at Toga. Since Rachel Alexandra it’s been a a fav of mine

[SG4]

I like the 10 furlongs at Saratoga, and then 4 weeks later 9f at Belmont, but why the need to switch the names? As was mentioned, Woodward was 10f last year, and both are grade 1's, why not just announce the JCGC will be shortened to 9f this year instead of the race name flip-flopping?

[BarchCapper]

Though this may have been the direction that ultimately needed to be taken, it might have been good for NYRA to wait a couple more years to see how things shook out. The field size factor is a big one, but there are a couple of counter-factors (one that could have affected JCGC field size in the future):

1) It's almost as if we've all forgotten that Vino Rosso "won" the JCGC and then won the BCC just TWO years ago!!!!!

2) There is a tendency for horses to have quicker recovery post-race and be able to race with greater frequency without Lasix. With the move this year to no Lasix in NYRA stakes, the interval between the "normal" placement of the JCGC before the BCC has the potential of being a more "normal" spacing of races for racing's star horses going forward.

[cj]

Originally Posted by SG4

I like the 10 furlongs at Saratoga, and then 4 weeks later 9f at Belmont, but why the need to switch the names? As was mentioned, Woodward was 10f last year, and both are grade 1's, why not just announce the JCGC will be shortened to 9f this year instead of the race name flip-flopping?

The JCGC is likely to draw a better field and is the more prestigious race. The last few years have not been very good, to be kind. I think the 9f Woodward will be fine in a new slot and this will help the Gold Cup.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by cj

The JCGC is likely to draw a better field and is the more prestigious race. The last few years have not been very good, to be kind. I think the 9f Woodward will be fine in a new slot and this will help the Gold Cup.

As someone who has always liked the Jockey Gold Cup as a championship race and has been to many of them,I am a little disappointed at the change. With that said, it is the right move by NYRA. The last few runnings have been disappointing to say the least. Times change and I guess it was time to change the Jockey Gold Cup. Not the first change of this race.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Seem like a wise preservation move for the JCGC; last year's field was approaching Big Cap status.

This move should reinvigorate the race with most trainers adhering to the silly "I need 6-8 weeks to train up to the BC" mentality nowadays.

Don't think the Woodward will lose too much, not many horses were attempting the Whitney-Woodward double if I recall correctly and if they keep it at 9 furlongs it should still be an attractive "final prep" for the trainers who prefer to run their horses rather than sit in the barn.

How many trainers are going to try the Whitney/Gold Cup double?

I get the thinking, but if NYRA and horsemen consider the Gold Cup more prestigious than the Woodward and want to keep it as an elite prestigious race, some trainers may now pass on the Whitney to run in the JCGC for a million instead. That could dilute the Whitney.

I go to the Whitney every year. Maybe in the future it will be the Gold Cup.

This is a problem without a good solution. The Belmont fall meet is not what it once was because of the Breeder's Cup, but you can only sandwich so much into Saratoga or you'll wind up diluting the quality and field size of other races because of race spacing.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

How many trainers are going to try the Whitney/Gold Cup double?

That wasn't the point of moving the JCGC in my opinion. They are trying to preserve its graded stakes status by basically swapping the names. The JCGC was in a more tenuous position than the Woodward based on the most recent renewals. Furthermore, the JCGC is a Win-and-You're In race and the calendar switch to 6-8 weeks out make sense since the current conventional stupidity of our top trainers is to sit on horses for that long ahead of the BC.

Will the Woodward in October suffer the same fate? Maybe, but perhaps NYRA will be promoting the race more as a BC prep (especially at 9f) and try and secure Win-and-You're In status for the Woodward, too. At any rate, it can afford a couple of weak renditions and not lose its Grade 1 status in the short-term.

I get the thinking, but if NYRA and horsemen consider the Gold Cup more prestigious than the Woodward and want to keep it as an elite prestigious race, some trainers may now pass on the Whitney to run in the JCGC for a million instead. That could dilute the Whitney.

Maybe the Whitney winner won't move on to the JCGC but the also-rans might if they are trying to get that Win-and-You're In free ride to the BC.

I go to the Whitney every year. Maybe in the future it will be the Gold Cup.

Why not go to both?

This is a problem without a good solution. The Belmont fall meet is not what it once was because of the Breeder's Cup, but you can only sandwich so much into Saratoga or you'll wind up diluting the quality and field size of other races because of race spacing.

Sounds like your solution is to do away with the Woodward or any older horse stakes at the end of the Saratoga meet. The race meet lasts for a 50-day stretch or so; 2 races per division per meet should never have been a problem to begin with.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

That wasn't the point of moving the JCGC in my opinion. They are trying to preserve its graded stakes status by basically swapping the names. The JCGC was in a more tenuous position than the Woodward based on the most recent renewals. Furthermore, the JCGC is a Win-and-You're In race and the calendar switch to 6-8 weeks out make sense since the current conventional stupidity of our top trainers is to sit on horses for that long ahead of the BC.

Will the Woodward in October suffer the same fate? Maybe, but perhaps NYRA will be promoting the race more as a BC prep (especially at 9f) and try and secure Win-and-You're In status for the Woodward, too. At any rate, it can afford a couple of weak renditions and not lose its Grade 1 status in the short-term.


Maybe the Whitney winner won't move on to the JCGC but the also-rans might if they are trying to get that Win-and-You're In free ride to the BC.


Why not go to both?


Sounds like your solution is to do away with the Woodward or any older horse stakes at the end of the Saratoga meet. The race meet lasts for a 50-day stretch or so; 2 races per division per meet should never have been a problem to begin with.

Actually the solution is to have the trainers and horsemen run their horses. They should stop being afraid to lose a race. When the Breeders Cup began,the year end races in Ca. and NY still drew good fields and were more than preps. Obviously,not policing sport has had its effect, but trainers being afraid to lose and ruining the handicap races has probably done more to harm the sport than anything else.

[classhandicapper]

That wasn't the point of moving the JCGC in my opinion. They are trying to preserve its graded stakes status.

Obviously.

I agree this should help with the status of the JCGC. I'm just pointing out it may come at the expense of the quality of the Whitney. Before, the Whitney was the premier race and then a few would pass on the Woodward due to spacing or other issues. Now the JCGC will be so attractive a few may pass the Whitney to focus on the JCGC instead because of the purse (an extra 500k relative to the Woodward), to avoid someone in the Whitney, due to wanting greater spacing.

I'm not criticizing the idea. I don't have a better one. I'm simply pointing out there may be unintended consequences.