Keeneland was bad

[ronsmac]

Has anyone seen a Keeneland meet that was worse than this one? Handle down 20 million, short fields and chalk galore. A lot of people called for dirt, me being one of them. I have to admit , they were better off with Polytrack.

[olddaddy]

The fields did seem shorter and it wasnt due to conditions of the track. I really cant figure out why the fields shortened up with dirt and most scheduled grass races were run on the grass. Maybe gulfstream running hurts Keenland?

[Some_One]

Increased drug testing?

[RXB]

Already a bazillion other dirt surfaces in operation. Now Keeneland is competing for the same shrinking pool of dirt horses (and the same pool of dirt bettors) as all of these other tracks.

[grimm7]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

Has anyone seen a Keeneland meet that was worse than this one? Handle down 20 million, short fields and chalk galore. A lot of people called for dirt, me being one of them. I have to admit , they were better off with Polytrack.

Agree! I was very disappointed with meet. I too was calling for dirt but fields were larger when they ran on Poly. Short fields on dirt is a nationwide problem.

[Tall One]

They could not host the BC with the poly.

[Cholly]

Maybe if they get it down to one-horse fields I'll pick my first winner at Keeneland.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by grimm7

Agree! I was very disappointed with meet. I too was calling for dirt but fields were larger when they ran on Poly. Short fields on dirt is a nationwide problem.

You're prefer larger groups of horses who lack talent on either of the conventional surfaces?

I think we'll have to dig deeper to find better reasons as to why there were short fields. Were not the barns filled by the usual trainers?

[Tall One]

Trainers point specifically for the meet, they ship in and win early, and they ship out...EARLY..

[RunDustyRun]

Completely agree...the average pick 4 and pick 5 payouts were anemic when compared to prior meets....chalk players, especially on dirt, must have done very well...dirt sprints especially were a merry go round with any horse more than two lengths back at first call having little if any chance...I prefer the poly

[tanner12oz]

Running half the card opening day severely hurts handle

[fmolf]

handle is down nationwide...the only solution is to have fewer tracks running....

[098poi]

Originally Posted by Cholly

Maybe if they get it down to one-horse fields I'll pick my first winner at Keeneland.

That's it! You've cracked the code.

[grimm7]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

You're prefer larger groups of horses who lack talent on either of the conventional surfaces?

I think we'll have to dig deeper to find better reasons as to why there were short fields. Were not the barns filled by the usual trainers?

What other reason could you come up with other than a shortage of dirt horses for small fields? I prefer larger fields talented or untalented like most because they produce larger payouts. Like to watch talented 5 or 6 horse but not for wagering purposes. Again, every track in the country is having a problem filling dirt races with talented horses. Barns did have usual trainers minus some Canadian and Presque Isle horses who normally ran on the poly.

[pandy]

This has nothing to do with the surface. There just aren't enough horses, period. The reason why the turf races have bigger fields is because there aren't as many turf races.