Saturday's Dwyer Stakes only 5 horses !!!

[deathandgravity]

Ok.. this maybe a stupid question? But..

Explain to me why if you had a ½ decent horse in the allowance ranks you wouldn’t pay the $4000 in fees & in hope of scooping up some of the minor purse payouts?

Are horseman aware of the other entries when nominating?

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by sour grapes

was watching old races from 1991,and the mother goose and coaching club only had 4 fillies,meadow star and lite lite against 2 tomato cans.go for wand had 2 opponents in the alabama.THe breeders cup has changed racing and its debatable whether its for the better.

Originally Posted by devilsbag

On July 8, 1978, the Dwyer Stakes featured a field of three. However, that trio were a part of the best crop in the history of American racing. This year, not so much.

Originally Posted by dilanesp

1957 looks to me to be as good a crop as 1978. But that's a quibble.

Hey!! I know one has to have a very good memory to be good at handicapping horses but you guys are over the top with these.

I'm in trouble because I can't remember what I had for breakfast just three days ago.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by cj

Iowa Derby this week, Indiana Derby next week.

Friday night?
Look forward to this every year.

[devilsbag]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

1957 looks to me to be as good a crop as 1978. But that's a quibble.

Not looking for an argument, but I'm not sure it's that close.
I'm not looking at it as the three-year-olds of 1978, but the overall foal crop of 1975. So putting the glamorous Triple Crown races aside, and as an advocate for the west coast, you are welcome to include John Henry in your reassessment.

[Tom]

Last 516 5 horse fields everywhere, favorites won 48% and WP 70%.

Go grab a nice $3 exacta!
Use it for a down payment on a beer.

Could be worse, could be one horse racing a shark.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by devilsbag

Not looking for an argument, but I'm not sure it's that close.
I'm not looking at it as the three-year-olds of 1978, but the overall foal crop of 1975. So putting the glamorous Triple Crown races aside, and as an advocate for the west coast, you are welcome to include John Henry in your reassessment.

Redefined that way, horses born in 1964, which include Dr. Fager, Damascus, Princessnesian, Gamely, and Fort Marcy, is going to count. Also 1966: Majestic Prince, Arts and Letters, Shuvee, Ta Wee, Cougar II, and Ack Ack.

[Secondbest]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Redefined that way, horses born in 1964, which include Dr. Fager, Damascus, Princessnesian, Gamely, and Fort Marcy, is going to count. Also 1966: Majestic Prince, Arts and Letters, Shuvee, Ta Wee, Cougar II, and Ack Ack.

Ta Wee. One of my all time favorites.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

They screwed up the Suburban also, with only a field of 6

Could have been a great card.

At first glance, it's only worth playing the 2 dirt features as part of a multi-race sequence.

Guess I will be focused on the two turf features.

Dirt racing in NY is a joke, has been for years. They might as well turn the main track into a 3rd turf course and run all grass racing. That would eliminate these 5 horse fields.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

Dirt racing in NY is a joke, has been for years. They might as well turn the main track into a 3rd turf course and run all grass racing. That would eliminate these 5 horse fields.

Only works for awhile. California continued to have 11 horse grass races long after our dirt racing went to hell, but now we card plenty of 6 horse turf races too.

[MonmouthParkJoe]

Originally Posted by deathandgravity

Ok.. this maybe a stupid question? But..

Explain to me why if you had a ½ decent horse in the allowance ranks you wouldn’t pay the $4000 in fees & in hope of scooping up some of the minor purse payouts?

Are horseman aware of the other entries when nominating?

Most times you pitch the angle of being able to get a horse graded stakes placed to get them in there. As it relates to saying who else is in there, each track is different.

Once the first Saratoga book comes out most horsemen wait on entering for stakes/allowance races upstate. Horsemen get pretty aggressive with their placement since everyone wants to win there.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

This is exactly right.

It's also more new in California than it is in New York. California used to have a lot of 10 and 12 horse stakes races in the 1980's, at the same time when NYRA had lots of short fields. Now it's the opposite, California is even worse than NYRA at drawing horses into its stakes races.

There are more options for stakes horses, and stakes horses also run a lot less often. Also, stakes purses haven't caught up with inflation, except the very top line ones. For instance, while the Kentucky Derby has grown from $600,000 to $2 million in the last 30 years, the Charles Whittingham Stakes purse shrunk from $500,000 to $200,000.

And that was only due to CD getting deserved manure for having owners pay such a big chunk of the purse ($1m in fees for 20 horses) while they pocket $100m over the two days. Hell, the owners should fuss louder and get the fees dropped to $20k or have CD boost the purse by another million.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

And that was only due to CD getting deserved manure for having owners pay such a big chunk of the purse ($1m in fees for 20 horses) while they pocket $100m over the two days. Hell, the owners should fuss louder and get the fees dropped to $20k or have CD boost the purse by another million.

Honestly, the Derby should be one of the richest races in the world based on what it produces for Churchill.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

Dirt racing in NY is a joke, has been for years. They might as well turn the main track into a 3rd turf course and run all grass racing. That would eliminate these 5 horse fields.

I dont really understand why this is....i think its a bigger question for the entire industry.

why are turf fields constantly getting large fields and dirt racing small fields.

when you consider that half the races in NY, or more, are on turf its not a issue of there are just more dirt races.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

I dont really understand why this is....i think its a bigger question for the entire industry.

why are turf fields constantly getting large fields and dirt racing small fields.

when you consider that half the races in NY, or more, are on turf its not a issue of there are just more dirt races.

I want to preface by saying that I do not know enough about this to have an opinion.


Some guesses:

Dirt racing is less random, and owners and trainers don't want to race in tough spots where they face a dominant rival.

The super trainers don't want to 'waste' a win purse with 2 or 3 entries in a dirt race. On turf, they are more likely to try to ensure a pace or hope one of their multiple entries gets a trip.

Everybody is resting and drugging their dirt horses. 'Spacing'.

Collusion. Taking turns for the purse money, and occasionally filling out the 5th or 6th horse w/ a 'b' horse to make a race go.

The breeding program. Some of the turf races (state-bred maiden (clm or MSW)) for example, are highly incentivized.

Turf horses fairly frequently get to run with the flow, and do no running, and there are more turf horses that are ready to run sooner, out of the populations.


Someone who has real experience with being a racing secretary, or someone who has studied the issue and knows the important factors would have to chime in.

[VeryOldMan]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

[B]ecause while everyone is trying to label Practical Joke a sprinter, I think he should demolish this field with plenty in reserve.

Boom goes the dynamite from OP! Nice call.