Bill Finley on NYRA stakes & grades

[Al Gobbi]

Finley is spot on in his comments that NYRA needs to overhaul their stakes program in an era of declining foal crops and stakes horses running few and far between

https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.co...-nyra-no-love/

[Publius]

A lot of what Finley writes sounds about right. The confusing thing is the
Committee decisions on Kentucky races. Upgrades for a few while not downgrading any races there.

[classhandicapper]

This website gives you some information on the process for grading stakes.

The more objective part of it looks fine to me. Here are the two notes that may have impacted some of the controversial changes this year that get more subjective. This is also where politics could creep into the process, which imo is obviously a problem.

Franklin-Simpson turf sprint

If the Committee considers that a race takes on special importance because it is one of the few of its kind (e.g., sprint for older females), such a race might be graded higher than a race that has similar statistics but is one of many in its own category.

Some questionable downgrades may have been impacted by this

Small fields sometimes can be looked upon as indication of a poor event, but it must be remembered also that small fields may be the result of exceptional quality.

I would add that imo using speed figures as part of the process is a bad idea when the goal is to ascertain FIELD quality not just a race that came up fast because of figure error, conditions or a standout winner.

First off, why use one set of figures? We know various sets of high quality figures often disagree -and sometime very significantly. Second, even when they more or less agree, there are race development issues that can have a very significant impact on the times of races. Unless they are using PAR times covering 5-6 years or more, figures can be misleading in any given year or two.

https://toba.org/graded-stakes/

[dilanesp]

The two that I find ridiculous are the Wood and the Vosburgh.

The Vosburgh is easy. It seems to produce the sprint champ almost every year. There was a time when the California stakes used to do this (and in that era I thought some of California's sprint stakes were under-graded). But now the place to be for sprinters is New York. So what are they doing?

The Wood, I understand intellectually WHY they are doing this, but it's SOOOOOOOO stupid. What Derby prep produces the Derby winner is a random process. It's variance. There's a bunch of different circuits, and sometimes the best 3 year old will be in New York and sometimes it won't be. We see the same thing in California- sometimes the Santa Anita Derby is loaded and sometimes it sucks.

The Wood has produced some big time graded stakes winners. They didn't win the Derby, but that doesn't mean that the race didn't have high quality fields. And one of these years, the Wood winner WILL win the Derby again. I think the committee is missing the forest for the trees.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

The two that I find ridiculous are the Wood and the Vosburgh.

The Vosburgh is easy. It seems to produce the sprint champ almost every year. There was a time when the California stakes used to do this (and in that era I thought some of California's sprint stakes were under-graded). But now the place to be for sprinters is New York. So what are they doing?

The Wood, I understand intellectually WHY they are doing this, but it's SOOOOOOOO stupid. What Derby prep produces the Derby winner is a random process. It's variance. There's a bunch of different circuits, and sometimes the best 3 year old will be in New York and sometimes it won't be. We see the same thing in California- sometimes the Santa Anita Derby is loaded and sometimes it sucks.

The Wood has produced some big time graded stakes winners. They didn't win the Derby, but that doesn't mean that the race didn't have high quality fields. And one of these years, the Wood winner WILL win the Derby again. I think the committee is missing the forest for the trees.

For the record, the Wood was not changed this year, it was a G2 and will remain a G2. I do agree that if the other preps are G1s, this one should be as well.

[Publius]

In last six runnings of the Vosburgh Stakes four winners won grade 1 races
at other race tracks. The Committee dropped this race to a Grade 3.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Publius

In last six runnings of the Vosburgh Stakes four winners won grade 1 races
at other race tracks. The Committee dropped this race to a Grade 3.

I mean the last two winners account for four Breeders' Cup wins. Of course horses like this hold the fields down, that is racing today. Nobody is lining up to face many time G1 winners in a G2. This is a ridiculous downgrade.

[ScottJ]

Originally Posted by cj

I mean the last two winners account for four Breeders' Cup wins. Of course horses like this hold the fields down, that is racing today. Nobody is lining up to face many time G1 winners in a G2. This is a ridiculous downgrade.

Ask yourself the following : If this same race were being held in California at a 1st/Bet venue with a five horse field where others were "chased by the competition", would the same race have been downgraded?

Be honest. Yes, this is an east vs. west comment and falls at the doorstep of Rick Hammerle and the graded stakes committee. Jointly, they have shown themselves to be unable to handle the role in which they are placed.

On retrospection, perhaps this is how you showcase your skill set for the upcoming NYRA Steward Stand openings?

Quoting John Tuld from Margin Call, "We're going to be left holding the biggest bag of odorous excrement ever assembled in the history of capitalism."

[classhandicapper]

Some of this may also be self fulfilling.

If a race gets downgraded (especially from Grade 1 to Grade 2) it potentially becomes less appealing in subsequent years because trying to get that Grade 1 win could change where a quality or horse or two decides to run.

Downgrading the Wood to Grade 2 (imo prematurely) is certainly not helping it attract the best horses.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

I mean the last two winners account for four Breeders' Cup wins. Of course horses like this hold the fields down, that is racing today. Nobody is lining up to face many time G1 winners in a G2. This is a ridiculous downgrade.

I agree it's a bad downgrade.

I think it's a problem with their systematic ratings.

The fields have not been large, the purse used to be 350k and is now 250k, and there wasn't much depth to the quality of the last two editions. They aren't just looking at the winner.

My own systematic ratings for the last 3 were very slightly below the Grade 2 PAR, but not enough for a downgrade. My rating is looking at the quality of the top 4 finishers.

[burnsy]

This is somewhat a joke article . As usual the focus is on one circuit. Horse racing segregates itself within itself . How in the world is this not an industry or national problem ? Who really cares about the grading ? Does it really mean anything anymore? It’s just something for people to basically bitch about at this point . While you have a two ton problem staring you right in the face . The number of good older horses competing at one time ………. Sucks. The fields have become short and even worse …… watered down . People bitching ? Reality tells me it has to be cut back exponentially more! This is laughable. Take a look in the mirror just once and face reality.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by burnsy

This is somewhat a joke article . As usual the focus is on one circuit. Horse racing segregates itself within itself . How in the world is this not an industry or national problem ? Who really cares about the grading ? Does it really mean anything anymore? It’s just something for people to basically bitch about at this point . While you have a two ton problem staring you right in the face . The number of good older horses competing at one time ………. Sucks. The fields have become short and even worse …… watered down . People bitching ? Reality tells me it has to be cut back exponentially more! This is laughable. Take a look in the mirror just once and face reality.

It is hard to disagree with anything you said. Do bettors or fans care about Grading ? Other than a few races are there really any Grade ! races ? Take the Triple Crown and a few of the Breeders Cup Races and perhaps a couple of other races and that is really your G1 races. Without a Handicap Division,it is hard to have many so called G1 races. Most of the 3 year old races aren't really G1. Maybe it is time for a new system. What it would be,I have no idea.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by aaron

It is hard to disagree with anything you said. Do bettors or fans care about Grading ? Other than a few races are there really any Grade ! races ? Take the Triple Crown and a few of the Breeders Cup Races and perhaps a couple of other races and that is really your G1 races. Without a Handicap Division,it is hard to have many so called G1 races. Most of the 3 year old races aren't really G1. Maybe it is time for a new system. What it would be,I have no idea.

Right, so many bigger fish to fry. Not to mention in the BC the UK runs past us like we're tied to a post. In my book the UK is grade 0 at this point.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by aaron

It is hard to disagree with anything you said. Do bettors or fans care about Grading ? Other than a few races are there really any Grade ! races ? Take the Triple Crown and a few of the Breeders Cup Races and perhaps a couple of other races and that is really your G1 races. Without a Handicap Division,it is hard to have many so called G1 races. Most of the 3 year old races aren't really G1. Maybe it is time for a new system. What it would be,I have no idea.

Exactly , c’mon the Cigar Mile , Jockey Gold Cup and I could name others are glorified Grade 3 races in reality . And it’s not limited to NY , I just live here so I know it the best . Other circuits are actually worse IMO. Some of these older horses will wait months …… not weeks …… months to run back . Especially when it’s coming up to the BC . I honestly don’t get what these people are quibbling and arguing over . Look at the real picture . Arguing over nothing basically . It could be a 1 , 2 or 3 and the same usual sub par suspects show up with very few exceptions. They get horses to move up just to look like a horse race ! Cmon !


And the three year olds don’t even have a base anymore . Health is an issue more than it should be . Look at the scratches and horses that fall out of training . Just do something other than make fake controversy that keeps the loyal fan base around . This all smoke up the ass !

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Exactly , c’mon the Cigar Mile , Jockey Gold Cup and I could name others are glorified Grade 3 races in reality . And it’s not limited to NY , I just live here so I know it the best . Other circuits are actually worse IMO. Some of these older horses will wait months …… not weeks …… months to run back . Especially when it’s coming up to the BC . I honestly don’t get what these people are quibbling and arguing over . Look at the real picture . Arguing over nothing basically . It could be a 1 , 2 or 3 and the same usual sub par suspects show up with very few exceptions. They get horses to move up just to look like a horse race ! Cmon !


And the three year olds don’t even have a base anymore . Health is an issue more than it should be . Look at the scratches and horses that fall out of training . Just do something other than make fake controversy that keeps the loyal fan base around . This all smoke up the ass !

Probably elements of the bloodstock industry would be behind the piece and have some interest in it. I suspect they essentially keep the lights on at some of these outlets.