ARE YOU KIDDING ME ???

[westny]

:

Originally Posted by jahura2

This is a joke. The Bluegrass at KEE and The Wood were downgraded to G2 but races that cant fill get to remain a G1? What a joke. Somebody on the CHRB has compromising pics of the Graded Stakes Committee!

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

You're right that sometimes they are good businessmen or women before becoming horse owners. But if they think buying horses is a good investment or a good way to make money they have someone giving them really bad advice.

That kind of contradicts the whole "getting it" thing you're proposing. If they "got it" they wouldn't send all their horses to the same 5 trainers. If they "got it" they wouldn't overpay for yearlings and 2 year olds that work fast at Sales with mediocre pedigrees that never materialize.

Right now owners are a big part of the problem. Let me know when they "get it" and become part of the solution.

One old business expression is nobody was ever fired for buying IBM. The same principle applies to hiring Baffert.

[Gentz]

Originally Posted by cj

A lot of the unprofitable tracks don't care if they are profitable, or even want to be profitable. That is what happens at racinos. Racing is a nuisance to them, not a business.

This is exactly right.. Penn National, for one, would drop racing like a hot potato if they could.... and one day legislation will allow it.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

If you offer me suggestions, i'll be happy to respond with why that suggestion can't or hasn't to date worked.

Please, don't mistake me as a man purporting to have any answers. I post what pleases me, and post it from whatever limited perspective my experience in racing affords me. Some find my postings worthwhile-others not so much. But NEVER, EVER, confuse me with someone claiming to "get it," or who sees some obvious solution.

And thank you kindly for your generous offer to refute whatever suggestions I might have offered. As a guy who has been a racing sec, ast racing sec, groom, hotwalker, owner, clerk of scales, identifier, clocker, teletime operator, claims clerk, placing judge, paddock judge, (paid) blogger, author of numerous magazine articles , stakes coordinator, and television analyst (of some repute-I was named one of America's top 10), not to mention an official track-oddsmaker with some 40,000 races under his belt, it is BEYOND gratifying to encounter somebody better versed in the game.

Oh, apologies, sir, I almost forgot to mention that I've weighted some 300 handicap races and served as chief recruiter for a G2 stakes for quite some time. I also supervise a full crew of racing officials, and have been somewhat instrumental in designing several date-preference systems, not to mention having helped advocate (and interpret the somewhat confusing wording of) numerous rule changes.

And, believe it, or not, I've also written the weight headings for one or two alw-stakes that serve as prominent breeder's cup preps.

So, again, thanks for your kind offer to enlighten me.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by jahura2

This is a joke. The Bluegrass at KEE and The Wood were downgraded to G2 but races that cant fill get to remain a G1? What a joke. Somebody on the CHRB has compromising pics of the Graded Stakes Committee!

There are too many Grade I races and the Wood was one of them. It's been pretty bad for a while.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Please, don't mistake me as a man purporting to have any answers. I post what pleases me, and post it from whatever limited perspective my experience in racing affords me. Some find my postings worthwhile-others not so much. But NEVER, EVER, confuse me with someone claiming to "get it," or who sees some obvious solution.

And thank you kindly for your generous offer to refute whatever suggestions I might have offered. As a guy who has been a racing sec, ast racing sec, groom, hotwalker, owner, clerk of scales, identifier, clocker, teletime operator, claims clerk, placing judge, paddock judge, (paid) blogger, author of numerous magazine articles , stakes coordinator, and television analyst (of some repute-I was named one of America's top 10), not to mention an official track-oddsmaker with some 40,000 races under his belt, it is BEYOND gratifying to encounter somebody better versed in the game.

Oh, apologies, sir, I almost forgot to mention that I've weighted some 300 handicap races and served as chief recruiter for a G2 stakes for quite some time. I also supervise a full crew of racing officials, and have been somewhat instrumental in designing several date-preference systems, not to mention having helped advocate (and interpret the somewhat confusing wording of) numerous rule changes.

And, believe it, or not, I've also written the weight headings for one or two alw-stakes that serve as prominent breeder's cup preps.

So, again, thanks for your kind offer to enlighten me.

I'm sorry you read my post that way.

My point was that I have researched and explored and discussed all the various ways to try to bring about a national governing body. All the ways to date that we thought it could be made to happen hit this stumbling block or that stumbling block. So I was saying it sincerely that all the ways I believe someone here could suggest how to make it happen (aka suggestions about what the owners can really do), I can tell why it hasn't. I don't consider that as an insult to anyone. I'd expect that someone who has worked in the trenches with horse veterinary or jockey health insurance or ex-racer retirement to prob be able to tell me why my idea on x or y in those areas may not work because they've already explored that option. And occasionally someone could have a new idea or twist on an old one that could work.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

There are too many Grade I races and the Wood was one of them. It's been pretty bad for a while.

The issue to me is having one or more of the big 3-4 KD preps not worth as much in black type as the others. Maybe there should be no G1s for 3yos until the Oaks and Derby.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I'm sorry you read my post that way.

My point was that I have researched and explored and discussed all the various ways to try to bring about a national governing body. All the ways to date that we thought it could be made to happen hit this stumbling block or that stumbling block. So I was saying it sincerely that all the ways I believe someone here could suggest how to make it happen (aka suggestions about what the owners can really do), I can tell why it hasn't. I don't consider that as an insult to anyone. I'd expect that someone who has worked in the trenches with horse veterinary or jockey health insurance or ex-racer retirement to prob be able to tell me why my idea on x or y in those areas may not work because they've already explored that option. And occasionally someone could have a new idea or twist on an old one that could work.

No desire to antagonize you. It's all good.

[Dahoss9698]

The only way a national governing body is going to happen would be getting all of the people involved in the sport thinking we need it. Not to sound doom and gloom, but it's not going to happen.

Imagine getting all of the tracks together to agree on something? They can't even make an effort to not run races on top of each other.

Not to mention gambling laws vary from state to state so I'm not sure how you'd get around that.

Do we need it? Hell yeah. Is it realistic in the state of the game now? Hell no.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

There are too many Grade I races and the Wood was one of them. It's been pretty bad for a while.

I think the Wood has been unlucky. It will produce some more TC race winners (Cloud Computing is a harbinger). Top NY trainers run top 3 yo's in that race.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Please, don't mistake me as a man purporting to have any answers. I post what pleases me, and post it from whatever limited perspective my experience in racing affords me. Some find my postings worthwhile-others not so much. But NEVER, EVER, confuse me with someone claiming to "get it," or who sees some obvious solution.

And thank you kindly for your generous offer to refute whatever suggestions I might have offered. As a guy who has been a racing sec, ast racing sec, groom, hotwalker, owner, clerk of scales, identifier, clocker, teletime operator, claims clerk, placing judge, paddock judge, (paid) blogger, author of numerous magazine articles , stakes coordinator, and television analyst (of some repute-I was named one of America's top 10), not to mention an official track-oddsmaker with some 40,000 races under his belt, it is BEYOND gratifying to encounter somebody better versed in the game.

Oh, apologies, sir, I almost forgot to mention that I've weighted some 300 handicap races and served as chief recruiter for a G2 stakes for quite some time. I also supervise a full crew of racing officials, and have been somewhat instrumental in designing several date-preference systems, not to mention having helped advocate (and interpret the somewhat confusing wording of) numerous rule changes.

And, believe it, or not, I've also written the weight headings for one or two alw-stakes that serve as prominent breeder's cup preps.

So, again, thanks for your kind offer to enlighten me.

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once. So there.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once. So there.

Ya got me, sir!

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I'm sorry you read my post that way.

My point was that I have researched and explored and discussed all the various ways to try to bring about a national governing body. All the ways to date that we thought it could be made to happen hit this stumbling block or that stumbling block. So I was saying it sincerely that all the ways I believe someone here could suggest how to make it happen (aka suggestions about what the owners can really do), I can tell why it hasn't. I don't consider that as an insult to anyone. I'd expect that someone who has worked in the trenches with horse veterinary or jockey health insurance or ex-racer retirement to prob be able to tell me why my idea on x or y in those areas may not work because they've already explored that option. And occasionally someone could have a new idea or twist on an old one that could work.

People are sick of arguing on the internet.

Frankly, a lot of the "good ideas" presented are often either not good ideas, or are presented too simplistically to be useful. For instance we all probably agree lowering takeout in some coordinated fashion is a good idea, but you'll see people here with the "idea" that lowering all takeout to 5% on all bets will increase handle and profits immediately. When someone counters, they're called stupid and shortsighted.

SOmeone once posited that playing canned hoofbeat sounds and applause would increase attendance and thus handle. Naysayers were called stupid and told "oh yeah, if not that, then what?!"

I spent a lot of effort posting on EMD's old thread whining about the 'loss' of the NYRA channel, using my 20 years of experience in the TV business...waste of time, why bother.

This is in NO WAY meant to say track owners are 100% across the board smarter than outsiders or immune from having bad ideas, or being stuck in old ways.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

Who are you reckoning said or thought "to heck with the bettors"?

Santa Anita sure didn't say that. They don't benefit financially from such a short field that will take win bets only. The owners and trainers who didn't enter their horses didn't do so to screw the bettors but because they apparently figure they can't even get third money or Black type against these three so are opting for another spot.

So complain if you want, but you're sure missing the cause of the problem and sound sort of ridiculous. It's not like you have to bet this race and don't have plenty of other betting ops today.

Ok...Then what IS the cause of THIS problem?

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

CA gets away with a lot from the graded stakes committee. They should've had all their dirt graded stakes reduced a grade when they had synthetic, just like a turf race taken off the turf. Now the constant small fields that give black type to horses who prove undeserving more than the norm. If the GSC threatened then they'd be forced to find a way.

I am amazed that with a field of three, the Committee has not ruled the race be downgraded or ungraded. In my opinion, it should be the latter.