What Happened To The Jockey Club Gold Cup

[aaron]

I remember when legendary horses used to run in the Jockey Club Gold Cup. Now,the race is just another race on the card. I guess that is the effect of the Breeders Cup. Where have you gone Kelso,Forego,Cigar and Skip Away.Not to mention,Affirmed and Seattle Slew getting beat by Exceller in probably what was Seattle Slew's best race.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by aaron

I remember when legendary horses used to run in the Jockey Club Gold Cup. Now,the race is just another race on the card. I guess that is the effect of the Breeders Cup. Where have you gone Kelso,Forego,Cigar and Skip Away.Not to mention,Affirmed and Seattle Slew getting beat by Exceller in probably what was Seattle Slew's best race.

The Whitney and the Woodward winners are skipping this race for the second year in a row.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by aaron

I remember when legendary horses used to run in the Jockey Club Gold Cup. Now,the race is just another race on the card. I guess that is the effect of the Breeders Cup. Where have you gone Kelso,Forego,Cigar and Skip Away.Not to mention,Affirmed and Seattle Slew getting beat by Exceller in probably what was Seattle Slew's best race.

It was happening before the Breeders' Cup.

Some data points:

Late 1960's-- Oak Tree. They didn't used to run in Southern California in the fall. This was a game changer. Indeed, in 1950 they DID run a fall meeting in Southern California, and it crushed New York as all of the best eastern horses, including most importantly Hill Prince, shipped out to Hollywood Park to run in it.

Oak Tree didn't immediately card a competitor to the JCGC. But it did immediately become an alternative to the New York stakes schedule, with better weather and bigger purses.

Changes in breeding-- the JCGC used to be 2 miles. Then it was 1 1/2 miles. Now it is 1 1/4 miles, and horses still skip it because their trainers don't want a 1 1/4 mile race. It isn't the only race that has shrunk, by far, but it's had to adjust because so few top horses are bred for stamina, and as it has adjusted it became a less "special" race.

Changes in training-- the JCGC, in the 1970's and 1980's, was part of a full New York handicap schedule at Belmont Park, including the Woodward, and the Marlboro Cup, spaced a couple of weeks apart. Slew O Gold, for instance, used to run in all three. Lots of horses did. But modern trainers don't like to run their horses very often (the only thing that has survived this trend is the Triple Crown). So now the Woodward has been backed into the Saratoga meet (where it really doesn't belong), the Marlboro is gone, and even then, lots of trainers want to run in one and not the other.

The Breeders' Cup-- you mentioned this, and it is obvious. It's worth noting though that the BC is as much a symptom as it is a cause. As I noted, the New York stakes calendar was in decline (along with attendance as well) long before the BC came around. The BC probably wouldn't have ever happened if New York were still in the dominant position it was in during the 1950's and 1960's-- you wouldn't need it, because all the top horses would ship to NY for the major fall stakes races in each division.

But the BC certainly exacerbated the trends.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by aaron

I remember when legendary horses used to run in the Jockey Club Gold Cup. Now,the race is just another race on the card. I guess that is the effect of the Breeders Cup. Where have you gone Kelso,Forego,Cigar and Skip Away.Not to mention,Affirmed and Seattle Slew getting beat by Exceller in probably what was Seattle Slew's best race.

What happened to the Champagne too?

It may have attracted the most impressive MSW winners, but it used to draw more seasoned horses and many of the winners of 2yo stakes in NY and from other parts of the country.

Perhaps there aren't enough 2yos to have a really strong program, but being from the same generation of horseplayers as you, it's sad to see races that used to decide championships turn into preps and strong NW1 ALW races.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Everybody covered all the bases but it seems to really boil down to more options for trainers that are looking to race less these days. Between the two I don't think there is any solution to making any race singularly significant year in year out outside the TC and BC.

[Track Phantom]

There are too many horses consolidated with too few trainers. It will continue to destroy the game as we once knew it.

Pretty simple.

[rastajenk]

And contraction will exacerbate it.

In fact, many of the sins that many here wail about all the time will be exaggerated with contraction: supertrainers, impudent jockeys, the battle between designer drugs and testing standards, the influence of breeding, just about everything.

But that's another subject; sorry for the temporary thread derailment.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

There are too many horses consolidated with too few trainers. It will continue to destroy the game as we once knew it.

Pretty simple.

Yes, it's simple to see, the ultimate survival result for horse racing is contraction to 10 super hub tracks.... Bigger fields with better value for the bettor, finally being run with a National Racing Czar, with the goal of rising to the integrity and handle of Hong Kong.......As you said, "pretty simple".

[rastajenk]

Well, that was fun.

[SuperPickle]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

And contraction will exacerbate it.

In fact, many of the sins that many here wail about all the time will be exaggerated with contraction: supertrainers, impudent jockeys, the battle between designer drugs and testing standards, the influence of breeding, just about everything.

But that's another subject; sorry for the temporary thread derailment.

It's ridiculous to use the argument that super trainers would get more horses so contraction is wrong.

First off Baffert, Brown, and Pletcher actively turn down horses and throw horses out. Even Graham Motion didn't take new owners for 2-3 years.

Second off, they already get all the good/well bred horses. They're looking for quality. They're looking for owners spending $500k plus on yearlings and the three of them pretty much dominate that market already.

Third, they've already turned down the chance to go west/east. Baffert has had a million chances to open a NY division. He doesn't want to. Brown and Pletcher could have 20-30 horses in SoCal any time they want. They'd rather stay home and use Parx and Monmouth as need be.

Pletcher and Brown aren't going to add another 100 horses if we had less tracks. They have all they want. They already dominate the game.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Well, that was fun.

We both posted at the same time about contraction.....The JCGC illustrious days are from a bygone era, but still it exists. Maybe with contraction, it will be restored to it's former glory....

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

We both posted at the same time about contraction.....The JCGC illustrious days are from a bygone era, but still it exists. Maybe with contraction, it will be restored to it's former glory....

Not as long as the Breeders Cup exists. Personally, I would like a return to the early days of the BC where regional stars could enter and sometimes win or at least hit the board, but contraction would without doubt put an end to that. In fact, with the contraction that some folks pine for, there wouldn't even need to be a Breeders Cup. An East-West competition not unlike the Sunshine Millions would do the same, with some Euros thrown in for spice. What fun.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by SuperPickle

It's ridiculous to use the argument that super trainers would get more horses so contraction is wrong.

First off Baffert, Brown, and Pletcher actively turn down horses and throw horses out. Even Graham Motion didn't take new owners for 2-3 years.

Second off, they already get all the good/well bred horses. They're looking for quality. They're looking for owners spending $500k plus on yearlings and the three of them pretty much dominate that market already.

Third, they've already turned down the chance to go west/east. Baffert has had a million chances to open a NY division. He doesn't want to. Brown and Pletcher could have 20-30 horses in SoCal any time they want. They'd rather stay home and use Parx and Monmouth as need be.

Pletcher and Brown aren't going to add another 100 horses if we had less tracks. They have all they want. They already dominate the game.

You act as if this situation with the trainers will never change. You couldn't be more WRONG. The game is dying and yet there is still a deep passion and a love for the game that will eventually supersede the way trainers dictate the game. EVERYTHING changes, mostly for the worst, but PASSION by the players and the owners eventually will win out with a complete reformation of the way the game is run. Holy crap, if Hong Kong can do it, if Japan can do it, if Australia can do it, why the hell can't the US??....And if the trainers don't like it, OUT YOU GO!..Jeff Mullins and his big mouth first.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Not as long as the Breeders Cup exists. Personally, I would like a return to the early days of the BC where regional stars could enter and sometimes win or at least hit the board, but contraction would without doubt put an end to that. In fact, with the contraction that some folks pine for, there wouldn't even need to be a Breeders Cup. An East-West competition not unlike the Sunshine Millions would do the same, with some Euros thrown in for spice. What fun.

Rasty, I can't help you if you don't see the vision....I look at it every night via Hong Kong....What fun they're having..

[rastajenk]

What passion can owners in Missouri or Iowa, or southern Illinois, or central Ohio, or Colorado and New Mexico, or Michigan have if the game is being played out 1000 miles away? Can they rope a few friends and say "let's go to the races, but there's airfare, and hotel costs, and other incidentals, hope you can swing that." Win pictures will be peopled by an assistant trainer, a groom, a a valet hiding behind the winning horse; you want that on the wall of your den?
There's no passion there. So the pool of potential participants shrinks even more. But hey, if it makes for a better betting experience for the current generation, who cares, right?