The Vosburgh

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by the little guy

West Coast horses shipped every year. I even remember Phone Trick coming in to race Groovy before the Fall. But until the end of the 80s or early 90s, West Coast horses always came. The Championships were decided the right way back then, by a year's work, and a series of races, instead of bob and weave and putting your eggs in one basket. Of course, back then, Eclipse voters probably also followed racing all year. They had to.

Some did, some didn't. I mentioned Landaluce, and another one who didn't ship back and still won an Eclipse Award in the same period was Chinook Pass. It was starting to become an option. Had there been no Breeders' Cup, this was just going to become more common.

Among other reasons it was a good idea, the people who founded the Breeders' Cup realized that racing was atomizing and there were more and more options to avoid the New York fall races. The BC was a necessary invention.

[classhandicapper]

Trainers have been trying to stretch top sprinters out for forever and a day. That's nothing new. There are always going to be a few horses spotted poorly, but that's not what's driving the lower quality sprint racing now. In fact, I'm almost certain it's LESS of an issue now. Previously, we even used to get those types of horse in the Derby. Now they don't accumulate the necessary points at 2. So trainers (like the great Steve Asmussen) can adjust quicker once they see a couple of route races. There's no pressure to try to run long.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Some did, some didn't. I mentioned Landaluce, and another one who didn't ship back and still won an Eclipse Award in the same period was Chinook Pass. It was starting to become an option. Had there been no Breeders' Cup, this was just going to become more common.

Among other reasons it was a good idea, the people who founded the Breeders' Cup realized that racing was atomizing and there were more and more options to avoid the New York fall races. The BC was a necessary invention.

There have been a few exceptional horses, but imo the sprint division has been generally weaker in recent years than in the past. It wouldn't matter who was shipping where, you'd just have a larger field of mediocre horses with 1 or 2 really good ones instead of a great field with multiple really top shelf sprinters.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Some did, some didn't. I mentioned Landaluce, and another one who didn't ship back and still won an Eclipse Award in the same period was Chinook Pass. It was starting to become an option. Had there been no Breeders' Cup, this was just going to become more common.

Among other reasons it was a good idea, the people who founded the Breeders' Cup realized that racing was atomizing and there were more and more options to avoid the New York fall races. The BC was a necessary invention.

Chinook Pass was injured out of the Longacres Mile in August and never ran again. No opportunity to ship east. Route horses (the ill-fated A Phenomenon, Fit to Fight, and uber-stallion Deputy Minister) were 1-2-3 in the Vosburgh that year.

The undefeated Princess Rooney would have been a well deserving champion 2yo filly in 1982 had Landaluce not been breaking records while winning her races out west.

Your 2 examples don't make the BC a "good idea" if the trade off is that all other major races are merely "Win and You're In" (read: preps). And typically, we don't get a full campaign or series of championship races as TLG stated (shipping East is not a prerequisite in that regard).

Hollywoodpark had the right idea by having 2 high purse juvenile races in December when the season is at its end, enticing a regional clash if necessary without impinging on other track's marquee events.

I'm much more comfortable with having Landaluce & Princess Rooney or Roving Boy & Copelan dominating their respective locales through a full racing schedule and never meeting than I am with Epitome or Action This Day being champions because they upend the apple cart in some rodeo. If California started to build prestige into their fall races then all the better; that builds rivalries and anticipation for future matchups down the line.

The BC takes all of that away.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Chinook Pass was injured out of the Longacres Mile in August and never ran again. No opportunity to ship east. Route horses (the ill-fated A Phenomenon, Fit to Fight, and uber-stallion Deputy Minister) were 1-2-3 in the Vosburgh that year.

The undefeated Princess Rooney would have been a well deserving champion 2yo filly in 1982 had Landaluce not been breaking records while winning her races out west.

Your 2 examples don't make the BC a "good idea" if the trade off is that all other major races are merely "Win and You're In" (read: preps). And typically, we don't get a full campaign or series of championship races as TLG stated (shipping East is not a prerequisite in that regard).

Hollywoodpark had the right idea by having 2 high purse juvenile races in December when the season is at its end, enticing a regional clash if necessary without impinging on other track's marquee events.

I'm much more comfortable with having Landaluce & Princess Rooney or Roving Boy & Copelan dominating their respective locales through a full racing schedule and never meeting than I am with Epitome or Action This Day being champions because they upend the apple cart in some rodeo. If California started to build prestige into their fall races then all the better; that builds rivalries and anticipation for future matchups down the line.

The BC takes all of that away.

The alternative to the BC isn't some idyll where horses run full seasons and face competitive fields. It's a world where top horses just don't run against each other. At least the BC means they meet at least once in most instances and the Eclipse winner beats at least one top class field.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

The alternative to the BC isn't some idyll where horses run full seasons and face competitive fields. It's a world where top horses just don't run against each other. At least the BC means they meet at least once in most instances and the Eclipse winner beats at least one top class field.

Huh? We just went over the alternative to the BC. It was the landscape pre-BC.

Yes, some horses would stay in CA because of the bolstering of the Oak Tree races but even that is only half correct. CA only bolstered the juvenile races and the turf races. And those were drawing east coast horses on a regular basis.

There was no major stakes for either older males or females on dirt. The Goodwood was a Grade 3 well into the advent of the BC and the Lady's Secret was especially created as a "BC prep".

Even the dirt 3yos had nowhere to go but turf in CA as early as the summer months. And that still is the case today unless you think the Shared Belief is a major event on the calendar.

[Tom]

Forego/Wajima, uckpasser/Damascus/Dr Fager, Affirmed/Alydar, Affirmed/Seatle Slew/Exceler....never would have those great races without a BC!

Oh, wait.....never mind.

[classhandicapper]

There have been some efforts to create a national series of races with points and incentives, but they failed for some reason. I guess it takes a lot of time, money, cooperation, and dedication to build something like that and racing threw in the towel.

One thing that's different now is that in the past NY had most of the high level barns and trainers. Now guys Baffert, Asmussen, Cox and others get a lot of the top dirt stock. Unless it's an elite race (typically Saratoga), they have other options than to run in NY. The power in dirt racing is shifting away from NY except for Saratoga. NY is becoming more of a turf capital, but with Brown dominating some divisions, it has issues there also. He already runs a lot of his horses against each other in very small fields, but if he can, he ships out to try to separate them.

[GMB@BP]

Would trainers run more in fall races if there was no BC?

I just dont think they would.

A better incentive I suppose is tying year end awards, with bonus payouts, with minimum amount of starts in Graded races, less for 2yo's obviously.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Huh? We just went over the alternative to the BC. It was the landscape pre-BC.

Yes, some horses would stay in CA because of the bolstering of the Oak Tree races but even that is only half correct. CA only bolstered the juvenile races and the turf races. And those were drawing east coast horses on a regular basis.

There was no major stakes for either older males or females on dirt. The Goodwood was a Grade 3 well into the advent of the BC and the Lady's Secret was especially created as a "BC prep".

Even the dirt 3yos had nowhere to go but turf in CA as early as the summer months. And that still is the case today unless you think the Shared Belief is a major event on the calendar.

You are ignoring the rise of Churchill and Keeneland 's fall meets, plus all the slot tracks.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

Would trainers run more in fall races if there was no BC?

I just dont think they would.

A better incentive I suppose is tying year end awards, with bonus payouts, with minimum amount of starts in Graded races, less for 2yo's obviously.

There's no question in my mind that when the connections of some top horses are mapping out a long range campaign, they are in part trying to get to the BC with a fresh horse. The smart ones have been doing that from the start. Some will even back off in the race prior to the BC and then turn the screws again for the big dance. It's not that uncommon to see a slightly sub par prep race. IMO the thinking would change a bit if there were no BC races, but I'm not sure that would make things better.

I see no issue with the year end awards. No one is going to agree with every Eclipse award any more than they are going to agree with every year end award in other sports.

When I was at DRF all the voters I talked to considered the horse's entire record for the year. For most there was an emphasis on Grade 1 wins and especially Grade 1 wins in the most prestigious races. So of course the BC races carried a bit more weight than some random Grade 1 win earlier in the year. IMO they should. But it's not as dominant in the thinking as people are implying. In situations where it's a very close call or where the category has no one that stands out, it often becomes the tie breaker. IMO, it should. It's the best field. But if another horses clearly has had the better overall year, that's who is going to tend to get the award.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

You are ignoring the rise of Churchill and Keeneland 's fall meets, plus all the slot tracks.

The "rise" of some of these "major" stakes is a direct offshoot of the BC. Tracks trying to create "preps" like the Lady's Secret (now Zenyatta) or the Galaxy (now First Lady) to entice 1 or 2 BC contenders. It doesn't ensure that such horses get together finally at the BC; it ensures that major horses never meet each other before the BC.

Keeneland's been around a lot longer than the BC. The Spinster was always a major race. Whirlaway and Round Table won the Breeder's Futurity in the '40s & '50s respectively. Doubledogdare won the Alcibiades.

If some of those Keeneland races became second tier races before than that shows you the prestige of the NY races; you don't just throw 6-figures at a new race and expect the marquee events to be supplanted.

Swale opted for the Breeder's Futurity in 1983 instead of the Champagne. The reason? Trainer Woody Stephens also trained Devil's Bag. Who do you think he preferred at the time? A couple of years later, he had Forty Niner. Forty Niner won both races.

You also realize there have always been alternative stakes that might conflict with the major championship races, right? For every Keeneland or Churchill or Parx or whatever, I can point out the major races at Laurel (DC International, Laurel Futurity, Selima), Meadowlands (Meadowlands Cup, Gardenia, Young America), Garden State, and Arlington (AP Futurity, Lassie) that have now gone by the wayside, many because of the advent of the BC. Those "rising" fall meets you came up with are just filling a void that was already there.

Meadowlands had it right when they created the short-lived Ballantine Turf Classic. It was not created as a anemic prep for the BC, but rather as a sequel to the Turf Classic at Belmont. In fact, just as another poster suggested, Meadowlands actually offered a $500k bonus to the horse that could win both. Guess what? John Henry was able to do it in the inaugural running and if ever there was a horse that proved that we don't need the BC (the great horse was not BC-nominated, and his owner had no intention of forking over the supplement), John Henry was it.

[classhandicapper]

The "rise" of some of these "major" stakes is a direct offshoot of the BC. Tracks trying to create "preps" like the Lady's Secret (now Zenyatta) or the Galaxy (now First Lady) to entice 1 or 2 BC contenders. It doesn't ensure that such horses get together finally at the BC; it ensures that major horses never meet each other before the BC.

The only way to ensure they'd meet would be to eliminate a bunch of the stakes with a goal of maximizing the competition nationally instead of operating to maximize individual circuits and opportunities/convenience for local horsemen/owners. The "center" of the action could vary seasonally based on weather and other factors. That's sounds like an idealistic non starter.

[Tom]

Stakes are the new allowance races.
We used to have nw1x, nw2x, nw3x, mnw4x, Classified, and Handicap races.

I'm waiting far some wizz kid to start writing nw2 stakes lifetime, nw3l, nw4l....

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

I'm waiting far some wizz kid to start writing nw2 stakes lifetime, nw3l, nw4l....

That's not such a bad idea.

If they can't fill some of the ALW conditions and they are going to write all these non graded stakes that pull horses out of the graded stakes, they could consider a condition here or there to push at least a few of the better ones up the stakes ladder so the graded stakes fill better. Too many of them have become close to unbettable.