Have You Seen The AQU Condition Book?

[cj]

Originally Posted by mountainman

That's a theory, not established fact. A theory I'm challenging someone to validate. And it's a specious theory with me, because I've seen LOTS of horsemen propose lower bottom purses with a thinly-veiled agenda to keep rival barns from dropping SOUND superior runners. And I've been at this a long time, myself.

Want theory? Here's mine:Most cripples on the verge of breakdown will be class-dropped REGARDLESS of bottom-purse levels. Barns don't require much incentive to "squeeze one more start" from a deteriorated animal. Disproportionate bottom purses, however, tempt outfits to drop SOUNDER horses as well, ones still functional at higher levels.

This sport does not provide the tools necessary to validate anything like that.

I don't think there is much good about dropping horses that are sound and functional at higher levels either. How is that good for the sport?

[cj]

Originally Posted by mountainman

And you seem to be saying that beefed-up bottom purses make horses disappear. That's not only a reach, it's impossible to verify. Do you think 3k claimers at beu don't go m.i.a.?

Of course they do. That wasn't the point. The point was that the sport makes it impossible to verify any of these claims. That doesn't make them false.

[cj]

To go off topic a little, isn't the point of the claiming game to keep the competition fairly level? Having the claiming prices and the purse levels so out of line seems to go against the reason for the claiming game in the first place.

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

A horse that wins for 10k claimer with a 20k purse gets 12k, but after paying the jockey and the trainer, the owner winds up with $9,600. Maybe that is the justification.

20k purse winning owner gets 12k, jockey gets $1200, trainer gets $1200 there are numerous NYRA fees. Most of these fees you do not see at other tracks. In addition to these fees, each and every owner must pay $800 per year for the insurance to run your horse on NYRA tracks. The one good thing is that if you run NY Breds the purses are second to none.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by cj

This sport does not provide the tools necessary to validate anything like that.

I don't think there is much good about dropping horses that are sound and functional at higher levels either. How is that good for the sport?

The owner hopefully makes money between the purse and the claim price. Former owner has money to reinvest. The horse gets turned over to a possibly new owner, giving him a chance to recoup or make money, and in states with sales tax, the state benefits economically.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

The owner hopefully makes money between the purse and the claim price. Former owner has money to reinvest. The horse gets turned over to a possibly new owner, giving him a chance to recoup or make money, and in states with sales tax, the state benefits economically.

Yes, I know all of that, but I still don't really see any of that being good for the sport as a whole.

[mountainman]

Believe me, I can make a case that Godzilla pots on cheap claimers help the game on several fronts, but that's beside my point. I merely opined that some factions have self-serving reasons for capping cheap purses.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by cj

Yes, I know all of that, but I still don't really see any of that being good for the sport as a whole.

Why? What good does it do for the sport on the whole by keeping sound and functional horses at a higher level?

[cj]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Why? What good does it do for the sport on the whole by keeping sound and functional horses at a higher level?

Competitive racing, rather than parades of 3-5 shots.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by cj

Competitive racing, rather than parades of 3-5 shots.

In my opinion the odds are a function of many other things. First, handicappers on the whole are better informed, too many conditions, horse population in relation to the too many conditions, rebates allowing bettors to pound horses because of their cushion, higher take-out rates, changes in breakage, etc.

One example of too many conditions. Last year Santa Anita was still writing nw2l races for 3 year olds in November and December. Totally, unnecessary in my opinion.

[Cannon shell]

Originally Posted by cj

To go off topic a little, isn't the point of the claiming game to keep the competition fairly level? Having the claiming prices and the purse levels so out of line seems to go against the reason for the claiming game in the first place.

The claiming game has been bastardized for the lack of a better word by the overwhelming number of conditioned claiming races which serve to inflate the true value of most claiming horses. At least until they no longer have conditions and must run in open races. Of course with tracks running nw1 6 months and nw2 6 months very few horses (at the lower levels) ever really don't have some sort of condition.

[Cannon shell]

High purses for claimers really don't play that big of a role in the drop down, breakdown issue except for occasionally providing cover for the bigger operations that might just be dropping one down to win the purse for any number of reasons. The mentality of owners/trainers with a horse they know is on its last legs has little to do with the purse and everything to do with being rid of the horse. I suppose you could make the case that higher purse levels lead to more claiming activity which leads to a guy dumping a horse to have it be more likely to get claimed but people looking to drop horses to get rid of them aren't that concerned with the purse.

Now IMO it was getting absurd at some racinos with 5k claimers running for 30k but the double the claiming price rule is pretty arbitrary and relatively useless. What the initial poster should have asked is why horses that race in Opt claimers are allowed to run for the entire purse when sometimes as in the NW1x NYB races with opt 14000 tags the pot is 75k plus.

I would ask why with a booming NYB program there is a need to have opt claimers in an entry level state bred race?

[Relwob Owner]

Originally Posted by cj

You can always find factors to fit other arguments.

Sadly, many trainers and owners try for "one more run" when horses are declining rather than retiring them or giving them time off. Now, don't get me wrong, the same thing happens if purses aren't good sometimes. But I don't see how anyone can deny that increasing purses well above the value of the horses in question doesn't further the incentive to not do right by the horse.

I don't have stats. But give me a slow Monday or Tuesday, not BC week, and I'll give a list of 30 or 40 horses from this year alone that broke down after very suspicious drops. Horses break down for many reasons of course, not always anything neglectful, but I'm 100% positive the rate increases on horses like this. I've been doing this too long to think differently.

One other thing, we usually know what happens to top horses. Many times these cheap claimers just vanish from the scene, never to be raced again. How could we possibly have any reliable stats? My database is full of horses that weren't reported as breakdowns but were never heard from again.

This is a great point that is rarely mentioned and is frequently missing from debates abt the breakdown topic.

Just my two cents, but really enjoy reading you and MM debate this topic. Good to see two guys who know their stuff going back and forth on an interesting topic.

[BombsAway Bob]

Originally Posted by mountainman

It's been my experience that measures to keep bottom tags and purses in proportion aren't quite as noble in motive as those who propose them would have you believe.

Small outfits that focus on low claimers still outnumber their higher class peers at most tracks (an Aqueduct perhaps excluded) and don't want the better barns dropping 86 beyers on their heads.

If someone can show me definitive proof that breakdowns and pullups are a function of purse-ratio in cheap claimers, I might rethink this. Until then, I'll consider such concerns an elaborate ruse intended to make cheap races winnable for mediocre horses and barns.

Horseplayers just don't comprehend how counter their interests run to the agendas of most horsemen.

i remember before Rockingham Park closed for T'Breds & switched to
Harness
(before abandoning both for 'charity' Pseudo-Poker room & Simo outlet),
i commented to Leading Owner that Year Ken Posco,
"Gee, all these 6-horse fields really stink for betting."
He smiled & said, "Yeah, but they're OK if you're an owner."

[onefast99]

I would ask why with a booming NYB program there is a need to have opt claimers in an entry level state bred race?
I ask the same question a 10y/o named gimme credit is running with the nw2 level allowance horses for the tag, 35k or 50k and wins at a regular clip, now there are races written for the condition only but as the fall season gets into full swing they appear less and less in the book.