One Site Only - By Bill Casner

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

G. K. Chapman — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:02:54 GMT

I'm a portrait artist seeking permission to paint Super Saver. Who do I contact?

GKchapman82@yahoo.com

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Lindsey P — Thu, 27 May 2010 01:53:04 GMT

A permanent site for the BC would only worsen tension btw the east and west coast. A 3 track rotation w/ Churchill, Santa Anita, and Belmont seems pretty fair to me.

There end of story! Every coast gets a BC site!

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

mike rullo — Wed, 26 May 2010 02:19:57 GMT

bill,

how is that fair to horseman on the east coast??? not only is the surface at santa anita is biased towards turf horses/euro's but having east coast horses shiping to the west coast for the breeders cup every year will not keep the east coast involved in the breeders cup within a 3yr period.

belmont will change the stakes to compete against the breeders cup. the breeders cup will become a non factor within a 5yr period.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

John — Tue, 25 May 2010 17:41:01 GMT

I am adamantly opposed to one Breeders' Cup site for many of the reasons already given here. A three or four site rotation is more reasonable and fair, allowing access and the Breeders' Cup experience to reach more people throughout the country. And to have the Breeders' Cup always run on a synthetic surface creates an unfair advantage to horses, who do not transfer their form well over this surface, but do their best running on dirt.

I didn't care at all for the successive years of Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita, and as a result, we lost Rachel Alexandra to the event, when if these races had been switched back to the East, on a conventional surface, we probably would have had that meeting between the eventual Horse of the Year and Zenyatta. To its credit however, Santa Anita did provide two years of virtually injury free competition, and this was gratifying. But as long as our convention tracks are maintained well and kept as safe as possible, site rotation is still the best move.

Keep the Breeders' Cup rotating: Santa Anita, Belmont Park, Churchill Downs, and possibly Gulfstream or maybe Woodbine, if our Canadian neighbors would be interested in hosting.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

general assembly — Sat, 22 May 2010 04:52:31 GMT

Moving to a permanent site will only further destroy the racing industry as we know it. Trainers who are already lemmings as far as selecting prep races will select only prep races that have a proven track record of producing winners of a particular race. A three region rotation would at least shake things up enough to maintain the importance of races on both coasts and the midwest. If we select only Santa Anita the entire fall schedules of every track outside of California would be at risk because it is pretty well established that you can't win a main track Breeder's Cup race at Santa Anita with a main track prep outside of California. Turf course preps are, of course, debatable. Part of the Breeder's Cup's aim is to promote racing in general. A switch to a Santa Anita only rotation would just be another in a long series of stupid choices racing has made to push itself into obscurity.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

TXLonghornFan — Fri, 21 May 2010 16:47:04 GMT

How's that Santa Anita thing looking now?

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Fast-Track Johnny — Thu, 20 May 2010 17:21:04 GMT

1)The concept of Breeders Cup is international,not parochial!

2) The process of Breeders Cup is to determine which horses are THE champions! So then, Breeders Cup races MUST rotate annually for these 2 reasons:

1) Grass horses will prove out to be TRUE champions if they win 2 or more Breeders Cup races on the somewhat different grass courses in the USA. 2) Other horses will prove out to be TRUE champions if they win 2 or more BC races on the definitely different dirty surfaces in the USA.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Dallas Fan — Wed, 19 May 2010 18:53:02 GMT

You don't have to run the BC Championships in November. They could be moved to late September or early October to avoid weather issues at most venues. And in the end, natural racing surfaces will prevail as synthetics are replaced with dirt...a reasonable experiment that failed. I would favor a schedule that alternates each year from eastern to western venues.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Pasturelands — Tue, 18 May 2010 06:12:07 GMT

I would like the BC to have a permanent home, but I would MUCH MUCH prefer CHURCHILL DOWNS, rather than Sta. Anita.

Why?

ONE, Sta. Anita is broke, and CD isn't. No money, no honey.

TWO, CD is famous worldwide as a HORSE race venue, and their legacy of horse-racing dates back to the time of ABE LINCOLN and the Civil War. Sta. Anita is also famous, but for other things, like restaurants, spas, hollywood, etc.

THREE, CD has an established, thriving horse industry, famous dirt course, and wide fan base, that are exclusive to horse racing ALONE. Sta. Anita has the race course. period. If things don't change, Sta. anita won't even HAVE a race course to hang on to.

Sure, the Cali weather is great, but honestly, we don't go to horse races to enjoy the weather. We can do that at home, thanks.

We go to horse races, to see THE HORSES. So put the BREEDER'S CUP where ALL the horses have always been for almost a CENTURY --- CHURCHILL DOWNS!

And for the "plastic" fans out there, just put a plastic track at CD so they can run their races there, alongside dirt races. That way, EVERYBODY'S HAPPY!

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Will W — Mon, 17 May 2010 04:37:34 GMT

No dirt. No Santa Anita. What a travesty to put it there permanently on a plastic surface ! Why turn our championship races over to the British, Irish, and European turf horses ??? If the tables were reversed, none of the Europeans would be so foolish as to take their championship races off the turf and put them on the dirt.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

FourCats — Sat, 15 May 2010 20:47:31 GMT

Keeping the Breeders Cup at any single track is basically a bad idea long term (though few people, especially in racing, think long term these days). The primary reason has been mentioned already by several posters here. And that is that the event would become a regional event, become stale and lose its cachet as a championship event. I have bought a few horses at the sales and always look for Breeders Cup-nominated horses. However, I live on the East Coast. If I know that the event is permanently on the West Coast, I will not pay extra again for a horse that is Breeders Cup nominated. This is not to denigrate Santa Anita. A permanent site on the East Coast would have the same effect for West Coast buyers.

And frankly, as a fan, having the BC be at a different track each year is exciting and creates a strong buzz. Even this year, with the BC going back to Santa Anita 2 years in a row, it had the feeling of same old, same old. And that was just 1 year of repeating the host track.

And, in my opinion, the arguments given about cost savings and helping California racing may or may not be true. But they are another example of short-term thinking. The cost savings would only last if the BC remained as vibrant country-wide as it is now (which I think is extremely doubtful). And saving California racing, while a noble goal, should not be a justification for sacrificing the vibrancy of the BC which affects racing in the entire country.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

KY Owner/Breeder/Fan — Sat, 15 May 2010 12:16:43 GMT

Breeder's Cup tickets once were a premium they are not today. There should be A three or four site rotation,CD,SA,Bel,fourth up in the air. The two day concept has some good points however Louisville, KY is the only place in the nation that will support two championship days of racing with sold out/very large crowds. It will not be oaks and derby but if the two days came every other year or 3rd or 4th year It would be huge in Louisville. Adding of Breeders cup races was a good thing however I think seperating the boy and girl races takes away from the signifcance of the orginal championship division races. No one except large racing fans are watching the Distaff on Friday. The Distaff not being on the Classic card simply is not right. Currently the stars of our game are a mare and filly. The newly installed races should be on Friday and the orginal Cup races on Sat with maybe a few extra races. Currently Kentucky has their head in the clouds with no real ability to compete with casinos across the river in Indiana. But Kentucky has also showcased a successful Breeders Cup.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Robert — Sat, 15 May 2010 06:06:44 GMT

I would love to be a fly on the wall for the new contract negotiations.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Robert — Sat, 15 May 2010 06:03:48 GMT

** Breaking News ** MID has voided its' contract with Oak Tree Racing Association which was to run until 2016 and which the judged approved to continue. -- If I were a betting man... oh wait, I am. -- I would say this pretty much sums it all up. It's a done deal. Oak Tree will be the permanent home to the Breeders' Cup.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Breakage — Sat, 15 May 2010 04:06:11 GMT

The NFL is arguably the most successful sports league in the last 40yrs,

and yet have no team in LA.

LA is the single most apathetic sports town in America,

I am a total idiot and can see just how moronic this idea is,

so why can't the people who make the big bucks?

because a rock is actually brighter in some regards?

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

TBOwner — Sat, 15 May 2010 01:21:12 GMT

Well now what do you all think?

MI won't honor the contract they just agreed to with Oak Tree. The lure of the BC being under them for years was too great. The greed factor kicked in and I absolutely guarantee you that the BC won't be worth diddly if MI is running the show.

I just hope like heck no committment was made or if so the BC can back out.

MI will end up just like the rest of the company. Despite the economy turning around that is one poorly run organization from what they've shown to date.

Just like everyone was nervous when Magna was buying up race tracks, if you want to see the BC survive? Be afraid, be very afraid.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Bob — Fri, 14 May 2010 23:14:03 GMT

Funny Cide,

My bad. My previous comment should have addressed to Mark.

Mark,

There are many legitimate reasons you or anyone else can state for opposing SA as a permanent home for the BC. I happen to like the idea but recognize there are many who don't and their opinions are every bit as valid as mine. My previous comment about earthquakes was an attempt at humor. That said, I think it actually is paranoia to be afraid to visit SA or host the BC in California because of the infinitesimally small chance that one may be injured in an earthquake.

Do the math on all of the injuries and deaths attributable to "acts of God" type events that happen in a given year from coast to coast. Where exactly do earthquakes rank in that list compared to others?

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Funny Cide — Fri, 14 May 2010 20:45:11 GMT

Nice post, Sue.

One point I may disagree with you on is the value of the BC foal nomination. I've never seen a buyer walk away from a nice horse because it lacks a BC nomination, and I'm not sure that it really helps the average yearling either. It's impossible to gage, I think, what the nomination is really worth, whether it brings more than $500 it costs, but I really would doubt it.

For me, I won't be nominating my foals, not until I'm assured that the BC will not be run again without any dirt racing on the card. I'm breeding for dirt, so with it being pie-in-the-sky that my foals make it to the BC anyway, if they're fortunate enough to be good enough, they'll likely have no place to run.

I'm just me, though. If we add Midway Sue and many others, it will make an impact. And it doesn't have to stop there. From ticket sales to the betting windows to our stallion selections, we can make an impact.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Pam S. — Fri, 14 May 2010 19:42:57 GMT

Midway Sue, just for the record, I believe Zookeeper is a she.

Also, I respect the fact that as a breeder you are much more connected, in a practical way, to the BC than I am as a mere fan. But I think it is sad that this great season-ending event, conceived in the early '80s as a showcase for all divisions of horses, not just the glamorous 3-year-old colts, has deteriorated into something you wish would just go away. What the heck happened?? Sounds like there's so little to lose, why not make the drastic change of having SA as the permanent host site?

When you talk about "entertaining the whims of a few," do you mean the many fans that enjoy the BC? As a breeder, you should be aware that without horseplayers and fans, there would be no racing, and then who would buy your horses? Fox hunters?

Should the Breeders' Cup "go away" for any reason, I would miss it a great deal and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Along with the spring classics, it is a major part of the racing calendar as far as I'm concerned. Hopefully change, whether in the form of a permanent site or something else, will save it.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Long Time Fan — Fri, 14 May 2010 19:29:54 GMT

To Midway Sue-- Are you insane? "we would be better off if the BC went away". That may be true for those breeders who don't know what they're doing and have had little to no success with High class horses. The industry needs the BC to showcase it's top tier talents and get people interested in the sport once again. I respect the folks who are in the industry for the sheer joy & competitive aspects of the game,not the ones who are in it to make a living like most small time breeding operations seem to be.As they say: Less is more.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Zookeeper — Fri, 14 May 2010 19:27:11 GMT

Midway Sue,

You missed my point completely regarding my being able to go CD for this year's BC. I wasn't bragging. Far from it. My point WAS, I'm not willing to spend the money if chances are that the day will be spoiled by the weather.

I'm not star-struck. Too old for that. However, as you said yourself, being polite is a must if one wants one's argument to hold any water. Questioning is one thing, calling or insinuating someone is a liar IS rude.

Maybe you would be happy to see the BC go but I wouldn't be. Whether I'm attending in person or watching on TV, it is to me a great couple of days for horseracing! If it fails to survive, I'll be sad. You can dance on its grave if you want. Your call!

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Midway Sue — Fri, 14 May 2010 15:06:41 GMT

Although this discussion seems to have fallen into useless bickering the fact remains that if your someone who can afford or someone who can't afford to go, the Breeders Cup should make an attempt to reach all levels of fans, not just the well off. Zookeeper admits or better still, brags he can afford to go every year if he wishes. Good for him. And he is exactly whats wrong with this industry. As long as horse racing keeps reminding the average fan that only the well off should attend the big events, the more the fans we will lose. Can you imagine Nascar treating their fans like this? And if you think Zookeeper that myself or others in the industy I work with would not go up to Bill Casner and tell him how we feel on this subject your dead wrong. He's a horse breeder, just like myself and any other breeders in this business. We shell out money that supports the BC just like him. We're respectful, but not starry eyed over the fact that he owns part of Winstar Farm. Quite frankly what the Breeders Cup needs more than anything else is fresh management. The current leaders are getting long in the tooth and set in their old ways. Not wanting to get cold or wet, though they don't even sit in those seats, is a sure sign of old age. The times of movie stars at the track went out after Bing Crosby and the Rat Pack disappeared from Del Mar. Can we not see the backlash after the debacle of Bravo and the Kentucky Oaks. The only reason the Breeders Cup still gets a lot of foal nominations is because most farms that sell their crop are held hostage to the fact if its not on the sales page in the book, they get less for their horse. In return they pretty much get nothing. Maybe as one poster said, we would be better off if the Breeders Cup just went away. Most wouldn't miss it and the extra money the breeders saved could be put to better use than entertaining the whims of a few.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Mark — Fri, 14 May 2010 15:00:44 GMT

Hey Bob,

You musn't be a very good handicapper. FACTS are there have been earthquakes at Santa Anita AND Hollywood Park during the running of a race WITH INJURIES TO PATRONS. NOBODY has ever been struck by lightning at a race track EVER. At least not in the physical sense....

just looking out for everyone's safety.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Funny Cide — Fri, 14 May 2010 13:15:44 GMT

Bob, who are you talking to? I've said nothing about the weather.

Zookeeper, better to be skeptical and seek the truth than to believe everything someone tells you without question. The BC, with the terrible decisions they've made over the past few years, deserve to be questioned.

re: One Site Only - By Bill Casner

Slew — Fri, 14 May 2010 09:31:48 GMT

I remember my first earthquake, and the house trembled and shook for quite a while. It scared me...why??? I was in Maine!. So the fact that Cali has earthquakes as an excuse seems to ignore the fact that even NYC has had earthquakes. And the Bugler???? .

...picky...picky...picky. That said...I still prefer a rotation. It affords some great tracks to showcase their best....and we have more than one awesome track in North America.