Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

charles — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:49:57 GMT

Leon, no matter what synthetic if done right is better than dirt. SA problem is that they were done wrong! period. The Breeders cup being done there 2 years in a row didn't help the controversy and Rachel not running on it amplified it a lot more. LET'S BE HONEST HERE...THIS IS ABOUT DIRT BIASED TRADITIONALIST NOT LIKING SYNTHETIC! Anybody who really believes that Rachel has any chance of beating Zenyatta on any surface if both were in top form is in denial. HOTY or not.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Leon — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 18:02:18 GMT

Charles,

The 37 fewer catastrophic injuries was a combined number for ALL California tracks.

At an average of $216,000 per saved horse, it is a very steep price to pay for a track that does not meet expectations provided. Moreover, that number does not include the extra expenditures in maintenance & repairs.

All I'm saying is that, at least in California, the mandate was rushed, and they could have used funds smarter. I agree Woodbine has had a very succesful switch, but Arlington's numbers were down 3% in 2009, when compared to their last year with dirt, so all that expenditure did not help handle because of the economic climate.

Keeneland has always been a premier meet with fantastic handle & purses, and the weather hardly ever plays havoc with racing there. The only thing synth racing did for Keeneland was to render their most important race (the Blue Grass) totally irrelevant as a prep for the Ky Derby and the rest of the TC.

It is extremely important to protect horses, but I'm sure there are other means to achieve so than forking out a couple of mill for a surface switch that has not delivered in its promises.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Ann in Lexington — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:41:43 GMT

Mike, you didn't read my post or understand it. The Breeders' Cup (so-called because it was funded by breeders) was NOT created to be a year-end championship race or series of races. It was created to keep high-profile 3yo stallion prospects from retiring before the fall.

If the Breeders's Cup was created to be a championship race, it would be invitational, to some extent - the top horses in each division would be invited to take part - and cheap no-hopers wouldn't be allowed to take part (look up the history of Rick's Natural Star). They wouldn't run things like a Futurity, or one of these mega-purse sales races to determine eligibility.

How race differs from the NFL or NBA is that there is no tournament where teams face one another and only the winner advances. It is more like NASCAR or golf. One might win Daytona or Augusta, but if one doesn't win anything else, or even perform with distinction in many other events, he/she doesn't end the year at the top driver, or golfer, or tennis player.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

charles — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 20:34:13 GMT

LEON, I don't know but this I know! Woodbine and Keeneland and a few others are very happy with their synthetic and their attendance and purse shows that. It's possible that SA just didn't install and maintain their synth correctly.

The other fact in life is putting in changes is hard to accept.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Leon — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:47:31 GMT

Charles:

I was under the impression that most horsemen, trainers & jockeys were very supportive of this switch, at least in California. What I gathered from the article, reading trainers' opinions, the concern from the Jockey Guild, and Mr. Shapiro's state of mind and personal nightmare after ordering such mandate, is that the new surfaces have not met expectations.

There is no evidence of what happens in the mornings with horses during training hours, and their multi-million expenditure decreased catastrophic injuries by a combined 37 horses in California; if each track spent $2M replacing surfaces, they spent $216,000 per saved horse. I'm sure

they would have been able to lower catastrophic injuries by other means with that kind of dough.

While we are all extremely happy about the 37 fewer catastrophic injuries, it still does not answer the question of whether these catastrophic injuries could have been avoided by stricter vet & medication controls, and by investing some of that money spent on synth tracks on studies on how to make dirt tracks safer, since everyone agrees synth tracks are a lot more expensive to keep, and they have failed to deliver what they promised. Were expectations too high? Obviously.

In terms of handle, Polytrack-user Turfway Park' handle for 2009 $58.6M, was flat with their 2006 handle ($58.5M), the first year of the Polytrack era, which I guess can be considered good under the present economic times; however, if we factor in 20% cumulative inflation the last 4 years, they can't be too happy about those numbers, especially when it is considered that avg purses for their last meet fell 14% compared to 2008 levels.

According to the article, the majority of the Horse racing community has serious doubts about synth surfaces. So do I.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

sceptre — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:14:34 GMT

Charles- It wasn't easy, but I tried to respond to your earlier posts as politely as possible. In truth, if this was only a one-on-one (just the two of us), I would have bowed out, because attempting to change one uninformed mind isn't worth the effort. Many here, however, have been exposed to your thoughts, so for them I feel obliged to respond...It's rather clear to me that your perspective on these subjects is rather limited and, may I suggest, somewhat warped. -As an aside, I very much hope that you have no involvement with the ownership of horses...Your comments about breakdowns are patently absurd and not worthy of explanation. I've already tried to describe why I have concern for Zenyatta-the polytrack vs dirt issue-which you appear to overlook in your verbose remarks. Lastly, it was rather telling when you substituted AZERI for ARAZI in addressing my example of one who may have been the worse for wear after having competed at a high level over, in this case, dirt vs turf previously. This would suggest that your experience is limited to the degree of having no awareness of Breeder' Cup Juvenile winner, etc., ARAZI. I'd suggest that you refrain from pontificating, and instead keep a more open mind as you hopefully continue to read, watch, and learn. Your words too easily feed into those with similar ignorance, or self-serving motive.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

BN — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:51:43 GMT

Oy. Here we go again. I thought this argument was dead.

Don't get me wrong - I love Zenyatta and was bitterly disappointed when she didn't win HOTY in 08. On the other hand, while I think her BCC was awesome, so was RA's entire season. I was thrilled to hear both were coming back in '10.

As for the Breeder's Cup deciding championships...so, Arcangues, Volponi, Skywalker, Cat Thief, all should have won HOTY? Based on their victories in the BCC? When there were better horses out there that year, who for some reason didn't fire or run their race? As for RA not being undefeated (career, not year), remember this: EVEN SECRETARIAT AND MAN O' WAR LOST! Those two greats, rated one and two by the Blood Horse, did not retire undefeated.

Time to let it go and look forward to 2010.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

papadave2 — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:16:57 GMT

I have attended five Breeders Cups, and plan to attend this year in Louisville. I enjoy seeing the quality of horses, but agree that th two day card is not world championships.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

charles — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:27:05 GMT

SCEPTRE and LEON:

You people are making a big deal out of nothing. First of, IMO breakdowns occur more often on horses that are drugged. That's one issue that should be PENALIZED TO THE HILT. Second, if you people are going to nitpick everything, LETS JUST SHUT THIS INDUSTRY DOWN. ANY HORSE AT ANY TIME can break a leg even while walking, so spare me your PETA BS. Zenyatta was so big that they waited for her to mature and didn't race her till she was almost 4. That tells me her well being is foremost to Sheriffs/Moss. BTW don't compare Azeri to Zenyatta. Azeri like Rachel puts a lot of pressure on themselves when they run while Zenyatta relaxes. If you watch Zenyatta's powerful kick, she glides and reaches out horizontally NOT VERTICALLY. That is why besides being huge, she covers so much ground effortlessly and thus less pressure but her weight in deep surface is a disadvantage thus the scratch at an off-track. IMO Rachel is more of a risk because she tend to give it all even though she is very tired. Look how her subsequent Q's are slower specially at the finish 25-26 range. Rachel looks impressive only against the fillies not because she is really kicking it at the end but because the other fillies are dying so bad. Compare that to Zenyatta who can run a sub 22 last Q after running a mile and you can tell which horse is really being pushed hard and which horse is stronger. Let's just hope they both have a very safe campaign in 2010 and I for one wouldn't race Rachel against Zenyatta. That is one race that Rachel can never win and it has nothing to do with the 'plastic'. Jackson did the right thing in skipping the Breeders. It wouldn't have mattered if it were on dirt.

BTW LEON, read this

www.keeneland.com/.../GroundControl.pdf

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Leon — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:46:20 GMT

Charles,

FYI: Horses also breakdown during workouts.

By the way, the bigger the animal, the more likely it is to sustain injury, because of the weight and impact on its extremities.

Just thought you should know.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Leon — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:43:02 GMT

There is no scientific evidence on whether synth tracks are actually safer than a well-kept dirt track.

There are other facts that have not been taken into consideration regarding breakdowns in the BC.

Horsemen, jockeys & trainers sometimes push the envelope with horses that are less than 100%, and medication sometimes masks pain and other problems. Official Vets sometimes turn the other way to allow a less-than fit horse to run. How often do you hear a trainer saying "this horse might need a race"? Doesn't that increase the likelihood of a breakdown?

Track superintendants make tracks lightning-fast in order to record fantastic times that would create buzz after a particular race. We all know this goes on.

Horse safety depends on everybody involved doing their jobs correctly, not just on whether the track is made of dirt or something else.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

sceptre — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:37:21 GMT

Dear Charles,

Your remarks about Zenyatta's looks, and what you peceived as relatively effortless performances have no bearing on the risks involved in switching her from sythetic to dirt. It's all about what you can't see-her bones may be modeled essentially for synthetic, not dirt. I'm not privy to her training regimen, so let's hope she trains on a fair amount of dirt. I do know that at facilities which have both, the horses routinely alternate, even if the race day surface is one or the other. I'm fairly sure that her connections are aware of this issue, but only they know what risks they're willing to take with her. Let's face it, they chose to bring her back at six; for me not very positive evidence that Zenyatta's well being came first. I remain skeptical and concerned...Recall, if you will, Arazi's lone tour de force dirt performance; he was never the same again.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Leon — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:27:40 GMT

David R:

The Breeder's Cup is ONE race, and it is not the defacto championship race. It has not been for years.

I love the Lil Darlin's idea of a summer-fall championship series, to be run on 5-6 different tracks in the country, ala Nascar, with an Eclipse Award and a big-fat bonus check to the winner.

Details would need to be worked out, but it could motivate owners and trainers to ship horses around the country, and it could create a play-off atmosphere and a grand finale to the horse racing season in the US.

IMO, it would definiteky be better than deciding championships based on the results of one SINGLE race, on one specific surface, or based on popularity or regional voting.

I'd like to read your opinions on the matter.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

charles — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:47:47 GMT

SCEPTRE: Zenyatta's trainer has stated that SHE LOVES DIRT and only tolerates synthetic. Besides, this powerful mare is so solidly put together that any real handicapper/horsemen who watches her after each race will realize that her races were basically workouts. Just looked at her after the classic! Ears still perked, light on her feet and very alert. Now compare that to Rachel after the Woodward where she was gingerly walked to the winners circle, a picture of a worn out filly who basically peaks at 8 furlongs. Zenyatta is a brute of a horse and build like a tank. I would like to see how close she can come to Secretariat's time in the Belmont at 12 furlongs. So, don't worry about Zenyatta on dirt, Sherieffs has done a great job on scheduling her races.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Pam S. — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:42:17 GMT

sceptre, I agree, great post. I have never understood all the bitterness and outrage over the Calif. synthetic tracks. (Especially while synthetic tracks elsewhere seem to draw little attention.) It appears to be rooted in Curlin's loss in the 2008 BC and Rachel's non-participation in the 2009 BC. But as you said, both events were injury-free and in my book that counted for something.

I hadn't considered the risk that switching surfaces might pose to Zenyatta's well-being. Like everyone else, I felt confident that her 2008 Apple Blossom win was proof she was "at home" on dirt. But that was two years ago, and it seems right that you sound a note of caution. But I have confidence in Team Zenyatta; they know their horse and they do what's best for her.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Footlick — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:55:19 GMT

sceptre- great post.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

sceptre — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:02:38 GMT

Many of the posts have been a bit off (initial) topic, and I confess the same for what I now would like to add- Some here have disparaged the synthetics, and I've read only one post that offered some defence. It seems that the non-participation of RA in the BC and the subsequent debate over HOY has further fanned the flames. So, allow me to request that synthetic bashers ask themselves one question-answer honestly to yourselves.- In your heart of hearts would you have preferred that the catastrophic injury stats for dirt vs synthetic been no different? Rememeber, answer honestly this question to yourself...Synthetics aren't perfect, at best they're a work in progress. They may not be the best solution, but the results as a whole have been somewhat encouraging. Yes, there are many types of synthetics and some play differently, as do many dirt tracks. Some claim that dirt tracks, if managed (more) properly can be the equal in safety to synthetics. There is no retrospective proof of this. I don't blame the BC committee for allowing the BC to be held at SA two yrs. in a row. As I recall, there were no catastophic breakdowns these past two Breeders Cups. One thing is absolutely certain; Racing needs to better protect the racehorses, and if altering track surfaces will help, this must be done. Change often impacts negatively on tradition, the transition period is particularly difficult for those of us who tend to define ourselves so closely to this sport. Please step back for a minute, though, and recall why synthetics were introduced-particularly in Calif. where the previous breakdown rate was so high. Many express elation that Santa Anita may return to dirt. Are you also willing to accept their prior breakdown rate? This sport was severely flawed for many years, probably from its inception. Until recently many of its flaws went overlooked. Yes, we can selfishly return to those days-then in many ways we could enjoy racing more-at least until we return our focus to its dark side. Lastly, most were elated that Zenyatta will return, moreso because of her owners' intention to have he compete more frequently on regular dirt. She is, however, a filly that has trained and raced predominantly on synthetic. Why has no one (particularly those who profess to adore her) expressed concern about how this could affect her future well-being? Yes, she has an able, smart trainer, but the advent of synthetics is relatively new-how much experience can he have with such a situation as this?

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Larry — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:08:54 GMT

Some interesting blogs. One note of historical relevance....The Kentucky Derby and The Preakness were run on the same day in 1920. His owner preferred the Preakness as he was eastern based.

As for the BC races and HOTY. I agree with those who wanted co-champions which has happened in the past (before Eclipse Awards were given out). My other thoughts which I've shared with Bloodhorse before is the downgrading of the importance of the Jockey Club Gold Cup and its reduction in distance. A top horse could win the Jockey Club at 2 miles; today it is really just a shell of its former importance. And the BC Marathon is a joke in distance. But why run more than 10 furlongs when the purse is high and nothing comes close monetarily at longer distances?

As for one race deciding a title. I find that ridiculous. If I have a top horse and I race that horse just once during the year and win should I get a title? I don't think so; but we tend to view the BC as deciding our champions. Throw out the year long accomplishments. As I view 2009 I have to look at the whole year not just one race; nor just what happens in summer and fall.

I would like to see The Washington International come back as a prestigious race; but not as a prelude to the Breeder's Cup; but as a stand alone race such as the Arlington Million. The Pimlico Futurity and Selima are two races I also have missed.

One thought in voting for Eclipse Awards is to evenly divide where the voters reside or where their work is based...cut out East/West bias.

I'll just look ahead to this spring and see what develops.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

charles — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:42:13 GMT

JAMES B.:

"The American HOY has been, from the inception of the award, the best DIRT horse"

REALLY? then how do we define JOHN HENRY who beat the best dirt and TURF horses for generations? SHOY?

SUPER HORSE OF THE YEAR?...

Let's be honest here. John Henry odds of beating CIGAR on DIRT is probably around even money but CIGAR beating John Henry on TURF is a LONGSHOT!

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

ZENYATTA — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:51:10 GMT

All this talk about the BC is missing the point IMO.I was led to believe the Eclipse Awards are based on horses who had at least one start in the U.S..Singspiel was awarded an Eclipse in 1996 and never raced in the U.S. and only won one race in CANADA.Diplomat Jet won 3 G1'S on the turf in the U.S.and lost out to Singpiel.It is time to come up with a system people can understand and appreciate instead people with personal agendas doing the voting.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Mike — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:52:37 GMT

The problem is with the structure of racing today, as you point out racing is not like the NBA, Baseball or the NFL, and this is the problem. The Super Bowl is like a national holiday, NBA players make millions of dollars a year and the LA Dodgers draw 30,000 fans for a Thursday night game in June while horse racing is barely surviving. How popular would these other sports be if they were run like racing, if the Celtics never played the Lakers or if the Colts were undefeated after the regular season and they decided they had done enough and skipped the Super Bowl? Racing must have a way of determining championships on the track. This is the reason the Breeders Cup was created, now it needs to be modified. I have heard Jess Jackson talk about a league for racing, I don't know exactly what he has in mind, but we should have a series of races leading up the Breeders Cup, with the champions of each division determined by some point system based on results from these races and the Breeders Cup.

Look at the one bright spot in racing today, the Triple Crown races and specifically the Kentucky Derby. Most owners, trainer, jockeys and fans would say that the Derby is the one race everyone wants to win, but the Kentucky Derby was not always a great race, back in the early days the New York owners refused to send horses out for the Derby, Man O War didn't run in the Derby because his owner didn't like "Western Racing" and thought that the Derby was just another race. Later Churchill Downs management persuaded the eastern owners to send their best horses and that was what made the Derby the greatest race, it is not the Mint Julips, the hats or My Old Kentucky Home that makes the Derby great, it is the horses. We need something like this for all divisions in racing. A race or series of races that draws the best horses from all over the country, the best sprinters, milers, grass horses to determine who is the champion on the track.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Fire Slam — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:52:01 GMT

I feel law makers in California who mandated Cali tracks install synthetics, and the BC folks are to blame.

Santa Ania shouldn't have hosted the BC two years straight. Now SA is going back to dirt.

Its not the connections of the horses fault. Zens camp stayed in California and won race after race. Why ship and stress the horse? They did right by her. Same for RA. Why run her on a surface she is not use to running on? Her connections kept her on dirt, and kept winning.

Blame this lost match up on none other then human error.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Footlick — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:30:14 GMT

j.sloane0087- If a horse proves in one race that they are totally superior to anything that ran during the year, why would you have a problem with that horse being the Eclipse winner? It makes no sense to vote a lesser horse the Eclipse winner, even if Canada would. Shouldn't the best horse win the award? That's what I always thought.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

Footlick — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:22:49 GMT

Pam S- that is true. If you have a horse that belongs in the BC, please run them. I don't see anything wrong with giving a Euro an Eclipse if that horse was heads above the rest. I don't think any Euro has gotten the award that didn't deserve it. I defy anybody to name a turf filly who was better than Goldikova. I alwaays look forward to the Cup too.

re: Breeders' Cup Not a World Championship

David R — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:14:10 GMT

Dan makes a decent argument about the Breeders' Cup not being a "World Championship" even. However, he is way off when he write that a Breeders' Cup race should weigh equally with all other races. Nonsense. The field that Zenyatta beat in the Breeders' Cup Classic had over 10 Grade I winners in it. The quality of that field was much more talented than all of the fields combined that Rachel Alexandra faced in 2009. If Rachel had run in the BC Classic she would have been in a photo for third.