• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

2013 Kentucky Derby 139th Edition: congrats to Orb (Shug, Joel, Phipps/Janney)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by Glimmerglass View Post
    Indeed as it looks like no Saratoga races have any relevance. However, the upside is that the Kentucky Derby history rich laden Grey up in Woodbine on polytrack is a recognized race

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by Laurierace View Post
      Warranted? No reason. Implemented? To screw over their competitors. In other words, because they can.
      Where is the like button

      Comment


      • #43
        Huh. Isn't that interesting.

        The three horses who would have had the most points this year were also the top three finishers this year. (Sort of--I'll Have Another was tied for third with Gemologist and Daddy Long Legs, with 110 points each.)

        Comment

        • Original Poster

          #44
          Originally posted by Simkie View Post
          Huh. Isn't that interesting.

          The three horses who would have had the most points this year were also the top three finishers this year. (Sort of--I'll Have Another was tied for third with Gemologist and Daddy Long Legs, with 110 points each.)
          Are you sure about the top three finishers in the Kentucky Derby: 1. I'll Have Another 2.Bodemesier 3. Dullahan

          [Daddy Long Legs finished dead last; Gemologist 15th]

          As for the commentary from Steve Crist (DRF Chairman, et al) he makes several good points: Kentucky Derby qualifying plan a good start, but needs adjustments

          A lot of it works, but there are new glaring problems with serious ramifications. The biggest is the devaluing of the most important races for 2-year-olds. Winning the Grade 1, $2 million Breeder’s Cup Juvenile used to guarantee a Derby berth, but now gets a horse only 10 points, the same as victory in the Grade 3 Withers on the Aqueduct winter track, the Grade 3 El Camino Real Derby at Golden Gate, or the Grade 3 Smarty Jones Stakes at Oaklawn. Churchill estimates it will take about 40 points to qualify for the Derby.

          It gets worse. Winning the race that usually crowns the champion 2-year-old is now worth one-fifth as much as the Risen Star Stakes at the Fair Grounds or the Tampa Bay Derby. This is utterly preposterous, and if Churchill makes no other change to this plan, it should immediately recast the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile as a 50-point race and consider raising 2-year-old fixtures such as the Champagne and Norfolk to 20-point status.
          Kevin Flannery, Churchill’s president, said Thursday that track management – which made all its decision in-house and without consulting other tracks or organizations such as the Breeders’ Cup – was open to tinkering with the plan. Here’s hoping he meant that. The new plan is a good start and fixed some problems, but contains several serious mistakes.
          Regarding the biggest error of all - the Illinois Derby being omitted - Crist says the Illinois Derby deserves to be either a 50-point race or at the very least a 20-point “wild card” event.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by Glimmerglass View Post
            Are you sure about the top three finishers in the Kentucky Derby: 1. I'll Have Another 2.Bodemesier 3. Dullahan

            [Daddy Long Legs finished dead last; Gemologist 15th]
            Right. The top three point earners this year would have been:

            Bodemeister: 120
            Dullahan: 111
            =I'll Have Another: 110
            =Gemologist: 110
            =Daddy Long Legs: 110

            My point was only that it was curious that Bodemeister, Dullahan and I'll Have Another were at the top of that list and also the top three Derby finishers. One could have made a pretty penny doing a trifecta box with Bodemeister, Dullahan and the three 110 point horses, even considering the dollars lost on the Gemologist and Daddy Long Legs bet.

            Comment


            • #46
              I'm pretty surprised at the relative lack of outcry about the changes, but I suppose I could be looking in the wrong places. Such a load of BS. One of the more charming aspects of The Derby in recent years (at least for me) has been the everyman, feel good tales. Imperialism, Smooth Air, Musket Man, Mine That Bird... we lose all that with this system. Never mind the blatant power play, never mind the despicable manipulation of the route to the gate & disregard for the horses welfare. With all of the talk that's one on over the years RE changes to the Derby, I can't seem to recall this nonsense being a part of the discussion. Damned if I can see how this is going to draw new fans to the sport, but I'm not having a whit of trouble seeing how it will help drive old ones away.
              bar.ka think u al.l. susp.ect
              free bar.ka and tidy rabbit

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by Texarkana View Post
                This is the stupidest load of BS I've seen regarding the Derby. I can't even think of a nicer way to put it. I hope it blows up in their face.

                And newsflash, Churchill Downs-- NO ONE CARES ABOUT HORSE RACING ANYMORE*. Nascar fans are not going to flock to horse racing because the championship series is like theirs.

                Wanna bring fans back to racing? Improve racing's public image and keep horses running beyond their 3 y/o year. Telling trainers that they have to somehow force their horses to conform to an even less flexible and potentially more arduous schedule isn't going to help either of those points.

                *Besides horsemen and horse players and the handful of remaining fans.
                You've got that right.

                I am a real outsider, a racing fan whose only contact is through forums like this and occasional fun trips to watch horsey stuff, like a day at the races or a visit to a beautifully staged auction like Barrett's. My horses give me an additional interest because of the fun of tracing their pedigrees and following their close relatives (like my favorite, Richard's Kid!).

                From my outsider's point of view, the racing professionals have weird ideas about how to attract new fans. I read some article about management at Hollywood Park or Santa Anita (can't remember which) admiring the good job that Del Mar has done attracting bigger audiences with various techniques such as fewer racing days. There was no mention, and I think, no awareness, of the fact that several episodes of "Real Housewives of Orange County" included trips to Del Mar, with beautiful surroundings, fabulous clothes, gorgeous hats, and private boxes with waiters bringing great mixed drinks.

                Does that make you sneer? I'm sure many do. The idea of appealing to the most despised demographic in America, the Middle Aged Woman, is like advertising to Martians. Del Mar figured it out. Do you all really think that 20-year-old college boys love horses? Who do you think decides where to go for a fun outing on the weekend, the husband, or the wife? Who has money?

                Texarkana has it Totally Right. No one cares about racing anymore, but everyone has pets, and when the potential new racing fan sees a horse break down or asks the TOTALLY LOGICAL question about why a racehorse who has won beaucoup dollars is not given a retirement, and there is no good answer, he/she is turned off. And when you have a Kentucky Derby Party and Eight Belles breaks down so dramatically, and everyone leaves in tears, it does no good for the sport. Racing needs to clean up its act and promote a better image. And don't start with the "it happens; horses break down, bla bla", instead, look at Hong Kong's stats and say, "How can we achieve those low breakdown rates?"

                When I watch TVG I feel like an outsider looking in. It's like a guys day -- all men announcers, with a focus so much on the betting and details of betting that the sport is obscured. It has a seamy feeling of creepy guys sitting at their computers compulsively gambling. (which is another thing Del Mar did right with, for example, its Battle of the Sexes, with the beautiful Chantal Sutherland against the charming and charismatic Mike Smith). Now if that is what appeals to their demographic, fine, and yes they are about betting, not racing, but if you want to bring in new people to be fans of Horse Racing, not just gambling, you need to do something different.

                Like Texarkana says, if you raced horses a few years, people could develop an interest and an attachment, like in baseball or basketball where fans follow a particular player. Zenyatta would never have been the star if she hadn't been raced so long. People had a chance to form an attachment and her handlers promoted her. Why are they the only ones who do that?

                I'm ranting now... time to stop.
                "Random capitAlization really Makes my day." -- AndNirina

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by PeteyPie View Post
                  You've got that right.

                  I am a real outsider, a racing fan whose only contact is through forums like this and occasional fun trips to watch horsey stuff, like a day at the races or a visit to a beautifully staged auction like Barrett's. My horses give me an additional interest because of the fun of tracing their pedigrees and following their close relatives (like my favorite, Richard's Kid!).

                  From my outsider's point of view, the racing professionals have weird ideas about how to attract new fans. I read some article about management at Hollywood Park or Santa Anita (can't remember which) admiring the good job that Del Mar has done attracting bigger audiences with various techniques such as fewer racing days. There was no mention, and I think, no awareness, of the fact that several episodes of "Real Housewives of Orange County" included trips to Del Mar, with beautiful surroundings, fabulous clothes, gorgeous hats, and private boxes with waiters bringing great mixed drinks.

                  Does that make you sneer? I'm sure many do. The idea of appealing to the most despised demographic in America, the Middle Aged Woman, is like advertising to Martians. Del Mar figured it out. Do you all really think that 20-year-old college boys love horses? Who do you think decides where to go for a fun outing on the weekend, the husband, or the wife? Who has money?



                  When I watch TVG I feel like an outsider looking in. It's like a guys day -- all men announcers, with a focus so much on the betting and details of betting that the sport is obscured. It has a seamy feeling of creepy guys sitting at their computers compulsively gambling. (which is another thing Del Mar did right with, for example, its Battle of the Sexes, with the beautiful Chantal Sutherland against the charming and charismatic Mike Smith). Now if that is what appeals to their demographic, fine, and yes they are about betting, not racing, but if you want to bring in new people to be fans of Horse Racing, not just gambling, you need to do something different.
                  .
                  Fans don't pay for racing, the bettors do.
                  It's the people that are churning hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars through the parimutuel windows on a daily basis that are bankrolling the game. It costs next to nothing to get into most US racetracks, so the average 'Middle Aged Woman" would have to spend hundreds of dollars in food and drinks while at the track to make an equivalent contribution.

                  Case in point. Here is next Thursday's card at Hollywood Park... http://www.drf.com/race-entries/BHP/USA/2012-06-21/D
                  There are $279,000 worth of purses being handed out on a average Thursday afternoon. How many non-betting 'Middle Aged Women' would it take pay for those purses, and how much would they have to spend per capita? And keep in mind that that is just to cover the purses, not the plant overhead and maintenance that it takes to just keep the place running. Nor does it take into account the big stakes purses that horses are running for on weekends. That's just a Thursday afternoon, every Thursday afternoon. Do you think you could get thousands of Middle Aged Women to go to the track, even on Thursday afternoons, and each spend hundreds of dollars?

                  Now, you see why TVG is geared towards bettors? In fact the bettors are the ones who are subsidizing racing for the 'fans'.

                  For better or worse, US racing has hitched it's wagon to a pari-mutuel funded system of financing itself, and under that system the bettor (the actual customer) is the one you will be (and should be) catered to.

                  Comment

                  • Original Poster

                    #49
                    Originally posted by Drvmb1ggl3 View Post
                    For better or worse, US racing has hitched it's wagon to a pari-mutuel funded system of financing itself, and under that system the bettor (the actual customer) is the one you will be (and should be) catered to.
                    Agreed. Sad but true in its harsh reality. That said I do think as the "traditional" bettor diminishes there is a belief that somehow fresh faces - and wallets/purses - can be lured in. Social media, feel good stories, special event days, widening the themes at tracks to include food trucks and maybe more female friendly concepts ... tracks are trying but honestly they know what side the bread is buttered on for now.

                    HRTV is more female friendly IMHO with their on-air talent, and shows focused on the horse-owning-loving lifestyle as well as tradition non racing horse sports. Whereas TVG is firmly hitched to UK punting giants Betfair and they aren't inclined to invest money with a segment of the population that won't produce a solid return.

                    All of this gets away from the OP at hand. The Paulick Report has gotten rather bitter over the whole change with the Derby eligibility system. Honestly if CD quickly changed the omitting of Hawthorne and the Illinois Derby it would go a long way in quelling the firestorm. From there they can selectively add back in a few races in and maybe bump the BCJV's allowed points to more realistic impact.

                    Additionally I think they ought to allow the transfer of filly-only races (those used for the Kentucky Oaks qualification) whereby if a filly garners a total which puts her in the top quartile of the colt's total - meaning she utterly dominated the ranks like Rachel Alexandra - then its transfers. This would be determined only the week prior to the Derby/Oaks entry. Make sense?

                    This means a truly super filly would have that wild-card option to get in.

                    As for the feel good stories being somehow unlikely and those long-shot praying for a win (and it paying off) I cannot say that under the new system that's instantly gone. Funny Cide still would've gotten in, for example, and as Linny said knowing the new rules in 2013 owners/trainers will plot their courses accordingly to either make it happen or not.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      I was going to say, I like TVG because they avoid the fluffy-bunny, pwetty pwetty ponies stuff (and do things like run races from Australia at night when nothing else is on TV. When you're an insomniac, late-night programming is important.) But when I (thirtysomething female) go to the track, I bet. I would probably bet on-line if it were legal in my state. Whereas I never liked HRTV as the commentary (what there was) seemed boring and personality-free, and I don't really need/want the extraneous horse programming (for that there's always RFDTV's infomercials.) I wouldn't OBJECT to non-PM-"bookie-style" wagering, but gambling's a huge part of racing. When I was ten, yeah, I probably could have stayed all day just to watch the horses run in a circle, but I can't imagine spending the whole day just sitting there drinking.

                      I'll wait and see on the 'new system.' And I'm not sure bewailing how it "devalues" the BC Juvenile is the right tack to take...of all the Juveniles run, how many winners went on to win the Derby?
                      Author Page
                      Like Omens In the Night on Facebook
                      Steampunk Sweethearts

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        So if a filly wants to race in the derby she has to race with only the boys in the prep? That is awful.... So some great fillies would have been left out.... What a shame now who is sexist?
                        Mai Tai aka Tyler RIP March 1994-December 2011
                        Grief is the price we pay for love- Gretchen Jackson
                        "And here she comes. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's ZENYATTA!"

                        Comment


                        • #52
                          Originally posted by ivy62 View Post
                          So if a filly wants to race in the derby she has to race with only the boys in the prep? That is awful.... So some great fillies would have been left out.... What a shame now who is sexist?
                          Um..she's gonna have to race with boys in the Derby. If she can't keep up/beat them in the prep, is that a good indication she should go in the Derby? If anything I'm not sure a twenty-horse cavalry charge over a mile and a quarter is the best way to introduce a filly to males. (Unless she's Zenyatta, but that's a special case and she wasn't a three year old.)
                          Author Page
                          Like Omens In the Night on Facebook
                          Steampunk Sweethearts

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            Originally posted by ivy62 View Post
                            So if a filly wants to race in the derby she has to race with only the boys in the prep? That is awful.... So some great fillies would have been left out.... What a shame now who is sexist?
                            Only three fillies have ever won the KY Derby. All three prepped against males

                            Regret - won Hopeful Stakes, and Saratoga Special as 2yo. (didn't prep as a 3yo, won Derby on first start of season)
                            Genuine Risk - 3rd Wood Memorial
                            Winning Colors - 1st Santa Anita Derby

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              Just because a lot of fillies have not won others did run.. Lets be hypothetical... Since Rachel Alexandra only ran against fillies should she have not been allowed to try the derby? I know she did not but this is hypothetical. Honestly, if Jesse Jackson had bought hre before the Oaks who knows what he would have done. Her entire campaign up until then was all against her own sex...

                              What was wrong with the old way.. Some long shots do pretty well... How about Mine That Bird?
                              Mai Tai aka Tyler RIP March 1994-December 2011
                              Grief is the price we pay for love- Gretchen Jackson
                              "And here she comes. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's ZENYATTA!"

                              Comment

                              • Original Poster

                                #55
                                Dear Hawthorne Park, we thought about it again and nope you're still not in the club. /s/ Churchill Downs

                                TB Times 8-30-12 "Churchill rejects appeal to add Illinois Derby to qualifying races"

                                "We flew down there for a meeting and it was suggested that moving the date would be of significance," Hawthorne President Tim Carey told the Chicago Tribune. "We were willing to move (from early April) to March to be part of it, and we got back to them. About three days later we got a letter from [Churchill President Kevin Flannery] saying 'No, we can't do it.' "
                                I'm reminded of a song by Denis Leary from back in 1993 (uncensored).

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  Utterly stupid.
                                  But he thought, "This procession has got to go on." So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn't there at all. H.C.Anderson

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    Businesses like to destroy their competitors. It's the nature of the beast. Competition tends to the creation of monopolies. Been proved time after time.

                                    The whole point of race meets with different tracks running at different times was to avoid competition.

                                    Federal regulation would be far preferable to one track owning the biggest race being able to determine what its competitors have to do.

                                    From the DRF story:
                                    It has been widely speculated that the exclusion of the Illinois Derby was intended as a blow to Hawthorne, which last year defended its spring meeting rather than allowing Arlington Park — owned by CDI — to open in May and to use revenue from several months of dark time simulcasts to bolster purses.

                                    "Everybody knows the Illinois Derby belongs, and everybody knows the rest of the story," two-time Kentucky Derby winning trainer and Hall of Fame member Carl Nafzger told the Chicago Tribune.
                                    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
                                    Thread killer Extraordinaire

                                    Comment


                                    • #58
                                      I have no issue with competition but this isn;t competition. It's CD (which owns what is arguably the biggest race in the game) deciding that another track's "prep" for the big race doesn't count toward eligibility.
                                      TB racing has not historically used qualifiers. Horses have not had to win X in order to race in Y. Connections usually have had the ability to prepare where they choose for bigger events. The oversubscription to the Derby in the last 2 decades forced CD to find a way to limit the field size. Graded earnings made sense. Now they have decided to effectively use the KY Derby as a tool to put another track (Hawthorne) out of business.
                                      F O.B
                                      Resident racing historian ~~~ Re-riders Clique
                                      Founder of the Mighty Thoroughbred Clique

                                      Comment

                                      • Original Poster

                                        #59
                                        Egads the just released official 2013 Kentucky Derby 139th logo couldn't look any more woefully inadequate.

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          Originally posted by Glimmerglass View Post
                                          Egads the just released official 2013 Kentucky Derby 139th logo couldn't look any more woefully inadequate.
                                          Cut-and-paste work of a 4th grader? Ick.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X