Breeders Cup Betting
Daily Racing Form
Equibase
Equidaily
Horse Race Insider
Horses, Handicapping and Hijinks
NTRA
Thoroughbred Times
Form Blog
Not to the Swift
Paulick Report
RacehorseGirl
Railbird
West Points
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
22 August 2008
Duck! Dodge! Dive! [Pet Peeves 1]
Close your eyes, and imagine the following for a moment:
A racetrack. It's packed. The air is pulsating with anticipation. People are talking rapidly, discussing the coming race. Signs are posted everywhere, supplementing spots on the radio and TV. (I'm about to give two horses currently running a gender change, but bear with me for a moment. Bonus points if you can tell me why I chose these two horses!) "Black Mamba (NZ) vs. Beatrix Kiddo (FR)". Let's make it all neat and put little tick marks under each horse's name, identifying how many times one has beaten the other.
The two horses are four years old and met in the Triple Crown races - once more the world was forced to wait, as these two took one each before a newcomer grabbed the Belmont from them. Since then, they've been at each other's throats, both trying to claim the distinction of 'the best'. So far, they're about even - sometimes one will have a streak of wins, but that only makes the loser more determined to nip them at the wire next time out. Sometimes it's a 3rd vs. 5th decision, when other horses show up to try to split the two foes and steal the spotlight from them.
Now, open your eyes and face the cold reality. It ain't gonna happen, babe.
This would be a good way to hook casual fans. They get to pick a side, revel in "their" horse's wins, trash-talk the opponent. Suddenly there's a reason to tune in; they know who's running and wants to see what the outcome will be. It will continue for as long as the horses are able to run, and eventually two or more others will hook up and replace them. It might be older vs. younger, brother vs. brother, Derby vs. Preakness vs. Belmont, horse vs. mare. Rivalries could be a useful thing (provided they don't get out of control and turn unpleasant). They provide familiar faces, thrills, and something to talk about and advertise.
It won't happen, though, unless more owners like Jackson enter the game at the highest levels. Owners who aren't afraid to see their horse lose, who understand that tomorrow is another day. Who want their horse to be named Horse of the Year because they're worthy ... not because their schedule was strategically planned so that there would be little to no conflict until the Breeders' Cup.
Unfortunately, I feel the Breeders' Cup defying my attempt to keep interests separate. It's taken on a life of its own and is beginning to resemble my other passion: horror. Vampires, specifically. One race at the end of the year has managed to suck dry the other 364 (now 363) days of racing. The days leading up to the event are composed of horses finding the softest spots possible and avoiding the risk of a loss until they have to. The rest of the days (at least for many of the older horses) are a total loss - it's become customary for horses to retire that evening, even if they're only three.
It may be difficult to resolve the problem of disappearing stars, but the rest may be manageable. How? One idea, something I've thought about for a while now:
In order to qualify for a spot in the starting gate, a horse must have raced in one of three qualifying races (winners would automatically be guaranteed a spot) within their division.
Simple as that. This way there will be a bit of dodging, but it would wind up more along the lines of 'well, I don't want to face so-and-so, so we'll take on this horse instead'. No more 'I'm going to race in the most obscure races I can find so that my horse will only have seen one of two of this year's starters'.
It certainly isn't a perfect idea and would need to be tweaked quite a bit in order to work (international horses would be at a disadvantage, so there would need to be some sort of work around), but it might alleviate the problem a bit.
As far as the biggest example of this phenomena this year goes...
In starting his career, Curlin showed us that he can handle a quick turnaround in races. Taking this into consideration, there's a race at Monmouth with his name on it. Asmussen has always said that he runs his best race the second time on a given track, so it's entirely possible that the same applies to surfaces.
Oh, wait. That would mean Big Brown won't have a prep race ... unless another track will write a race for him with a week's notice.
"I felt it was the sporting thing to do to announce Curlin's schedule to give fair notice to anyone looking to compete against the reigning Horse of the Year this fall."
-Jess Jackson [Thoroughbred Times]
-Jess Jackson [Thoroughbred Times]
Close your eyes, and imagine the following for a moment:
A racetrack. It's packed. The air is pulsating with anticipation. People are talking rapidly, discussing the coming race. Signs are posted everywhere, supplementing spots on the radio and TV. (I'm about to give two horses currently running a gender change, but bear with me for a moment. Bonus points if you can tell me why I chose these two horses!) "Black Mamba (NZ) vs. Beatrix Kiddo (FR)". Let's make it all neat and put little tick marks under each horse's name, identifying how many times one has beaten the other.
The two horses are four years old and met in the Triple Crown races - once more the world was forced to wait, as these two took one each before a newcomer grabbed the Belmont from them. Since then, they've been at each other's throats, both trying to claim the distinction of 'the best'. So far, they're about even - sometimes one will have a streak of wins, but that only makes the loser more determined to nip them at the wire next time out. Sometimes it's a 3rd vs. 5th decision, when other horses show up to try to split the two foes and steal the spotlight from them.
Now, open your eyes and face the cold reality. It ain't gonna happen, babe.
This would be a good way to hook casual fans. They get to pick a side, revel in "their" horse's wins, trash-talk the opponent. Suddenly there's a reason to tune in; they know who's running and wants to see what the outcome will be. It will continue for as long as the horses are able to run, and eventually two or more others will hook up and replace them. It might be older vs. younger, brother vs. brother, Derby vs. Preakness vs. Belmont, horse vs. mare. Rivalries could be a useful thing (provided they don't get out of control and turn unpleasant). They provide familiar faces, thrills, and something to talk about and advertise.
It won't happen, though, unless more owners like Jackson enter the game at the highest levels. Owners who aren't afraid to see their horse lose, who understand that tomorrow is another day. Who want their horse to be named Horse of the Year because they're worthy ... not because their schedule was strategically planned so that there would be little to no conflict until the Breeders' Cup.
Unfortunately, I feel the Breeders' Cup defying my attempt to keep interests separate. It's taken on a life of its own and is beginning to resemble my other passion: horror. Vampires, specifically. One race at the end of the year has managed to suck dry the other 364 (now 363) days of racing. The days leading up to the event are composed of horses finding the softest spots possible and avoiding the risk of a loss until they have to. The rest of the days (at least for many of the older horses) are a total loss - it's become customary for horses to retire that evening, even if they're only three.
It may be difficult to resolve the problem of disappearing stars, but the rest may be manageable. How? One idea, something I've thought about for a while now:
In order to qualify for a spot in the starting gate, a horse must have raced in one of three qualifying races (winners would automatically be guaranteed a spot) within their division.
Simple as that. This way there will be a bit of dodging, but it would wind up more along the lines of 'well, I don't want to face so-and-so, so we'll take on this horse instead'. No more 'I'm going to race in the most obscure races I can find so that my horse will only have seen one of two of this year's starters'.
It certainly isn't a perfect idea and would need to be tweaked quite a bit in order to work (international horses would be at a disadvantage, so there would need to be some sort of work around), but it might alleviate the problem a bit.
As far as the biggest example of this phenomena this year goes...
In starting his career, Curlin showed us that he can handle a quick turnaround in races. Taking this into consideration, there's a race at Monmouth with his name on it. Asmussen has always said that he runs his best race the second time on a given track, so it's entirely possible that the same applies to surfaces.
Oh, wait. That would mean Big Brown won't have a prep race ... unless another track will write a race for him with a week's notice.
< < Home
Post a Comment