been hearing that for years, still waiting for it to come to fruition.

I know, but they still have to do it. You know these people who have Derby Parties love this ****. We could care less, but they have to do it. Look at Super Bowl coverage, by the end of the day you usually know that the offensive tackle had four pulled pork sandwiches and used a lime flavored condom the night before.

there are lime flavored condoms?! i am so glad buckpasser started this thread! lol

Not pissed at all. You implied everyone complaining lost money and I thought that was a ridiculous statement that needed correcting.

I was only playing Churchill. As long as the network coverage doesn't keep me from seeing the track feed on my ADW, I could care less if they show Oprah until they open the gates because I'm not watching. But when the ADW vid says tune in to NBC for coverage, I'm pretty much screwed if I want to watch a race. Hell, I couldn't even tell if they were going to show the Woody Reserve until the horses were going onto the turf course. Not one mention or peek at a horse until post time.

I'd kind of like to see if any of the horses are melting down with the big crowds, but if that's not your cup of tea, I understand.

Yeah, Orange and Strawberry too. I have no idea...stopped using those things after the oil spill.

Understood man. Actually everyone at the party I was at was quite surprised that the Woodford was televised as well. The melting down thing is a valid point, but at that point I'm already buried in a load of bets. It's all good Bigs. Sorry to get you upset with my first comment.

Every year people complain about the network coverage. I think you guys are nuts. First off, the sport is tailor-made for HD with the beautiful animals, the vivrant colors and the environment as a whole. Secondly, the blimp shots, the rail shots, etc. are absolutely amazing. Every year I read some clown saying they should just use the basic single camera shot you watch at home on your ADW site because "that's the best way to watch a race." Are you kidding me? NBC is basically making a two minute movie out there and you'd really rather be watching the grainy track camera? Finally, all the human/animal interest stories, the Top Chef b.s., and interviews with the celebs are what draws the casual fan in. I run a restaurant and had the NBC coverage on the TVs. I watched a table full of 20something girls who probably never would have turned it on unless they were forced to watch it stare at the television slack-jawed with awe and genuinely into it by race time. I'm guessing if given the chance to go to the track in the future they will be more inclined to do so and push their money through the windows. All they needed to be was exposed to it.

they were probably deciding which hats and dresses to look for at the mall.


as for casual fans, like i said elsewhere, been hearing that line for years. still waiting.

too many tents on the far turn for the turf races.

So you don't think celebrities, background stories and slick television production matter to the "casual" fan? That's simply a wrong opinion to have, lady. Look, this is more than the biggest racing day of the year, it's an all day commercial for the sport -- a sport that already screwed itself sideways in the '50s and '60s by refusing to embrace the medium of television.

I look forward to the network race productions during Triple Crown season. Other than Breeder's Cup, it's the only time of year you can watch the sport being treated like the major sporting event it should be. Sure, I do my handicapping and watch the board at home on the computer, but how does anyone say with a straight face the race itself is not simply awesome in HD with all the different angles and cutaways to the human drama?

Sorry about tossing the "lady" in there. That may have been borderline disprespectful. I don't mean to be that. I just think the network's coverage helps create new fans. People who aren't passionate fans (yet) don't want to hear a roundtable discussion by five sweaty public handicappers about pace meltdowns and Tomlinson ratings. No one wants to watch or listen to something over their head. Using said restaurant as another example, today my employees -- "forced" to watch all day Derby coverage began asking me questions about the sport, which was great (got to be big shot knowitall all day). They seemed to love it. There's a good chance a few will be tagging along with my brother the next time he hits up Raceway Park. Of the two guys that go with him, both will love it and one of them will probably go back on his own again. Eventually, that one guy will bring a few of his other buddies. All will have a good time, and one of those guys will come back again... etc.

Yeah....and CJ's potato salad was great! :D

Just breezed through it. It was nothing but fluff for the once a year horse racing crowd. I was actually suprised that there was no real feature on Devil May Care, but then I guess they would have had to get in to the whole Eight Belles tradgedy. I was happy for the guy with the bad hairpiece that won on Super Saver. But the real problem is that they don't promote the sport well enough. How bout instead of giving a guy 100k to make a bet. Give 400 people 250 dollars to play the pick four and see what happens. Show people that there are other bets that could be very profitable if played correctly. That's a more realistic scenario than regular people putting 100k on a horse to win. Once again the die hard fans get screwed having to endure with the fluff coverage and ridiculous time between the race. I wonder how many people think that's the way (talking about the time between races) it is at every track around the country every day of the week.

Don't forget the steamers, sausage and beans...and finding $700+ in my account!!!

Could they maybe mute the crowd during the call of the race. It's impossible to hear.

if this garbage they show is going to bring in more fans, which is what i keep hearing, when will that start to occur? hasn't happened in the last 20 years.

One thing I did like was after the race there were 2 or 3 minutes where no one said anything and they just showed Calvin and "the scene" of the Derby. Almost made you feel like you were there.

This from the NY Times today...

Women, who made up 52 percent of last year’s Derby viewership, have become crucial to boosting viewership.

Last year, NBC attracted 16.3 million viewers, the most in 20 years, to see the 50-1 long shot Mine That Bird win the Derby. When Rachel Alexandra won the Preakness, 10.9 million watched, the second most in 20 years.

“They’ve changed the way horse racing is presented,” said Evans, alluding to NBC’s Derby production and the series of pre-Derby prep races around the country that Churchill Downs and the network have collaborated on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/sp...tml?ref=sports

it's a sport that i can see women liking. i know i do...which is why i wish they'd focus more on the racing part of it. show some of the previous races from the horses, show them on the backside while talking to the trainers. if you get women interested in the actual racing, and not 'i'm wearing an outfit by so and so', you might see a return in future.

BUT, thing is, they want viewership, not more folks going to the track. nbc isn't in it to boost handle or attendance.

Ah, but then what does racing do with this once-a-year exposure? Nothing. Maybe that's the real problem. The sport's popularity peaks at the Derby, sharply declines through the Triple Crown series (unless, of course, a possible TC winner is headed to the Belmont), and then momentum abruptly halts as summer hits. Why horse racing doesn't put together three or four "supercards" (like the BC) and run them every three or four months to maintain momentum (Grand Slam of horse racing, anyone?) is beyond me...