A little off the topic but why are mile races now considered sprints? I mean it is a great accomplishment to win the Met Mile or Cigar Mile but theses are NOT sprints! TVG sponsors the sprint so I guess if they say it should count.....

The Breeders' Cup's problems start from the name - BREEDERS' Cup. The program was designed originally to create ONE big race that would have enough purse money to tempt owners to keep from retiring their star 3yos before the end of the year, or to keep them in training for their 4yo season. It would be funded by money from stallion owners, primarily the big name stallions whose sons were the prime candidates for early retirement, and foal nominations, mostly from high-end ffarms.

Unfortunately, horses like John Henry, by a mid-level stallion, or horses from other parts of the world, were put behind the eight-ball from the beginning, since they nor their sires were likely to be nominated and so had to pay outrageous supplemental fees that generally weren't worth the gamble. The Breeders Cup has never been the level playing field that one ought to have for determining championships.

The most damaging Breeders' Cup additions to the original plan are the sprint and the 2yo races. I remember when sprint races were merely preps for longer races and the champion sprinter award was frequently a consolation prize for a miler who couldn't last 10f. When grading started there were NO G1 sprints and only a couple of G2s; now one sees them every third weekend. These days people BREED for BC sprint winners, instead of getting sprinters as a normal byproduct of trying to breed classic winners. And don't get me started on the damage to 2yos knees that 2-turn races from early September onward can do as youngsters are prepped for the BC.

Actually, one turn miles were considered sprints a long time ago. And the US sprint title has always been "sprinter and/or miler" - just look at the list of winners in the past.

Very good point.

Sprint should mean sprint. Since 1980 only 2 horses that were named eclipse winners in the sprint catagory could be considered sprinters/milers Gulch and Precisionist maybe Smile also and all of those horses won the B.cup the year they won. I know we dont have a miler class like Europe but One turn miles should not be taken into consideration for the sprit title.

Don't forget Orientate, Rubiano, Artax, all milers who took no prisoners at 6f or 7f either. The point of the Met Mile and Cigar Mile is that they are around one-turn and so attract a lot of the better speed horses, especially the ones who are better at 7f than 6f.

Orientate and Artax were never really effective over 7 furlongs during their eclipse seasons, therefore were not recieving votes based upon their success at distances greater than 7 furlongs. Rubiano won 4 grade 1 races at 7 furlongs during his championship season.

All nice horses but that is not what I'm talking about.
Winning a one turn mile race should not be considered when voting for SPRINT awards. I mean if you won the Carter then went on to win the Turf Classic and BC Turf, the Carter should not be considered when voting for a Turf eclipse.

Well what if a horse won the Metropolitan Mile, Carter, Cigar and then the Breeders Cup Sprint--should that horse win the eclipse as top sprinter?

It makes me sad as well Boss. It reminds me of the old commercial where there is the Native American guy and he sees people littering and he starts to cry. We are the Native American Boss!

Please Boss, regale them with tales of yesteryear. Give them a small glimmer of what it was like when it was still a game.

Winning the Cigar and BC sprint is as unlikely as winning the Carter and BC Turf but the Carter and BC Sprint are really the only sprint wins. That being said everything depends on the competition. If another horse were to win the Count Fleet, Forgeo, De Francis, Bing Crosby, Phoenix, and Vosburgh and didn't compete in the BC Sprint (maybe injured) who is the champion sprinter?
Better arguement is if Horse wins Met, Cigar and BC Sprint without another Gr 1. sprint win vs. above horse?

I would go with the Met, Cigar and BC Sprint.

Boss-

I am BRUCE. Speaking of which, I need your expertise. I am taking you up on your all expenses paid trip to Las Vegas tomorrow and am in desperate need of some plays both pro and college. Will you post some for us morons?

Glad you are doing well boss.:)

In '04 Afleet Alex was robbed when they gave Declan's Moon the 2yr colt award. One of the biggest screw ups in system to date.

I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'd probably agree with you. I remember being pretty impressed by Pico Central that year.

Overall, though, I don't think the BC has resulted in too many wrong horses winning an Eclipse.

--Dunbar

Speightstown had a better record at the true sprint distance of 6F. He was very consistent all year and at times brilliant.
He also won far and away the most important sprint race of the year, the BC sprint. I have no problem with Speighstown getting the nod. The connections could have run in the BC if they really wanted the award.
I dont consider the Met Mile a sprint.

Thats complete nonsense. Pico dusted him off and squashed him like a bug in the vosburgh. Pico skipped the cup because it woulda cost them a ton to supplement him.
he as absolutely incredible that year winning the Vosburgh, Carter, met Mile and I believe the San Carlos. Ridiculous!!!!! And I screamed bloody murder about it at the time. The BC doesnt equal a whole year.

Welcome back Merasq, its good to see you posting again. We need more people that want to talk about the races themself, rather than polycrap and stallion options.

Hard knocker. Game old campaigner. Whatever that means.