like i said two pages ago, we don't go there because of $$..we ship to dubai, to japan...cause they have the $$$$...we have plenty of turf racing with big purses here...hell, euros HAVE the arc and still come here to the bc...for the $$!

as for breeding....bid, who has been the TOP sire overseas for about 15 years???? sadlers wells. he's by northern dancer. danehill, second all these years to sadlers wells...by danzig, who's by northern dancer. many of the top horses overseas share the same blood as our horses here do. so much for the breeding aspect! storm cat, top sire, by storm bird by...northern dancer. euros come to kentucky every year to buy up turf horses. we obviously can breed them, they take them home and win with them!

I think you could bring a Euro trainer over to prep a serious 2 year old for American classics.. Its just not feasible to ship the horse over just to run, while prepping out of the country.

Oracle, do you know of anyone interested in a nice 2 year old

MESSAGE ME NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!
DO I HAVE ANYONE INTERESTED!!????? YES!!!

Oracle I get it, this game isnt about winning money. If it were about winning money nobody would be in the game. Most people that own racehorses are interested in the prestige, not the money. They have money. Whether they run for 100 thousand, or half a million, that isnt going to change their life. You dont think a big time American owner would LOVE to have a horse go over and win the Arc, or any big euro race for that matter? Cmon, you know they would, its not about the money when you are talking about races like that, its the prestige. That being said we couldnt go win it

How many owners over here do you deal with? Man, you'd be surprised how much they care about money!!
And if you know owners who don't? Could you please email me their phone numbers right away!!! LOL!!

we couldnt?

you may want to go to pedigree query dot com....check out the pedigrees of some of the horses going to the arc...

deep impact
rail link
pride
sixties icon

just for starters...

Oracle, A lot more than you think.

150k yearling purchase as well on that message I sent you. If you need a cut, give me a fax.

No I don't need a cut, message me back though. I knew who it was without needing a name or a cut just on the stats.

I sent you a new message, he ran second in that race, not third.

you would think that would be the case but it's usually not. how do you think they got all that money? why do so many lottery winners end up broke? people who have money hate to fritter it away. they know how to make it, and they know how to keep it. lottery winners who were previously poor have all that money and think 'hey why not buy my buddy a new car...i've got more than enough money'. in reality, if they knew how to manage their newfound riches they could buy their buddy that new car. these are not hard and fast rules but hopefully you see my point.

Sunday the very wealthy people I have as friends or clients are exactly as you describe. They made their money in the first place by being business smart and having accepted principles that they live by and exercise in business.
No matter how passionate or generous they may be, you just don't see them throwing away insane amounts of money or making bad business deals.
I wouldn't say any that I know are in the game to make money, they realize its pretty hard to do that. But they tend to have a set figure in their minds as to how far in the hole they are willing to go in the game, either in general or per year. All they really wanna do is have a lotta fun and not lose too much money. But to play the game and stay within their principles, they have to take the rare valuable horses they get lucky with and maximize their earning potential and more importantly their residual value in the shed. Most tend to reinvest those scores right back in the game. But.................
they didn't get rich by making bad decisions.

Sadly, Iffraaj is out (but Librettist back in).....
http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/sho...2558#post62558

To Conclude
 

I've read this thread with interest.
Personally I think its a little childish saying "we've got better horses than you," etc etc. But ultimately the racing scenes that have developed either side of the Atlantic have done so pretty much in complete isolation of one another. That's not to say Europeans don't buy American bred horses at the sales...they tend to be the fastest, and we know that these days the race is to the quick. That's also not to say that Americans don't purchase proven top European performers to go and compete over there. Why not? And then there's the occasional raid made on an American race by a European-trained horse, largely because of the money that can be won over there.

Oracle repeatedly stated that money was the be all and end all. In this regard there are parallels with the Ryder Cup. Perhaps its the case that the American psyche covets the almighty dollar above all else, and cannot find motivation for anything so trivial as prestige. That said, we know the same isn't the case of Sheikh Mohammed, but that's only because he was born as one of the richest men on the planet!

I prefer European racing because of the variety, the fact that speed hasn't become (as much) so critical, and at the expense of stamina. That you can watch racing at courses as diverse as Newmarket, Epsom, Chester, Goodwood, Longchamp or Leopardstown from one day to the next without getting the impression that you could be at any other track. That said, the uniformity of US tracks must surely help those looking to make a profit from their punting.

I also like the fact that the authorities haven't bowed to pressure and felt obliged to legalise the use of those drugs that have become an integral part of the sport in the US.

Most of all, however, I like the fact that Flat racing dies a death in October/early November and jump racing takes over until late April. I wouldn't have my winters any other way!

Apparently, nobody paid attention to me on the other thread so I'll post this again over here. The record of horses that come to the BC Mile directly from the QE II:

1985-(1st) Shadeed.......4th at 5/1 (moved to third by dq)

1987-(1st) Milligram......13th at 7/1
1987-(2nd) Miesque......won the BC
1987-(3rd) Sonic Lady....3rd in BC

1988-(1st) Warning........11th at 9/5 (favorite)

1989-(1st) Zilzal............6th at even money (favorite)
1989-(4th) Green Line Express......11th in BC

1990-(1st) Markofdistinction.........7th at 7/1

1991-(2nd) Kooyonga..........13th in BC
1991-(3rd) Shadayid..............7th in BC
1991-(4th) Second Set...........12th in BC

1992-(2nd) Brief Truce..........3rd in BC

1993-(1st) Bigstone.........6th at 12/1
1993-(2nd) Barathea........5th in BC

1994-(2nd) Barathea........won the BC
1994-(5th) Distant View......7th in BC
1994-(7th) East of the Moon.......12th in BC

1995-(2nd) Ridgewood Pearl.........won the BC

1996-(1st) Mark of Esteem.......7th at 6/5 (favorite)

1998-(1st) Desert Prince........14th at 3/1
1998-(3rd) Second Empire........6th in BC
1998-(4th) Cape Cross..........9th in BC
1998-(5th) Among Men.........11th in BC

2001-(2nd) Noverre...........7th in BC
2001-(4th) Bach...............3rd in BC

2004-(8th) Diamond Green........8th in BC
2004-(9th) Antonius Pius......2nd in BC

So u can see here that there have been eight QE II winners that have come over and run in the BC Mile as their next start. All eight have lost. Three of them have been favored and one was a second choice. The average price they've gone off at is $4.88/1 The BEST finish by any of the eight is a THIRD (by dq). This list doesn't even include Selkirk, the 1992 QE II winner that ran in another race before the BC then came over and lost the Mile (5th as the 7/2 second choice.

My point here is that winning the QE II has been a virtual kiss of death when it comes to the BC Mile. U have a much better chance of cashing a winning ticket with a horse that is coming out of the race that DIDN'T win it. Three QE II losers have come back to win the Mile. Ironically, all three of those horses were coming off of second place finishes in the QE II.

Overall, there have been 27 horses that have run in the BC Mile after making their last start in the QE II. They have an overall record of 3-1-4.

Play George Washington at your own risk. I'll be playing Araafa, who by the way, has already beaten George Washington this year once. And the price will be much better.

I think freshness is very important in the BC Mile, and generally those QEII winners you mention have run there at the end of a busy European season. In George's favour is the fact that he has run just four times, with an extended mid-summer break. This will be just his third outing off the back of that break.
Araafa beat George in the Irish 2,000 where they encountered heavy ground and, yes, if those conditions came up at CD (unlikely in the extreme) I'd consider playing Araafa. But George has beaten that horse twice, both times in the style of an exceptional miler. There are questions over his temperament, although I think they're receding as the season goes on, luck in running always plays a huge part around the frying pan-tight US courses and 2/1 (the best price on offer, as short as 5/4) doesn't offer value. However, he has put up the 2 best miling performances in the world this year, and, whichever way you look at it is by some way the most likely winner of the race.
Put simply it's illogical to say that Araafa has a better chance in the BCM just because he didn't win at Ascot, when the winner beat him senseless.

That's all well and good, but no horse with a RAN in the Dam Sire line has won the Derby, no horse with a 5 week layoff had won the Derby in a bunch of years, until Barbaro...I wouldn't use one race as a reason why they can't win another race, it's coincidence, not because of running in that race...Some horse will eventually win the BCJ and Derby, it's going to happen...

U may say it's illogical but I don't know about that. I mean, facts are facts and so far, the fact is that eight times the QE II winner has come over and eight times they've been soundly defeated. By contrast, seven times the QE II runner-up has come over and they have three wins and a third. This kind of record sounds eerily similar to that of the Arc. No winner of that race has ever come over and won the BC Turf but six Arc losers have won the race. Are either of these things coincidences? Maybe. Maybe not. I think the most compelling reason for why George Washington can be the one to break the trend is the one u gave about him not having had a long and tiring season. It's my opinion that u have to be in top shape to handle a course and race like Ascot's QE II and asking a horse to reproduce such an effort so soon in today's game is perhaps asking too much. I also think that because of the course layout at Ascot, the winners of this race are usually horses that are probably better suited to 9-10f in American races. Notice the names of Giant's Causeway (2nd by a neck in BC Classic) and Falbrav (3rd by a head in BC Turf) as well as Rakti, Starcraft, and Dubai Millennium. I think all of those horses were better at longer distances than at 8f. I think that the mile at Ascot is more of a test of stamina than it is here where speed is king.

Of course it could happen and GW could be the one to do it. And obviously, it's a small sample size from which to make such a bold statement as "he won't win this race because he won the QE II." I'm not making that statement here though. Only saying that history thus far is stacked against him and I don't think that I'm going to be anywhere close to willing to take the short price that he's sure to be to see if he's going to be the one to buck the trend.

Of course the BCM shapes more like a 7f race, which is why I liked Ifraaj for this year's renewal before his setback. But by the same token, George Washington certainly wont be beaten for a lack of speed. O'Brien's one worry before the Guineas was whether he had the stamina for 1m such is his speed.

my money will
be on george.