She ran a monster race in the Cicada....

Than was laid off 2.5 months and responded with a 33 Beyer in some small stake Belmont Stakes weekend...when I singled her in some multi-win exotics.

She was 2nd in the Prioress at 19/1 one month later.

Bad example, the G1 Citation sucked too. The mid Atlantic has some awesome grass sprinters. That said, I dont think the new races should be G1.

Huh?

If you take a look at the lifetime past performances of the field for the Hollywood Turf Express you will see that those horses ended up in turf sprints because they were unsuccessful either on the dirt going short or on the turf going longer.

You missed my point completely.......and then chastised me. Much appreciated.

And, by the way, the Mid-Atlantic has a lot of " awesome " performances....that don't get duplicated in NY.

There are nine graded stakes for turf sprinters (all of which Grade 3's) - and honestly, isn't that nine races too many?

A Breeders Cup Turf Sprint...or anything that legitimizes turf sprints for horses age three and up is a bad idea.

I'd be in favor of a Breeders Cup Starter Allowance race - restricted to horses who raced for a tag of 25K or less during that racing season - before I would be a turf sprint.

A middle distance starter allowance race would feature a massively oversubscribed field of horses with forms dominated by winning performances at a VERY WIDE variety of race-tracks and distances....probably trained by a bunch of move-up artists and undesireables.

The real bright spot of that kind of race would be the fact that it would not siphon out contenders from other BC races. I'd rather see cheaper horses in razor sharp form get to run for a $1 million purse - than have the possibility of the fields for the existing Breeders Cup races being further watered down

It was an analogy Hubie Brown. You come up with a better one.

It is very hard to find quality races in this day of racing in late fall. The BC is becoming for horses who have not already cemented their stud value or for horses to go out in a blaze of glory. Heck, stud plans for War Pass have already been decided. If he goes on to win the Derby and the Travers then why run him in the BC Classic. It wouldn't add to his value.

One thing I would like to see is a race for 3 year olds only going 1 1/4. Then we could have a race soley for older horses going 1 1/4 miles. You can make an exception stating that if a 3 year old won any of the triple crown races he/she can run in the older horse race and receive a bonus if he/she wins.

I wonder if the success of the Dubai Festival has played into the plans of the BC. I remember the President of the BC stating that he would like to see the BC spread out over a three or four day period. Where on earth is the BC going to find horses to run in so many races that people are interested in seeing. We can barely get enough horses to compete in the BCC these days worth watching.

I am not a fan of what the BC does to racing but it is here to stay so they need to do something to make the racing more appealing to the betting public as well as to the non-betting public.

I personally like it as a one day event. I also think that it is easier to promote to the casual fan. Who is going to pay huge amounts of money for tickets to 4 days of racing? How many people ate the tickets for the first day in the monsoon this year? In my opinion a 3 year old race at 1 1/4 is a bad idea, even with the conditions you applied. So if Curlin and Street Sense go to the classic you are left with Hard Spun, AGS and a bunch of mediocore 3 year olds running in a BC race. What would have the Classic been if those horses would have opted for the 3 year old race? I just do not think that it would be good for the BC.

Good points and you are probably right. I am trying to come up with someway to increase the number of half-way decent entrants.

You know it's the Breeders Cup. Usually full fields, with the exception of the turf classic. European shippers, how will the 3 year olds fare, who's stretchin out, who is on the turf. There are plenty of storylines. Handicapping is tough enough, now 2 year old races and even worse synthetic surfaces. It's the Super Bowl of racing, it will always be exciting. Just as long as they do not dilute the product.

MaTH - you believe that the BC shouldn't be expanded to the possible dilution of fields? If the BC powers could come up with a way to expand the prodcut without diluting the fields, would you be in favor of that? I am in favor of expanding the BC format to 4 days. Europeans pay good money to come over here for the BC. Why not give them the opportunity to witness 3 or 4 great days of racing instead of just 2? I do not think that all BC races should be Grade I's. My feeling on racing in America is that the mid-level racing is more competitive that the high level of racing. I would not mind at all to see an evenly matched field of high level allowance horses and some Grade III horses compete

I agree, but unfortunately many people don't see it that way. One day of 8 or 9 Breeder's cup races is PLENTY! It's just nuts that people want to see this go to as many as 4 days.

Once upon a time, the Arlington Classic was indeed a classic race, a 10f dirt contest that was won by such horses as Blue Larkspur, Gallant Fox, Omaha, Challedon, Shut Out, and Twilight Tear. Even after it was shortened to a one-turn mile, it still attratcted champions -winners included Native Dancer, Nashua, T.V. Lark, Tom Rolfe, Buckpasser, Dr. Fager and Ack Ack. Then they started to play around with it, changed the distance and surface, dropped it a couple of years here and there....,

If there had been grading in the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s, the Arlington Classic would have been a deserving G1. The name meant something then; I hate to see track management squander the history inherent in grand old race names by giving them to less meaningful contests.

But that is what genetics will sometimes throw up. Even classic-type horses will sire sprinters because of 'genetic drift'. That was because the ancestral wild (not feral, like mustangs) horse didn't need top speed for more than 2 or 3 furlongs to put enough distance between them and a predator to escape. It took centuries, nay, millennia of human intervention in horse breeding to produce animals who could run at this speed over a distance of ground. If we suddenly turned all TBs into the wild and let them breed as they choose, in a hundred years none of them would be able to break 2:10 for 10f. Maybe not even 2:20.

I, by the way, have never been in favor of rewarding failed TBs with a million-dollar race in the form of the BC Sprint. Not failed racehorses, you notice, but horses who have failed the challenge of stretching their speed to classic distances, which defines the TB and separates it from its sub-breed, the running Quarter Horse. (Check out QH pedigrees - 75% or more of the names in them are known TBs, with many of the unknowns likely to be TBs taken West for breeding cavalry remounts.)

BUt that's what happened with the turf Mile. There were precious few turf mile stakes races run in the USA before the Breeders' Cup started, and none of them respected. Mostly they were run as part of series of prep races for the BIG turf race of the meet at 12f (or 14f at Santa Anita), or as a consolation race for lacking the stamina for the BIG race. The Dixie Hcp was 12f on turf. The Hialeah Turf Cup was 12f. The Hollywood Invitational Turf H was 12f. Turf racing was all about classic distance (12f) racing until the Turf Mile came along. Now all the big racetracks have big turf mile races which have, in some cases, stolen the thunder from the longer distance races.

The BC is insidious; it has shaped the entire US racing program to its format, to the detriment of racing as a whole. Why were the Jockey Club Gold Cup, Vosburgh S, Super Derby, and others shortened? To get in line with the BC.

Very good point.

I think 4 days of the breeders cup is a horrible idea. If you want to try to lure Europeans here for American racing, then promote things like Saratoga and even Del Mar. Here is a novel idea, promote here in America too. That is 30 days of good racing. I just always worry about the state of horse racing in the U.S. and not too many people (outside of this board) will or even can take 2-4 days off to go to the track. After this year, who is going to lay all that money out for tickets for four days of racing.? I liked the BC when it they were using the one day format. I can live with the 2 day deal, but I can not see them expanding it any further without diluting the product. So for the 9-11 races they want to run, i think they should just have it one day. As far as the graded stautus of these races, I just think that it just doesn't matter to a large percentage of people outside the industry. When these people see and talk about a horse like Curlin, they do not say that he has won 3 G1 races. They remember he won the Preakness and the BC classic. I bet you half of them do not even know what a G1 race is. But inside the industry i can understand people not wanting to make some of the races G1's. Bottom Line is that personally I thought that there was nothing wrong with the format and now they are trying to fix it just so they can make more money.