[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

that I thought the "Win and your in" concept was redundant and pretty stupid. There are virtually no horses that win these types of races that couldnt run in the BC anyway. And really I dont think many people pay much attention to the whole program anyway. But I am really interested to find out what this quote means by Hayward form the TU piece...


"The first Saturday of the meet was top heavy with stakes races because of the Breeders' Cup Win And You're In promotion. The first Spa Saturday featured the Grade I Whitney, Grade I Go for Wand, Grade I Diana and Grade II Vanderbilt.

That won't happen next year. Hayward said the Breeders' Cup people already have told him there will be no Win and You're In here.

"We were told they aren't going to do any races at Saratoga or Arlington in the summer," Hayward said."


So my question is are they scrapping the program or is the Arlington Million, Secretariat, Beverly D and Saratoga stakes excluded from the program?
This will be interesting for sure.


http://timesunion.com/AspStories/sto...ategory=SPORTS

My first thought is that they wouldn't scrap the program this fast. They've spent a lot on promoting and advertising it so I don't think they'd give up on it yet. So in trying to figure out what could happen, I came up with this possible situation. As you said earlier, the races they were using, those winners were virtually assured of getting in anyway so making them "Win and You're In" basically was pointless. So maybe what they will do next year is make some of the less prominent races into program races. This MIGHT have a positive effect. While top races at a track like Saratoga or the fall Belmont meeting don't need to add extra incentive to attract top horses, other races do. By adding the "Win and You're In" to some second tier races, perhaps it will help to get better horses into those races. Also, doing this might make some of those horses that would have been virtually guaranteed before....a little less guaranteed. Maybe it means that, whereas in previous years, if they had won the Whitney, they could rest assured they'd be in, now they might have to run in the Woodward or JCGC and put in a good performance because the competition for the open slots is that much tighter. On the negative side, the competition is so thin these days that you have to wonder if it's wise to further dilute the product by taking any horses away from the top races?