Who awoke Campo out of his slumber

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

It's not just the lack of marathons, but the entire shortening of the condition book in NY. In the winter, there is the abundance of races at a mile/mile and seventy yards instead of the 8.5F and 9F races that used to be a staple on the inner dirt; races at those distances are now scarcely run in overnight races.

At Belmont, it's not just the turf sprints but the awkardly positioned 9F on the inner turf instead of the "old" 10F and 11F races that we used to frequently see. And I bet you can count on one hand the number of main track, overnight races carded at a distance over a mile on the main track.

The lack of variety and shortening of distance has been in evidence the first week of the Saratoga race. Taking out 2YO races and off the turfers, the racing office has carded 10 races at 6F, none at 6.5F, and only 3 at 7F.

NYRA can talk about the "distance" purse supplements as evidence of its "commitment" to promoting distance racing (post-Eight Belles). But if this is a good idea, why do it only at Saratoga? Why not do it year-round? In reality, NYRA's racing program, to the frustration of many horsemen (and in the name of the almighty field size), caters to speed, speed and more speed.

All of this may be true but NYRA still runs more distance races than anywhere else. Some people want to call a mile a sprint when talking about year end awards yet very few tracks write ANY races longer than 1 1/16th on a regular basis. How can you consider a mile a sprint (which it most certainly isnt) when the most typical distance race is 1 1/16th or 1 mile 70yards?

The CDI tracks (CD, FG, AP, Crc) almost never write longer races. While people often complain about this, the tracks claim they cant fill them. But if they dont write them, why would they expect owners to buy or breed such horses? It is the chicken and the egg quandry. If they write enough of them and they are weak races, eventually the horseman will figure out that they are weak and look to acquire better horses to try to win the easier races.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The CDI tracks (CD, FG, AP, Crc) almost never write longer races.

But these tracks (AP and CRC, certainly) still offer more in terms of variety than NYRA. My intent was not to focus solely on longer races but to also highlight the lack of variety.

AP regularly offers 5.5F, 6.5F and 7F sprints for older horses, for example. This makes the sprints interesting, as there are horses that just can't handle even a .5F difference. This not only works well for the astute handicapper, who notes these preferences/limitations but also for the connections, who can cash a check every so often by running their horse at its preferred distance. Why not reward these people for all the times they're running their horses in what are not optimal distances for them? In other words, filling tracks' cards.
At NYRA tracks, if your horse can't make it to 6F or can't quite get up going 6F, you're basically ****ed. Why is that?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

But these tracks (AP and CRC, certainly) still offer more in terms of variety than NYRA. My intent was not to focus solely on longer races but to also highlight the lack of variety.

AP regularly offers 5.5F, 6.5F and 7F sprints for older horses, for example. This makes the sprints interesting, as there are horses that just can't handle even a .5F difference. This not only works well for the astute handicapper, who notes these preferences/limitations but also for the connections, who can cash a check every so often by running their horse at its preferred distance. Why not reward these people for all the times they're running their horses in what are not optimal distances for them? In other words, filling tracks' cards.
At NYRA tracks, if your horse can't make it to 6F or can't quite get up going 6F, you're basically ****ed. Why is that?

I never understood why tracks didnt write more 6 1/2 furlong races?
Or why as soon as July ends so many tracks refuse to write any short races for 2 year olds? The later developing ones would benefit from a start at a short distance like 5f but they stop writing them.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

While people often complain about this, the tracks claim they cant fill them. But if they dont write them, why would they expect owners to buy or breed such horses? It is the chicken and the egg quandry. If they write enough of them and they are weak races, eventually the horseman will figure out that they are weak and look to acquire better horses to try to win the easier races.

Agreed. Is it that the races don't fill, or that the racing office doesn't get as many starters as those in management obsessed about field size would like? I've often said that, if they start to let these races go with six instead of insisting upon eight, eventually horsemen will notice that may be easier checks out there in distance races and find horses for such races.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Agreed. Is it that the races don't fill, or that the racing office doesn't get as many starters as those in management obsessed about field size would like? I've often said that, if they start to let these races go with six instead of insisting upon eight, eventually horsemen will notice that may be easier checks out there in distance races and find horses for such races.

And the fact that executive turnover is so high at CDI and Magna ensures that the short term objectives of larger field size always trump any longer term planning. It isnt that field size isnt immensely important but if you state you want to reverse the trend of shorter races then you have to write longer ones.