Liam's Map=Cross Traffic part 2?

[Port Conway Lane]

I don't get it. Is the race to blame,the distance,the connections? It adds a third dirt race for 3 and up at a middle distance. If you eliminate the race you have a six furlong sprint and a mile and a quarter route for all 3@up males to point for.
I wonder how all the horses that should've pointed for the sprint (including 2 horses that actually won the mile) would have been any better off being an also ran in a different race. After all they all couldn't have won it.

As for Liam's Map I would want him in the Classic but if the connections decide a daughter of Trippi wouldn't be able to produce a 1 1/4 racehorse (or whatever their reasoning) I just accept it and move on. Eliminating the Mile won't force the hand of any connections to run in the Classic. They'll simply find another place and time to run.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

I don't get it. Is the race to blame,the distance,the connections? It adds a third dirt race for 3 and up at a middle distance. If you eliminate the race you have a six furlong sprint and a mile and a quarter route for all 3@up males to point for.
I wonder how all the horses that should've pointed for the sprint (including 2 horses that actually won the mile) would have been any better off being an also ran in a different race. After all they all couldn't have won it.

As for Liam's Map I would want him in the Classic but if the connections decide a daughter of Trippi wouldn't be able to produce a 1 1/4 racehorse (or whatever their reasoning) I just accept it and move on. Eliminating the Mile won't force the hand of any connections to run in the Classic. They'll simply find another place and time to run.

A daughter of Yankee Gentleman produced the Belmont winner, oh and the KD

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by freddymo

A daughter of Yankee Gentleman produced the Belmont winner, oh and the KD

Yeah, not that I pay any attention to that. I read somewhere that he had the worst breeding of any of the last 50 belmont winners. Goes to show ya.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

I don't get it. Is the race to blame,the distance,the connections? It adds a third dirt race for 3 and up at a middle distance. If you eliminate the race you have a six furlong sprint and a mile and a quarter route for all 3@up males to point for.

Who cares about all 3@up males? The BC is a "championship" event. That means Grade 1, top class horses. Half the Dirt Mile winners never won a Grade 1 before or after.

I wonder how all the horses that should've pointed for the sprint (including 2 horses that actually won the mile) would have been any better off being an also ran in a different race. After all they all couldn't have won it.

What do you mean they couldn't have won it? What about Precisionist? What about Gulch? What about Dancing Spree? What about Smile?

As for Liam's Map I would want him in the Classic but if the connections decide a daughter of Trippi wouldn't be able to produce a 1 1/4 racehorse (or whatever their reasoning) I just accept it and move on. Eliminating the Mile won't force the hand of any connections to run in the Classic. They'll simply find another place and time to run.

Yeah, they can race on the undercard where they belong.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Who cares about all 3@up males? The BC is a "championship" event. That means Grade 1, top class horses. Half the Dirt Mile winners never won a Grade 1 before or after.

Well then I guess the mile doesn't diminish the Classic.

What do you mean they couldn't have won it? What about Precisionist? What about Gulch? What about Dancing Spree? What about Smile?

I'm not talking about the horses that won the sprint (and you have no idea what race those winners would have opted for) I'm speaking of the recent years you cited in which multiple horses were listed that you claim should have run in the sprint.

Yeah, they can race on the undercard where they belong.

It simply doesn't force them to run in the Classic. Blame the connections if you're looking for a scapegoat.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

Well then I guess the mile doesn't diminish the Classic.

Wrong. Preakness winner Shackleford, Travers/Woodward winner Alpha, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Mast Track, Goodwood winner Well Armed, Travers winner Golden Ticket, Donn winner Hymn Book, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Rail Trip, Haskell winner Verrazano all had credentials for the Classic.

I'm not talking about the horses that won the sprint (and you have no idea what race those winners would have opted for) I'm speaking of the recent years you cited in which multiple horses were listed that you claim should have run in the sprint.

Ok. So how do you know Goldencents, Gayego, Vineyard Haven, The Factor, Pyro, Jersey Town, Caleb's Posse, and Aikenite wouldn't have won the Sprint?

And just because they "all couldn't have won", does that justify the ducking and diving?

It simply doesn't force them to run in the Classic. Blame the connections if you're looking for a scapegoat.

The fact that the race carries instant Grade 1 status when it should not, has Breeder's Cup attached to its name when it is no more than a glorified undercard race is what detracts from the Classic, because one or maybe two Classic and Sprint horses looking for an easier race--the antithesis of what the BC should be about--inevitably reroute to it.

It is a bad race, and the results of the runnings thus far prove the point.

[Port Conway Lane]

[quote=RolloTomasi;1042483]

Wrong. Preakness winner Shackleford, Travers/Woodward winner Alpha, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Mast Track, Goodwood winner Well Armed, Travers winner Golden Ticket, Donn winner Hymn Book, Hollywood Gold Cup winner Rail Trip, Haskell winner Verrazano all had credentials for the Classic.

This is contrary to your point that there are bad horses in the mile. Or are you claiming that because the winners of the mile were bad horses that the race was bad, or the field quality was bad? Or that the good horses in the mile were placed at the wrong distance? I fail to follow your reasoning, it is contradictory.

Ok. So how do you know Goldencents, Gayego, Vineyard Haven, The Factor, Pyro, Jersey Town, Caleb's Posse, and Aikenite wouldn't have won the Sprint?

First of all two of those won the mile so they have no regrets. As for the others who knows? The fact is you named multiple horses in the same year that should have run in the sprint. My point is that not all of the ones you named could have won in the same year. So yes I could say that some of the ones you mentioned would not have won, take your choice.

And just because they "all couldn't have won", does that justify the ducking and diving?

The mile gives trainers an option to run their horses at a distance that may fit their horse best. Are you telling me that American racehorses are either a
6 furlong sprinter or a 1 1/4 mile router with nothing in between?

The fact that the race carries instant Grade 1 status when it should not, has Breeder's Cup attached to its name when it is no more than a glorified undercard race is what detracts from the Classic, because one or maybe two Classic and Sprint horses looking for an easier race--the antithesis of what the BC should be about--inevitably reroute to it.

Back to the horses you named at the top. For whatever reason the connections chose to run in the mile. It doesn't mean that the absence of the mile would ensure their participation in the Classic.(especially Verrazano)

It is a bad race, and the results of the runnings thus far prove the point.

Prove what point?? You named both quality runners and others that weren't.
Bad horses winning and Quality horses winning. Bad horses losing to good horses and vice versa. What exactly makes it a bad race and how do the results prove anything?

[cakes44]

I love the BC dirt mile. Also, I doubt there will ever be many people arguing to get rid of the Turf Mile and still keeping the Turf Sprint.

[RHT2004]

I said this in the AP thread, but are we sure Honor Code is pointing to the Classic? His next race is the Kelso.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

This is contrary to your point that there are bad horses in the mile. Or are you claiming that because the winners of the mile were bad horses that the race was bad, or the field quality was bad? Or that the good horses in the mile were placed at the wrong distance? I fail to follow your reasoning, it is contradictory.

I didn't say there were only bad horses in the Dirt Mile. The point has always been that the Dirt Mile "dilutes" the other races. And in and of itself it also tends to be a diluted race, just as I explained earlier, as it showcases older, tailing off runners, midwest Derby winners, and one or two top class horses ducking the main competition.

These are supposed to be championship events, not simply decent races.

First of all two of those won the mile so they have no regrets. As for the others who knows? The fact is you named multiple horses in the same year that should have run in the sprint. My point is that not all of the ones you named could have won in the same year. So yes I could say that some of the ones you mentioned would not have won, take your choice.

The connections Goldencents and Caleb's Posse arguably cost themselves Eclipse awards by avoiding the Sprint.

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

The mile gives trainers an option to run their horses at a distance that may fit their horse best. Are you telling me that American racehorses are either a
6 furlong sprinter or a 1 1/4 mile router with nothing in between?

For the most part, racing in the US (and on dirt) is delineated very simply between sprinters and routers. Does that mean the Classic needs to be 10f? Not necessarily. It could be 9f, especially considering the impact that the desire for speed and precocity by breeders has had on the industry.

How many Grade 1 races exist that are a flat mile and for open 3yo and upwards? For that matter, is there a Champion Miler Eclipse?

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

Back to the horses you named at the top. For whatever reason the connections chose to run in the mile. It doesn't mean that the absence of the mile would ensure their participation in the Classic.(especially Verrazano)

Yeah, the Preakness winner, the Travers winner, the Hollywood Gold Cup winner, the Woodward winner fit and race ready all would have opted out of the Classic on racing's "biggest day".

Prove what point?? You named both quality runners and others that weren't.
Bad horses winning and Quality horses winning. Bad horses losing to good horses and vice versa. What exactly makes it a bad race and how do the results prove anything?

The results prove it because no Eclipse champions have won the Dirt Mile and only one prior Eclipse champion even bothered to compete in it.

Simply put, the BC races should be deep quality fields from top to bottom. Races that bring together aging, tailed off runners, perennial also-rans, Grade 2 types, and a ducking and diving top class horse do not belong on the main card.

Again, these are supposed to be championship events.

[Jasper131]

Along the same lines, there should be more than a $500,000 difference in purse between the Sprint ($1.5 mil) and the Dirt Mile ($1 mil), in my opinion.

[Port Conway Lane]

[quote=RolloTomasi;1042495]

I didn't say there were only bad horses in the Dirt Mile. The point has always been that the Dirt Mile "dilutes" the other races. And in and of itself it also tends to be a diluted race, just as I explained earlier, as it showcases older, tailing off runners, midwest Derby winners, and one or two top class horses ducking the main competition.

The connections of the horses who "departed" the other 2 races must not have thought too highly of their chances. This probably has much more to do with their horses ability at a given distance rather than "ducking". Again, absence of the Mile doesn't force the hand.

For the most part, racing in the US (and on dirt) is delineated very simply between sprinters and routers. Does that mean the Classic needs to be 10f? Not necessarily. It could be 9f, especially considering the impact that the desire for speed and precocity by breeders has had on the industry.

How many Grade 1 races exist that are a flat mile and for open 3yo and upwards? For that matter, is there a Champion Miler Eclipse?

Basically you are saying there are only 14 qualified male routers in the country worthy of competing at the BC.
I disagree.

Yeah, the Preakness winner, the Travers winner, the Hollywood Gold Cup winner, the Woodward winner fit and race ready all would have opted out of the Classic on racing's "biggest day".

but they were aging, tailed off runners, perennial also-rans, Grade 2 types, and a ducking and diving top class horse who didn't belong anyway.

The results prove it because no Eclipse champions have won the Dirt Mile and only one prior Eclipse champion even bothered to compete in it.

Not surprising as eclipse champions are not a dime a dozen. Year in and year out you'll be lucky to get 3 on the whole 2 day event.

The connections Goldencents and Caleb's Posse arguably cost themselves Eclipse awards by avoiding the Sprint.

Maybe,maybe not. Eclipse awards is what they is, and if either horse could have won the eclipse then according to your criteria the quality of the mile isn't as bad as you make it out to be. Championship Event.