Belmont Entries for 5/29.... Very Poor

[philcski]

I don't like the card either, but I understand why it's bad. There's the biggest day of the year in New York coming up next Saturday and obviously the appeal of running on that day (+ the added overnight purse money) trumps. That being said... I think it's OK to call a spade a spade. This is NOT a good card for a Saturday at Belmont Park. It's becoming more and more common that this is what we get from NYRA, unfortunately.

This sport needs a commissioner in the worst way. If something doesn't change the tracks in areas with a population will cease to exist and all that will be left is Indiana Downs and other tracks supported by rural degenerate meth-riddled slots/table players.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

This sport needs a commissioner in the worst way. If something doesn't change the tracks in areas with a population will cease to exist and all that will be left is Indiana Downs and other tracks supported by rural degenerate meth-riddled slots/table players.

I think what you're trying to say is this... and I agree with you

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Awful. But really I deserve to lose playing a $25k maiden claimer on the turf.

It's like asking them to take your money. If the cards continue to be this horrible in New York they might as well throw another $25 million to solve the problem.

Very true. I want to play New York.

The current trend of cheap claimers with 25%> scratches is extremely disconcerting. And it's happening not only in New York but also Kentucky and California.

Drastic changes need to happen in order for these tracks to survive. The first move in the right direction would be to boot the IRS out of the game.

[NoLuvForPletch]

My opinion, as small amount of respect that it might get, is that they are running an awful lot of maiden races these days at BEL.

Last Sunday's card was particularly disturbing, 5 Maiden races (3msw, 2 mcl), 4 claiming races at 25k and down, and an allowance race. That's a Sunday card in May in NY?

Overall in May of the 160 races run, a total of 60 have been Maiden races (30 msw, 30 mcl). 37%

But in the past week or so the 19th-26th the numbers increase to 43% and instead of a 50-50 split btwn msw and mcl we've had 8 msw and 16 mcl, including 5 maiden claiming races on yesterday's card.

While some of these races might make for good betting races (if you like throwing darts), the quality is just not there.

[Travis Stone]

This is not just a Belmont trend, this is an industry trend. The lone exception is a one-year expcetion, and that's Monmouth (but they're not all allowance races either).

We are right in the middle of a changing shift in the overall quality of horse flesh this sport is producing.

Quantity (at the expense of quality) is becoming a big problem, especially when you consider breeder awards etc.

It makes more sense to breed 10 mares to a $2,000 stud than one mare to a $20,000 stud. The 10 mares, when factoring in rewards, have a greater chance of positive return than the one.

This weekend I'll see horses run for more money as Louisiana-breds than non-La-breds which are running for less but are likely faster.

The result of all this is cheaper races, which we have to get used to for the time being, from the top to the bottom.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by NoLuvForPletch

My opinion, as small amount of respect that it might get, is that they are running an awful lot of maiden races these days at BEL.

Last Sunday's card was particularly disturbing, 5 Maiden races (3msw, 2 mcl), 4 claiming races at 25k and down, and an allowance race. That's a Sunday card in May in NY?

Overall in May of the 160 races run, a total of 60 have been Maiden races (30 msw, 30 mcl). 37%

But in the past week or so the 19th-26th the numbers increase to 43% and instead of a 50-50 split btwn msw and mcl we've had 8 msw and 16 mcl, including 5 maiden claiming races on yesterday's card.

While some of these races might make for good betting races (if you like throwing darts), the quality is just not there.

It's not just that they're running a lot of maiden races or the same horses seem to be running all the time. It's more about the lack of quality in these maiden fields. By this I mean, for the most part, that there are some very bad horses running. I bet a lot of cheap tracks (relatively) so it's not about quality for me. What it's about is whether there are horses in a given race that have ABILITY. Too often at NYRA, presently, these maiden fields resemble the maiden fields of the AQU INNER --- there's no form to go by (other than NUMBERS --- for horses that are getting gapped.) It's about competition within races not about field size or quality of field.

Moreover, NYRA isn't the only track that has a limited pool of horses to deal with. So, it's common to see the same horses over and over. Yet other racing secretaries seem to find ways of keeping these races both interesting and competitive, and, more importantly, BETABLE. What they do is switch up on the distances. So, for example, over at CRC, you have the same plugs squaring off every 7-10 days but one week they're sprinting over 5.5F, next time they're going 7F, then 6F, then 6.5F or any combination of these. Campo still thinks he's under AQU INNER constraints and that 'SPRINT' means '6F'.

Most of the races presently at NYRA are just not betable.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

It's not just that they're running a lot of maiden races or the same horses seem to be running all the time. It's more about the lack of quality in these maiden fields. By this I mean, for the most part, that there are some very bad horses running. I bet a lot of cheap tracks (relatively) so it's not about quality for me. What it's about is whether there are horses in a given race that have ABILITY. Too often at NYRA, presently, these maiden fields resemble the maiden fields of the AQU INNER --- there's no form to go by (other than NUMBERS --- for horses that are getting gapped.) It's about competition within races not about field size or quality of field.

Moreover, NYRA isn't the only track that has a limited pool of horses to deal with. So, it's common to see the same horses over and over. Yet other racing secretaries seem to find ways of keeping these races both interesting and competitive, and, more importantly, BETABLE. What they do is switch up on the distances. So, for example, over at CRC, you have the same plugs squaring off every 7-10 days but one week they're sprinting over 5.5F, next time they're going 7F, then 6F, then 6.5F or any combination of these. Campo still thinks he's under AQU INNER constraints and that 'SPRINT' means '6F'.

Most of the races presently at NYRA are just not betable.

1000% agree with this... not every race is the Kentucky Derby, nor can it be, and it doesn't have to be. A balanced field of 10 $20k Claimers is very bettable and interesting to me. They aren't running these type of races anymore. They've been replaced by N2L's going 6F on the turf, which quite frankly are not interesting to me or most others.

('bettable' has two 't's' though i think)

[jms62]

Originally Posted by philcski

1000% agree with this...

('bettable' has two 't's' though)

Ditto. This whole debate is like ground hog day.

1. We (the consumer) complain.
2. We get blasted and hear a hundred excuses (many are valid)
3. No thinking out of the box to change things by management.
4. The whole cycle starts again.

If MP is a one hit wonder so be it, at least we enjoy this year.

[Linny]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

It's not just that they're running a lot of maiden races or the same horses seem to be running all the time. It's more about the lack of quality in these maiden fields. By this I mean, for the most part, that there are some very bad horses running. I bet a lot of cheap tracks (relatively) so it's not about quality for me. What it's about is whether there are horses in a given race that have ABILITY. Too often at NYRA, presently, these maiden fields resemble the maiden fields of the AQU INNER --- there's no form to go by (other than NUMBERS --- for horses that are getting gapped.) It's about competition within races not about field size or quality of field.

Most of the races presently at NYRA are just not betable.

I don't ever recall a BEL meeting where they used so many "extras" to fill cards. It appears that unlike other seasons they are relying on trainers like Randi Persaud, Mike Miceli, Naipaul Chatterpaul and Heriberto Cedano to complete the day's cards. Looking at the "Index to Trainers" in the DRF today, I see more typical AQU INR trainers than Belmont trainers, even in the grass races.

[Cannon Shell]

The racing landscape has changed both nationally and on the East coast, mostly due to the influx of slot money which turned morbid, D level tracks like Delaware and Philadelphia Park into B level tracks. 25 years ago NYRA clearly was not only the top racing circuit but the biggest purses and strongest stakes program as well. IMO the tracks in 1985 were ranked approximately like this in terms of strength of horses and purse levels:

A. Belmont/Saratoga
B. Aqueduct
C. Monmouth/Laurel/Pimlico
C-.Garden State
D. Philly/Delaware/Suffolk/Atlantic City
E. Penn National/Charlestown

There was no Presque Isle or Colonial
Arlington Park and Chuchill Downs were C level tracks with virtually no crossover of horseman with the East Coast Tracks. LA tracks were D level except for the FG which was an C level. Southern CA racing was very strong but outside of Lukas there was almost no crossover in trainers or horses.

The mid Atlantic tracks ran turf sprints but virtually no one else did. NY breds had a complimentary role in the makeup of cards. In NY there was a clearly defined structure of claiming horses from 14000 up to 100000 claimers with 20/35/50/75 in between and no conditional claimers. Guys regularly ran horses back in 2 weeks. There were very few trainers that had divisions at more than one track. Off season training at Saratoga was fairly limited. Statebred programs outside of NY had very little to offer.

Think about how this has all changed.

As the lower ranked tracks purse structures were strengthened, the allure of racing in NY waned. As those other tracks rose in stature, NYRA was forced to adapt some of the cheaper conditions that those other tracks were offering. 25 years ago you may not have shipped a $30000 nw2 lifetime horse to Philly after breaking your maiden because the purse there was simply not attractive enough to risk the wrath of Lenny Hale. You simply found your level at the NYRA track against open claimers and ran there, usually for a significantly higher purse, even if the competition was stronger. However as the conditioned claiming purses rose, the crap was worth taking.

Then add in the "super trainer" factor where the concentration of horsepower has funneled virtually all the best bred horses to a handful of trainers. They now train for owners that would have been considered rivals of sorts, yet now they are all on the "same team" and if another horse in the trainers stable is deemed superior to yours, off to Delaware they go. Of course not all owners fall for this trap but often they are the ones who are a little more attuned to the finances of their stable and see the value in racing at circuits other than NYRA. In a lot of cases they are competing for superior purses against inferior horses often at day rates/vet expenses/etc. far lower than what they pay in NY.

I haven't even factored in the rise of the KY tracks in the 90's which siphoned off many good horses that previously would have been sent to NY.

NYRA has made a lot of missteps over the years in regards to it's racing program. Relaxing the rules regarding the number of horses on the grounds has created the super trainer who has absolutely hurt the overall quality of racing in NY. Adding too many different class levels especially conditioned claiming races. Depending too much on NY breds that often make up the bulk of the card on a lot of days. Way too many turf sprints. But I cant say that the people making the calls on those issues could have envisioned the current scenario now in place. And these things happened over the watch of several different hierarchies as well.

[Linny]

I tend to think this card is below par for a holiday weekend Saturday. I also think that by not having a dark day on Wed. they are spread even more thin.

Steve, I agree with your points about the politics but there is more than that. The game has changed dramatically over the last decade or so. The trend toward fewer races has tricked down from the graded stakes horses to listed stakes and allowance horses. The only horses running 10-15 times a year now are the cheap ones. That is what PJ and other racing secretaries have to contend with.

There was a time when they simply wouldn't run MDCL on grass so trainers with those horses went elsewhere. They didn't run $15kMDCLNYB so those horses went to Finger Lakes. There are alot of horses running at BEL this meet that 5-10 years ago would have been at the Lakes beating up horses that had just come out of a pasture in Genesseo, because they had recency. Now they stay in NY and win bad races. There have been races at BEL this year won by horses who will never break 50 on the Beyers, EVER. NY racing used to be elite, the pinnacle of racing on the east coast. Now, it is no different, day in and day out from any other venue.

NY has also handed over 2yo racing to KY. They will run the first 2yo's of the year today. They used to run 2yo stakes on Belmont weekend. Babies used to ease some of the stress of filling allowances and take the pressure off horses that had run all winter. If it were not for NYBreds, they might not be able to fill 2yo races 'til after July 4th. I'm not sure why this is since many of the KY baby races are overfilled and ames like Pletcher and Asmussen and others who run in NY are in them.

I am sure that PJ would love to fill Memorial Day weekend with allowances and stakes but any horse that ran in the last 2 weeks in those levels probablywon't be back for another 2-3 weeks. Presuming that Belmont day purses get the usual bump, many trainers will be pointing for next weekend.

While the handle at MON isn't level with that at BEL, they are up significanly from last year and it's fair to guess that some of that bump, is a loss to Belmont. Most players have a limited budget and wagers made and MON are wagers not made elsewhere.

[Payson Dave]

Originally Posted by Kasept

..... I make no apologies for being especially supportive when it comes to New York racing... And I know how hard most people at NYRA work to put on the best show possible...

...the Pataki administration worked to prevent the Aqueduct VLT parlor from being built in an attempt to financially hamstring the Association so the "Friends of NY Racing"/Empire group could foist the franchise into their hands. That perverted attempt to gain the franchise and the racino for their own greedy purposes has placed NY racing and breeding in the position it's in right now... And the fact that the New York media was too lazy to investigate those specifics or willfully ignored them, is a disgrace.

Every ... harness track in the state has their VLT parlor installed, and the most important facility that was approved a decade ago STILL SITS WAITING TO BE BUILT... Yet the editorial boards of the embarrassing newspapers here and downstate have failed to examine or decry why $1,000,000 a day in revenue has been missed for the past 2,920 or so days (Yeah.. roughly $3,000,000,00). As a taxpayer in NY, I wonder how there isn't an absolute uproar from the citizenry as to the whys and wherefores of this missed revenue opportunity.

... I'm tired of the over the top smears and attacks on a group of people currently at NYRA that have nothing to do with Kenny Noe, Terry Meyocks, Barry Schwartz or anything that happened on the watch of other Association administrations.... .

^^^ This is the type of info/opinion that the NY Horseplayers should be repeatedly sending in as "Letters To The Editor" to every newspaper, politician, and local TV Station in the State...

There are no doubt problems in the Racing Industry... I frequently hear horseplayers lament about being the lowest priority...about being an under-appreciated but important component of the industry...

The situation in NY is mostly a polictical one...many Horseplayers are constituents of the Politicians that are directly involved in the problem...Horseplayers have a little more leeway to rally public opinion... and/or to inform the non-horseplaying taxpayers/constituents of the huge amount of money the inept/corrupt politicians are failing to make available to the State budget/funds

One way of looking at it is.... if horseplayers are not part of the solution ....then they may well be part of the problem...

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Linny

NY has also handed over 2yo racing to KY. They will run the first 2yo's of the year today. They used to run 2yo stakes on Belmont weekend. Babies used to ease some of the stress of filling allowances and take the pressure off horses that had run all winter. If it were not for NYBreds, they might not be able to fill 2yo races 'til after July 4th. I'm not sure why this is since many of the KY baby races are overfilled and ames like Pletcher and Asmussen and others who run in NY are in them.

Isn't this partly a function of the racing calendar? If a trainer in KY wants to test a 2YO in major venue, it has to get that 2YO ready early, or wait until Keeneland opens in October. More and more, NY trainers wait until Saratoga to unveil their babies.

Everyone seems to long for the "good old days," but 20 years ago, a track like Churchill Downs had really poor racing with allowance races going for half the purse that a race in NY went for. It was not until purses were significantly increased in the mid-1990s that Churchill and Keeneland really took off and started to have an impact upon NYRA's horse population. Delaware and Philadelphia didn't have comparable purses, and places like Mountaineer and Charles Town ran nothing but $2500 claimers.

The other aspect that has not been discussed here is the impact that another recent phenomonem, the mega-stables, are having upon the game. It's tough to get an allowance race to go with a large field when the horses eligible for the condition reside in only a handful of stables. Maybe the uncoupled entry rule will help, but I doubt it. I know it's a pipe dream nowadays, but racing would be far better off if no trainer had more than 40 horses. (As an aside, think about how remarkable Woody Stephens' Belmont record is given the size of his barn in the 1980s versus what Pletcher gets today.) The Pletchers of the world rarely turn down a horse, and if a horse can't excel at Belmont, they ship it to tracks like Delaware and Arlington so they can keep their win percentage up and not have to tell the owner that the horse is not MSW-worthy.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Isn't this partly a function of the racing calendar? If a trainer in KY wants to test a 2YO in major venue, it has to get that 2YO ready early, or wait until Keeneland opens in October. More and more, NY trainers wait until Saratoga to unveil their babies.

Everyone seems to long for the "good old days," but 20 years ago, a track like Churchill Downs had really poor racing with allowance races going for half the purse that a race in NY went for. It was not until purses were significantly increased in the mid-1990s that Churchill and Keeneland really took off and started to have an impact upon NYRA's horse population. Delaware and Philadelphia didn't have comparable purses, and places like Mountaineer and Charles Town ran nothing but $2500 claimers.

The other aspect that has not been discussed here is the impact that another recent phenomonem, the mega-stables, are having upon the game. It's tough to get an allowance race to go with a large field when the horses eligible for the condition reside in only a handful of stables. Maybe the uncoupled entry rule will help, but I doubt it. I know it's a pipe dream nowadays, but racing would be far better off if no trainer had more than 40 horses. (As an aside, think about how remarkable Woody Stephens' Belmont record is given the size of his barn in the 1980s versus what Pletcher gets today.) The Pletchers of the world rarely turn down a horse, and if a horse can't excel at Belmont, they ship it to tracks like Delaware and Arlington so they can keep their win percentage up and not have to tell the owner that the horse is not MSW-worthy.