6/8 (BEL) 145th Belmont Stakes: Field at 14 as 'Tiz' passes

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I agree with you, Doug, that the filly races should have some weight toward the Derby since 3-year-olds are so lightly raced nowadays that, as you said, no one knew Dreaming of Julia was that good until her last race, but the list you offer up of the fillies that ran in the Derby doesn't help the argument. Of the list, the only one who hit the board and would have been excluded under the current system is Eight Belles.

2010 Devil May Care- 10th
2008 Eight Belles- 2nd
1999 Excellent Meeting- 5th
1999 Three Ring- 19th
1995 Serena's Song- 16th (won Jim Beam against males)
1988 Winning Colors- 1st (won Santa Anita Derby)
1984 Life's Magic- 8th (ran 5th in Santa Anita Derby)
1984 Althea- 19th (won Arkansas Derby)
1982 Cupecoy's Joy- 10th
1980 Genuine Risk- 1st (third in Wood)
1959 Silver Spoon- 5th (won Santa Anita Derby)

So over half of them raced against the boys prior to the Derby anyway. The Preakness and Belmont aren't relevant as nothing has changed with them.

Again, I agree with you that the Oaks prep races should count, because I agree filly owners don't run fillies unless they feel they have a real chance and it's good for the sport's profile when fillies run in the Derby. I just don't think that the fillies' record in the Derby helps the argument as the two winners would have made it in under the current system anyway, and Eight Belles is perhaps not the ideal poster child for good fillies who would have been excluded( RIP).

yeah, if the whole point of the system was to get the best in the race, they have to find a way to include the top fillies, if they wish to enter.
they have wildcard points, don't they? that should include some of the big filly races like the santa anita oaks for example.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, if the whole point of the system was to get the best in the race, they have to find a way to include the top fillies, if they wish to enter.
they have wildcard points, don't they? that should include some of the big filly races like the santa anita oaks for example.

It's not rocket science ... just call the final major Oaks Preps (the Gazelle, Santa Anita Oaks, Fantasy, Gulfstream Oaks, and Ashland) "win and you're in" races

That way, the five most deserving fillies are allowed to enter the Derby if they want to.

Of course, 99 times out of 100, they won't. In most cases, the won't even be nominated and would have to pay outrageous fees to supplement.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

It's not rocket science ... just call the final major Oaks Preps (the Gazelle, Santa Anita Oaks, Fantasy, Gulfstream Oaks, and Ashland) "win and you're in" races

That way, the five most deserving fillies are allowed to enter the Derby if they want to.

Of course, 99 times out of 100, they won't. In most cases, the won't even be nominated and would have to pay outrageous fees to supplement.

no, it's not. i like that cdi wanted to tilt the field more towards 3 yo over 2 yo wins, and for those who get better later in the spring-but if it excludes some of the very best 3 yo's because they're fillies, it's not a good system.
and yes, they very seldom would be entered-but why make it impossible? makes no sense, it's a throw the baby out with the bathwater move.

just read about giant finish and carve on bloodhorse. they need to institute a minimum # of points to get in the field.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

but the list you offer up of the fillies that ran in the Derby doesn't help the argument.

Yes it does. Horses are much less frequently raced than in the 1980's and before that:

Here are the 1981 Derby PP's: http://www.drf.com/row/pps/1981.pdf

The top fillies were far more likely to get tried in preps against males in the old days because horses raced a lot more frequently.

However ... the ENTIRE point of the list is that fillies were almost never entered against males when the system was based on Graded Earnings.

Since 1945, several thousand fillies could have entered and raced in the Kentucky Derby ... yet only 11 did.

So, why the need to make a point system designed to keep them out? Because Eight Belles broke down when she was pulling herself up on the gallop out after dusting 18 of the 19 males she faced?

[Revidere]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Yes it does. Horses are much less frequently raced than in the 1980's and before that:

Here are the 1981 Derby PP's: http://www.drf.com/row/pps/1981.pdf

The top fillies were far more likely to get tried in preps against males in the old days because horses raced a lot more frequently.

However ... the ENTIRE point of the list is that fillies were almost never entered against males when the system was based on Graded Earnings.

Since 1945, several thousand fillies could have entered and raced in the Kentucky Derby ... yet only 11 did.

So, why the need to make a point system designed to keep them out? Because Eight Belles broke down when she was pulling herself up on the gallop out after dusting 18 of the 19 males she faced?

1981 was also the year Lizza entered Wayward Lass, ostensibly knocking out Flying Nashua. Barrera then got an injunction allowing Flying Nashua to race, then Wayward Lass scratched. The theory was that since Nashua was about through in the breeding shed, the Flying Zee camp wanted "their" Nashua in the race.