Even the playing field in the TC - points for ALL races

aethervox
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:48 am

Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:25 pm

After the Belmont, I think that Steve Coburn made a valid point.

To get into the Derby a horse has to have a certain number of qualifying points.

Any horse can enter the Preakness or Belmont - they don't need qualifying points.

To even the playing field, I think that horses entering the Preakness and Belmont should need qualifying points as well - perhaps give points for Graded stakes run in between the Derby and Preakness and Preakness and Belmont.

It's only fair.
Somnambulist

Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:29 pm

If I'm ever hungover and need to vomit, I will come back and read this and all related trains of thought.
Gato Del Sol
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:04 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:32 pm

Just give them all trophies.

It's only fair. :roll:
terpsichorist
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:10 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:37 pm

Does it ever end ???
GreenasGrass
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:55 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 1:42 pm

Even the Playing field - require that all starters in the Belmont have a race within 3 weeks of the Belmont. No race. No Start.
terpsichorist
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 10:10 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:07 pm

GreenasGrass wrote:Even the Playing field - require that all starters in the Belmont have a race within 3 weeks of the Belmont. No race. No Start.
and if a horse had a mishap , fever or mild problem that forced him to pass that race . you would punish him and the connections.

Leave it alone , this is the history of the TC Classics . It's tough , it's competitive and it's been like this for along time . A testimony of the greatness
of to the few champions who have won the Crown !
User avatar
Curtis
Posts: 1411
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 am
Location: Monroe, WA
Contact:

Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:14 pm

aethervox wrote:After the Belmont, I think that Steve Coburn made a valid point.

To get into the Derby a horse has to have a certain number of qualifying points.

Any horse can enter the Preakness or Belmont - they don't need qualifying points.

To even the playing field, I think that horses entering the Preakness and Belmont should need qualifying points as well - perhaps give points for Graded stakes run in between the Derby and Preakness and Preakness and Belmont.

It's only fair.
The Preakness and Belmont do have qualifiers. They don't come into play because the fields aren't oversubscribed. The system is fine. I wish that he had won too but even here in Western Washington the sun came up this morning. I fed my horses and now it's time to find a good two-year-old to follow.
Laurierace
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 5:21 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:18 pm

Why don't we just give everybody a participation ribbon and forget the races altogether.
Old Bones
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:33 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:21 pm

If you mean changing the spread or making the Belmont Stakes a restricted race by not allowing new shooters, no way. No change. And to entertain that thought I think shows serious disrespect to those who have accomplished the feat.

It ain't supposed to be easy.
a Flying Brick
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:53 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 2:35 pm

I read one comment somewhere that they thought winner of Derby should be able to pick his own post for Preak and Belmont. lol

They are comming out of the woodwork on this one.
Somnambulist

Sun Jun 08, 2014 3:58 pm

Laurierace wrote:Why don't we just give everybody a participation ribbon and forget the races altogether.
Kumbaya.
carole
Posts: 2647
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 4:57 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 4:14 pm

No wonder American breeders want speed speed and more speed! Remember people ranting about Cali Chrome's Derby time? In Europe no one would give a dam. If he broke a record or something 'oh nice!' but even if he ran slow, as impressively as he did they would still be calling him a champ, knowing that he just ran a fantastic race!

Also, the English Triple Crown has not been won since Nijinsky in 1970. When Camelot was trying for it, there wasn't as much hoopla around it as there always is in America. When Sea The Stars didn't attempt it, that was fine because 1 3/4 is a distance he wouldn't want and he was targeting the Irish Champion at the time and the Arc subsequent to this. Does that make him a less of a great? Well I sure hope not!

I think there is just too much significance on the American Triple Crown. Once a horse wins the Derby it is almost required to run in the Preakness and if he wins that he must run in the Belmont, doesn't matter if it's rested enough or if it will ever get the distance, it just HAS to try.

Here in England no one pushes for these horses to race at a mile followed by a massive step up to 1 1/2 and a trip which they would likely never race over again, 1 3/4 miles. Why is it so important that a horse has to win the American Triple Crown? Plenty of good races after the Triple Crown which would probably be more within the range of a Derby winner than a 1 1/2 mile trip over the big sandy.

That being said, can't wait to see a re-match between a rested and healed California Chrome and a rested and fit (just as he was at the Belmont) Tonalist!
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Sun Jun 08, 2014 6:49 pm

carole wrote: That being said, can't wait to see a re-match between a rested and healed California Chrome and a rested and fit (just as he was at the Belmont) Tonalist!
Unless they both meet up in one of the BC races, I don't think that will happen. CC will go back to California, and Tonalist will race here in the northeast. He's a nice horse. He won a Grade II race going into the Belmont. But, I'm still of the opinion that a horse shouldn't get to run in the Belmont unless they ran in one of the other 2 TC races. There were some horses in the Belmont that really had no business being there. It changes the dynamics of a race when horses haven't made their bones to legitimize their entry. I feel the same way about the Derby - 20 horses is.... just plain money sucking greedy. Where in any of the TC winners' races did they have to run against the number of horses that are in these races nowadays.
User avatar
Turul
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:32 pm
Location: California

Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:19 pm

Ballerina wrote: Unless they both meet up in one of the BC races, I don't think that will happen. CC will go back to California, and Tonalist will race here in the northeast. He's a nice horse. He won a Grade II race going into the Belmont. But, I'm still of the opinion that a horse shouldn't get to run in the Belmont unless they ran in one of the other 2 TC races. There were some horses in the Belmont that really had no business being there. It changes the dynamics of a race when horses haven't made their bones to legitimize their entry. I feel the same way about the Derby - 20 horses is.... just plain money sucking greedy. Where in any of the TC winners' races did they have to run against the number of horses that are in these races nowadays.
Fully agree. Couldn't have said it better and I'll stick to it.

Before the Belmont, my friend said he read in the analysis about Tonalist and that he has a good chance. I went back and looked at his races and pedigree. For crying out loud, he broke his MSP only this year out of running only 3 times total. Never in a G1, of course. His pedigree is noteworthy however, having a strong staying influence. So I told my friend he has no chance against Chrome and his record. He is definitely no A P Indy who similarly won the PP then the Belmont. I maintain that he will be fast forgotten b/c there are no more long races he would be able to run down a champion. Looks like the few TBs that still have any stamina (in today's breeding practice all runners are bred for speed not stamina) are saved for the Belmont to hit then quickly fade into oblivion. He will probably remain "Tonalist who?" whereas everyone knows California Chrome.
Looking into the eyes of Cigar was a life changing experience.
a Flying Brick
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:53 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:22 pm

who were the horses that had no business being in the Belmont? Matterhorn and Matuszak maybe?

A trainer once said to me ... forget the glory ... go for the cash.

It's a $1.5 Million Purse. Who doesn't want a part of that huh? Come on. These people cannot pay the bills on glory alone. They all need a paycheck.

As far as small fields for Belmont in the past ... ppl probably just did not want to waste time against horses they cannnot beat and decided to point elsewhere.

Everybody knows the rules. There is NOTHING unfair. It is what it is. It's always your choice as to what to do next. And I would hardly call these fresh horses RINGERS. Again, no complaint from Coburn when he beat 7 new horses in the Preakness. Why? Cause he won.
Last edited by a Flying Brick on Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Turul
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:32 pm
Location: California

Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:24 pm

a Flying Brick wrote:who were the horses that had no business being in the Belmont?
Try Matterhorn, Samraat, and Matuszak.
Looking into the eyes of Cigar was a life changing experience.
a Flying Brick
Posts: 378
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:53 pm

Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:39 pm

As long as you meet the conditions of a race and there's room in there for you ... you should have every right to enter.
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Sun Jun 08, 2014 7:42 pm

Turul wrote:
a Flying Brick wrote:who were the horses that had no business being in the Belmont?
Try Matterhorn, Samraat, and Matuszak.
Try any horse that hadn't won a graded stakes. Samraat has done well for himself with graded stakes wins going into the Derby.
the olline rebel
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 6:47 pm
Location: MD

Sun Jun 08, 2014 8:19 pm

a Flying Brick wrote:As long as you meet the conditions of a race and there's room in there for you ... you should have every right to enter.
THIS is actually the problem.

There are really so many lousy horses in the Derby (despite their "point" system), all the TC races, and the Breeder's Cup. How in God's name do horses that have a 20% win rate (often in lousy races, allowance/claimer) get in these "elite" races?

It really is ludicrous. Look at it sometime.
Jeff
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:12 am

Sun Jun 08, 2014 8:21 pm

Laurierace wrote:Why don't we just give everybody a participation ribbon and forget the races altogether.
Any winner of the Derby and Preakness should be able to pick which horses run in the Belmont.

And whoever gets chosen should carry 10 more pounds than the TC candidate.

It's only fair.
Post Reply