Back in the day, I felt the same way present-day sports talkers feel: How modern era Olympics exist as a made-for-TV event, appealing to a contrived sense of patriotic nationalism performed by pro athletes, not the amateurs of yesteryear.
You could easily blame the old Communist bloc countries for that, especially the U.S.S.R., for subsidizing the Olympic program so their athletes could train full time to earn propaganda points they believed Gold medals provided.
Finally, when we sent Charles Barkley, Larry Bird, Clyde Drexler, Patrick Ewing, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Christian Laettner, Karl Malone, Chris Mullin, Scottie Pippen, David Robinson and John Stockton to Barcelona to play basketball in 1992, all pretense of amateurism was gone forever.
The age of innocence is long gone, too, and so is the time we ask modern day athletes to perform athletic feats that once were the purview of mere mortals. It’s not so much that modern athletes are better, which they are, but technology has made the achieving of excellence that much more difficult.
Forget about whether you think that Snowboarding or the Biathlon or Aerial Skiing are legitimate sports. The more relevant question is why would athletes subject themselves to such risks.
Was there really a need for the world’s fastest luge run? And won’t there will be a point where humans cannot ski jump any farther, traverse a Giant Slalom faster or perform a quintuple axel from the time you leave the ice until the time you return?
Anyway, I was thinking about all this as I watched the Olympics last week and this on NBC when late last week it occurred to a friend of mine to ask: “Where are the ads for the $5-million Apple Blossom starring Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta?
Then I started thinking about what my friend asked. Where were the ads, indeed? Is the NTRA so broke or so incapable about getting the most important match between two thoroughbreds on the same network that one month hence will broadcast “America’s Race?” And isn’t there some momentum for synergy there?
NBC also broadcasts the Preakness Stakes and ABC is in the last year of their deal with the New York Racing Association to broadcast the Belmont. And it wasn’t a rival network undercutting another.
The fact is that the cashed-strapped NYRA, even before the bottom fell out, jumped at the bigger bucks without inviting NBC back to the table. ABC took a shot that a Triple Crown bid would be a ratings bonanza; NYRA took the money.
This year’s Olympics has proven to be a big ratings winner for NBC, beating “American Idol” in the Nielsen Ratings for the first time ever. And it’s made money for the struggling network, some of which they are expected to spend on regaining the Belmont Stakes, whose contract with ABC is in its final year.
Against this background, why isn’t the racing industry doing everything it can to interest NBC in the Rachel-Zenyatta matchup for $5-million? Are they so happy with the disappointing treatment they’ve received after throwing racing’s eggs into ESPN’s basket?
And ESPN doesn’t even need the money, thank you. To be able to charge top dollar for advertising minutes while stuffing massive basic-cable dollars into the other pocket has helped make them one of the world’s most successful television networks.
If they wanted to, ESPN would be in position to help bring horse racing back into the mainstream. Why would they bother to do that? Because they could probably own the broadcast rights for an entire sport and they’d be able to do it for pennies on the dollar.
Some know-it-all sports-talk host this week berated Oaklawn Park for scheduling the race on a Friday when no one would see it. Perfect. Let’s knock the only racing organization to put considerable money where their marketing mouth is.
What Mr. Know-It-All didn’t realize is that people still go to Oaklawn to watch horse races. And any national media that would cover Rachel-Zenyatta I obviously would stick around for the following day’s Arkansas Derby.
The same host mentioned that Oaks Day at Churchill Downs was the perfect venue. I’m sure Churchill would love to host such an event, just not that weekend. They have spent a decade making Oaks Day the equal of Derby Day. That might never happen but they’re getting closer every year. Now thanks to Rachel last year, the Oaks really is on a roll.
And there’s one other consideration. No event ever will or could be the equal of the Kentucky Derby in that market. And to sandwich Rachel & Zenyatta between the Oaks and Derby would be a logistical nightmare does a disservice to all three events.
I don’t know what the NTRA could have done, or what they might be trying to do with this unique opportunity, one that puts thoroughbred racing back on sports map. But to not scrape up the money to buy time on the same network that broadcasts thoroughbred racing’s premiere event, or use that event as leverage with the network, is yet another opportunity lost.
25 Feb 2010 at 03:19 am | #
In the minds of turf writers coast-to-coast the forthcoming ‘event’ involving RA and Zen will, if televised, once again put Thoroughbred racing on the map; that the race is America’s race, a premiere event; that racing will once again be the topic of discussion at watercoolers coast-to-coast; that a $5-million purse for a two minute race is money well spent, and NTRA should blow even more money pursuing a televised race.
In my mind, along with my group of sharpies, such a race involving so much purse money is utterly ridiculous. Somehow, I guess by not being nuts, I envision that Charlie Cella would get more bang for the buck, would truly put Oaklawn Park on the map, and would create numerous new fans if he would hold onto the $5-million until next year’s meet and then write a condition book that would offer nine races every Saturday and Sunday with purses of $100,000 each; owners and trainers coast-to-coast would descend on Oaklawn Park from all corners of the country with their best thoroughbreds, the on-track crowd would be SRO and the off-track handle would be awesome. Numerous owners, trainers, and jockeys would be making some serious money, and numerous bettors would be cashing tickets on races offering value (cashing the only reason people return to a racetrack more than once or twice a year).
Instead, we all will watch a valueless race for a couple of minutes, a race that probably will be over on the far turn and forgotten by everyone by evening dinner, as an owner, trainer, and jockey depart will most of the $5-million.
And the beat goes on .....
25 Feb 2010 at 03:40 am | #
Interesting that you did not mention the talk show host by name-which is obviously Mike Francesca of WFAN. Any reason? Why be afraid, be credible and name names.
25 Feb 2010 at 03:41 am | #
I don’t think the public is really all that interested in the race. If the race were on Saturday or Sunday and was promoted it might create some nationwide interest. While most players,will look forward to the race,they are still more interested in cashing tickets.
If either Rachel or Zenyetta lose their prep race,then the buildup will mean nothing.
Wmcorrow is probably correct in saying the money would be put to better use with having 100,000 races every Saturday and Sunday.
25 Feb 2010 at 04:04 am | #
Sports are a now experience and everything is current. All successful sports live and die by their star content. Racing’s greatest mystique is that no horse is exactly the same from 1 race to the next. That is how trainers(and players)who know what they are doing earn their $. Unfortunately for racing, this race now lacks the prescence of Quality Road. No matter what the girls accomplish, doubts will linger that he is better than both. Stars sell sports; consumers love them; marketers line up when the best are on stage. Include him, and there will be clip after clip everywhere as a major network rights holder promotes its next super event. Include the bungling incompetents at the NTRA and it will never happen.
25 Feb 2010 at 04:35 am | #
Doug,
That was the argument of my colleague Anthony Mormino who said that money should have been put into Oaklawn’s handicap race for males. He doesn’t believe these fillies should run in restricted female races. He has a point, as do you. But if either of these fillies were mine, and technically had little left to “prove,” I would keep them with their own kind until the Classic.
Wendell,
By arguing my point, you’re making my point. Have you ever heard the name Shaun White around a water cooler. The Olympics are an event, just like this race would be. They won’t “save” the sport but would should a positive light on it for a change.
Robert,
The barbs were as much tongue in cheek as they were supposed to be instructive. If that missed, then I did a bad job.
Aaron,
I am a weekend warrior myself. Having said that, there already are too many meaningless races on Saturday and SUnday as it is.
That’s for the time, gents.
JRP
25 Feb 2010 at 04:39 am | #
Douglas Amos: You are correct! Stars sell sports, consumers love them, marketers line up; that is when ‘stars’ are Homo sapiens.
25 Feb 2010 at 05:02 am | #
Mr. Pricci: In your reply to Aaron you state that “there already are to many meaningless races on Saturday and Sunday as it is”; this comment leaves me nonplussed, as after over fifty years of wagering on the horses I have yet to think of any race as meaningless. I suspect what you mean is that unless a race leads to qualifying for a stake race the race is irrelevant.
To me, and I speak for every ‘regular’ at the local OTB and racebook, any and all races are meaningful and can, in most situations, provide a financial gain to the astute ‘capper.
The race involving RA and Zen will shine light on the industry, but it won’t create new fans; what will create new fans that day will be those casual bettors and novices who end the day with more money than when they started.
25 Feb 2010 at 05:07 am | #
wmcorrow, I disagree. Stars sell sports even when the stars are horses. Think of Man o’ War or Seabiscuit or Secretariat. What the NTRA has abjectly failed to do since its formation is to mainstream its stars.
The NTRA ads I’ve seen (and I’ve only ever seen them during high profile races when the interested audience is already “sold") have all been generic - an anonymous field of horses coming down the home stretch. There’s no hook in those ads - no personality - nothing to involve the viewer, whose only impression is likely to be that one horse race is much like another.
Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta both have tremendous star power - look at the cheering, weeping crowds both have drawn to the track. But NOTHING is being done to promote either horse to the general public.
It’s all done piecemeal, left to the owners and local track where a given race is being run. Racing needs strong centralized management and a marketing program able to capitalize on the sport’s central attraction - the individual horses.
25 Feb 2010 at 05:35 am | #
Noelle D: I agree that Thoroughbred racing needs central leadership and a ‘national’ marketing program; however, such marketing program must emphasize the gambling aspect of racing, not the horse.
You mention Man O’War, Seabiscuit, and Secretariat; horses of a bygone era when racing had a monoply on gambling, and racetrack management and turf writers could augment the myth that those in attendance were drawn to the track because of certain horses and stake races, when in fact all were there for the sole purpose to gamble.
A quarter of a century has expired since Secretariat, and the myth still lives on that the horse is the attraction, while just about all racetracks are on life support from slot revenue, on-track attendance is virtually dead, and all-source handle continues to decline. Yet, the dominant commentary for the last several months by turf writers has been on Rachel meeting Zenyatta as if the year was 1973.
Go figure!
25 Feb 2010 at 06:08 am | #
wmcorrow, sure the gambler is the “core” fan -
However, I’m one of those people you say don’t exist. I go to the races to see the horses and I make a point of going if I can when my favorite horses are running. The handicapping and the gambling add a little spice to the experience, but are not the point. Likewise, my grandparents, parents, aunts, uncles and and all their many friends were mostly not serious gamblers back in the day. They went to the track - mostly on weekends - for fun and to see the horses, particularly their favorite horses. Yes, like me, they all gambled a little - $2 bets - but the point of going was spending a day outdoors enjoying the spectacle. If there was a really great horse running on a weekday, they might even skip out of work for the afternoon.
Today, weekday races are like weekday afternoon baseball games. Who has time to go? One of my local tracks is open mid-winter, when it’s freezing outside. Who’s going to go to the track then? But the stands at racetracks ought to be full on weekends when the weather is good. They aren’t. Why? Because racing has dipped below the public radar. My local tracks don’t advertise and don’t get covered in the local papers. How would anyone even know they’re open, or that a day at the races is an option for a family outing?
And - if the chance to see great horses had no part in bringing people to the track, then please explain why the Apple Blossom day tickets sold out in a matter of hours? You can’t tell me no one cares that it’s Rachel Alexandra vs. Zenyatta and we’re all only going to gamble.
25 Feb 2010 at 06:20 am | #
One thing that hasn’t changed and something I have been arguing for sometime. The industry as a whole, including the media networks, is somehow lostt in the past when it comes to publicizing an event. For whatever reason they still in their stubborness think theyt are “horse racing” and the people always know what’s going on. NOT!
The fact is that when presented with a golden opportunity to put their product forward in a good light, the industry (Mr. Cella definitely is not included in this statement!) falls on it’s collective ass.
This race is in fact being talked about, yet not by the nattering nabobs on the varous sports and major media networks!
As to it being on Friday. I’d surely call in sick and get my ass to Oaklawn for this race! In my and many other’s eyes, this transcends the normal day, just as the Derby, World Series or the Super Bowl. This is something you want to be present for. As such, day of the week doesn’t mean squat. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the so called 1973 mentality as wm put it. What is wrong is the complete lack of enthusiasm from the very people who decry how much the sport is lacking or whatever. Then you give them good red meat and all of a sudden they become members of PETA! (pun is intended)
25 Feb 2010 at 06:56 am | #
You hit the nail on the head.
Before the race the network could advertise the Derby preps as well.
25 Feb 2010 at 07:31 am | #
I’m with Noelle on the answer given. I’m a fan who goes to the races when I can, brings whichever family members and friends I can drag with me, and enjoys the races. But no one will ever retire on what I gamble.
The horse racing idustry does seem to be its own worst enemy. Alex Waldrop may be a nice man, but he is ineffectual and has no imagination. And that’s what advertising this business needs. It’s easy to give people who are already interested in the sport a pep talk, but if this sport has any chance to survive, it needs to get rid of the old guys who are stuck in the past. And I say that as someone who can look back at 50. Bravo’s coverage last year - fluffy, yes, but I can guarantee you it exposed horse racing to people who never would have even thought about it. Hank Greenberg - he’s a turn off, literally. I’m sure he was fine 10 years ago, but now he’s the face of horse racing that the young people are not interested in. There’s a young girl on Youtube - seggymon - she’s done some fantastic horse videos. That’s what the people involved in promoting horse racing (isn’t that one of the reasons for being of the NTRA?) need to be looking at and getting ideas from. At least Oaklawn Park is giving away trading cards. But that’s just rewarding those who are already interested.
25 Feb 2010 at 07:56 am | #
Wouldn’t it have been nice if there had been a little ten second spot promoting the race during the Olympics? The only time I see good horse racing advertisements is during a horse racing event. Makes no sense, that’s called “preaching to the choir”. We need new fans!!
25 Feb 2010 at 08:14 am | #
I have to say I don’t think ESPN is going to be the savior of our sport. As a reporter I tried to book interviews with the network on our top 25 market. They couldn’t have been less interested to promote the Breeder’s Cup. The sport needs to step and have a central voice. One commissioner and a support staff who understands the importance of PROMOTION. It’s sad to see it splintered and becoming a sideline interest.
25 Feb 2010 at 09:01 am | #
ESPN is all about cable subscriptions. Racing produces product every day. Must be a possible middle ground there somewhere. Anyhow, the world spins on ideas not people and racing sure needs some. Let the NTRA spend their time certifying racetracks that end careers; sites like this offer the game its best chance to find a way to survive.
25 Feb 2010 at 10:45 am | #
Hi John:
For a couple of years I’ve enjoyed your provocative commentary. Thanks very much.
As a lifelong racing fan and someone who winters in South Florida, just a few furlongs from Gulfstream’s mile chute, I’ve noticed a similar lack of advertising here, as compared to last year:
Gulfstream ads in trade journals haven’t jumped out at me; I don’t see the planes with Gulfstream banners flying over the beach any longer; and I don’t see the advertising effort I saw last year in attracting a younger crowd.
A Gulfstream billboard on I-95 features a middle-age man and an arcane/inane reference to “real men” and “big purses.” Isn’t that emblematic of every knock this sport has suffered in marketing and advertising critiques over the past 20 years?
According to state figures, January’s handle on many days has been off double digits, despite the fact that construction is finally finished; the retail “Village,” with all its attractions, has opened; and field size has remained high, due to the efforts of GP’s new, young, clever and well-connected racing secretary.
The weather has been cited as cause for the handle drop, but I would have guessed chilliness would be of benefit to a racetrack whose only daytime competition is the beach.
To a degree I can understand the lack of advertising on a national level; the huge expense may not have cost benefit for a sport that has evolved into a simulcast parlor game.
But, compared to being at Oaklawn on that big day, isn’t being in the crowd at your local racetrack or OTB a close runner-up, much better than sitting at home by yourself? If so, wouldn’t it be of benefit that—even if you lack confidence in your own product, and even if only on big-race days—local establishments invest in advertising, even if, just for the day, you’re advertising someone else’s race?
Thanks John,
Bob
25 Feb 2010 at 11:05 am | #
Noelle D: I shall try to answer your question why the Apple Blossom sold out.
All ‘events’ sell out. By events I mean the Triple Crown races, the Travers, Pacific Classic, Oaks, and several other events. If Thoroughbred racing were confined to ‘events’, it would be an unsurmountable success. If racing were comprised of just the Saratoga, Del Mar, and Churchill meets, racing would truly be talked about at every watercooler across the country. And, the extremely wealthy owners and their ‘big eight’ trainers would be even more dominant and controlling, and turf writers would be in their glory.
Fortunately, or unfortunately many others want a ‘piece of the action’, meaning that other racetracks operate, other owners and trainers want to own and train horses.
The industry is not boutique. So what is it?
Can you visualize Saratoga, Del Mar, or Churchill Downs surviving if there were no ability to gamble? It should be obvious that the ability to gamble is the attraction, not the horse. Now, will events such as the Apple Blossom get those in attendance to go to the racetrack the following Saturday? History suggests no! History also acknowledges that Triple Crown winners, et cetera, have not created new racing enthusiasts.
In 1995 simulcasting came into vogue, and it was assumed that it would rejuvenate racing; it didn’t. Then racetracks hooked up with slot machines and appeared to have found a new source of revenue to lead the industry into golden years; now the slot machine side of racinos are trying to dump the racing side.
What has been missing since 1995, when Thoroughbred racing was at its nadir? What has been missing is racing organizations failing to promote racing for what it actually is: an alternative to casino gambling.
The people at the Apple Blossom, the Triple Crown races, the Travers, et cetera are there, not to gamble, but to have a great time. Fine! But, doesn’t racing need me, and guys like me, who go to the OTB or racebook three to seven times a week? Doesn’t racing need people, like those sitting in front of slot machines, to simply gamble? Isn’t it really about cashing tickets, making money that brings people to the racetrack, OTB, racino, or racebook?
Why can’t Thoroughbred racing sell itself to the public as a gambling venue? Come, gamble on the horses, make money, enjoy - something that I have been doing for over fifty years. What to hell does Rachel and Zenyatta have to do with it?
25 Feb 2010 at 02:25 pm | #
Corrow,
You’re a man of wisdom.
A track’s profit margin is based on size of handle. How much money is wagered on the races. A 5M purse for this race is suicidal.
Noelle D,
I’m glad you enjoy watching good horses run. But if you show up at a track just to watch and don’t bet, your value as a customer is the same as someone who takes up a table at a diner for an hour and orders a glass of water.
25 Feb 2010 at 02:44 pm | #
Johnny DeCarlo - I didn’t say I don’t bet. I just don’t bet a lot. I pay the tracks whatever they’re asking for good seats. I spend a lot of money on other things, too - parking, programs, t-shirts, souvenirs, drinks, and meals, for instance. I bring people with me who also spend money - sometimes some of them bet more than I do once they’re there. If the empty tracks were filled with people like me, who go to see the horses and spend money on whatever is available while they’re there, I suspect they’d be in better shape than they are now.
25 Feb 2010 at 06:40 pm | #
“Against this background, why isn’t the racing industry doing everything it can to interest NBC in the Rachel-Zenyatta matchup for $5-million?”
Have you checked the books lately? The “racing industry” leaves a lot to be desired. They, themselves, are meaningless!!!
-----
“Some know-it-all sports-talk host this week berated Oaklawn Park for scheduling the race on a Friday when no one would see it.”
Does he not have a point??? When I heard about the race I was excited. Then I realized it was on a Friday. At that point I thought… what a bunch of freakin’ idiots!!!
25 Feb 2010 at 06:46 pm | #
wmcorrow & Johnny DeCarlo, what you two are doing is one of the problems with horse racing. What you are saying is that if a fan doesn’t bet large amounts of money, they don’t count and should go away because they are just taking up space. From whom??? I’m the same kind of fan as Noelle D - I go and pay for way overpriced hotdogs that are usually on stale buns, I buy the overpriced souvenirs, books, programs, etc., I don’t even complain about paying for parking and then having to walk a few blocks to get in. Don’t you guys get it? Horse racing needs every available person interested in it. If it shuts out the fans because they don’t gamble large amounts of money, you will find tracks that you can hear echoes in. Oh wait - that’s happening already. And that’s one of the problems. Times have changed and if the attitudes of the people involved in horse racing don’t change with it, then we are ALL - fans and gamblers alike - interested in a sport doomed to die a slow, painful (at least for all of those making their livelihood from it) death.
26 Feb 2010 at 03:17 am | #
Seriously! NTRA needs to balance what they do for this one race. If they do anything or throw any marketing dollars at this they will have to do the same for Breeders Cup, the Derby, the Preakness and that alsoran race at the Belmont. It boils down to three issues. First the politics of “this track received more support from the NTRA than that track. Second Oaklawn made the grand gesture and has accomplished what it wanted to do was continue to build the Owners legacy in his later years. Third and most importantly, nobody outside existing racing circles care. This is not the Olympics for God sake. On race day this will be 2 hours of talking heads followed by less than 2 exciting minutes and it will be over. How boring to those outside the game. Come on, in this day and age when a quality horse’s racing career is lucky to last two years and it is spread over 6 to 12 races across the country, it is next to impossible to draw a following from the casual player let alone the non interested. Keep it real and look at it for what it is!
26 Feb 2010 at 03:51 am | #
First of all Oaklawn is not a NTRA member so why would the NTRA go out of there way to spend member’s money on a track that does not support them. Second thing is, Oaklawn is not certified by the safety and integrity alliance. Will that affect the people watching or the average or non race goer from watching or wagering? I think not. Has anyone seen a list lately of who is a member of the NTRA? The main goal and main reason for the NTRA was for promoting the sport and buying TV time. Now they are in the business of the safety and integrity alliance.
26 Feb 2010 at 04:31 am | #
Karen: Your going to a racetrack with friends and having a great time is wonderful. You and your friends paying for parking, food/beverage, souveniers, books, and programs contributes nothing to handle, from which purses are derived.
Unless you are pushing money through a wagering window, you are contributing nothing to the growth of racing - you are merely helping track management cover the day’s operating expenses.
Memchuck: Nice perspective. If the race is televised, it will be an hour or two of talking heads and two minutes of racing. Even I, and ole’ timer, will be bored stiff until race time.
Hopefully there will be racing going on at other racetracks to keep me occupied.
26 Feb 2010 at 04:53 am | #
wmcorrow - my usual $2 (occasionally as much as $10) bets on each race when I’m at the track may be small potatoes, but if the tracks were filled every weekend raceday with people like Karen and me and our friends and families, the improvement in racing’s overall financial situation would be substantial, I can assure you.
Likewise, large crowds betting smallish amounts while also spending on whatever extras the track offers would contribute substantially to facility maintenance and upgrades - most of the tracks I’ve been to could use some improvements.
26 Feb 2010 at 08:11 am | #
Dear wmcorrow. I heartily agree with Karen. There is plenty of room for everybody at racetracks, whether they wager $2 a race or $2,000. On-track attendance creates atmosphere, an ingredient missing at 90 percent of racetracks. One of the great things about horse racing is the melting-pot grabbag of society it has always represented.
26 Feb 2010 at 07:17 pm | #
60-70 YEARS AGO WHEN THE usa WAS MORE AGRARIAN THAN URBAN, NEARLY EVERYONE HAD PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH , IF NOT DAILY CONTACT WITH LIVESTOCK, INCLUDING HORSES. EACH TOWN HAD A FAST HORSE. EACH RODEO/FAIR A BEST HORSE.
SINCE THE 60S AMERICA HAS BECOME MORE AND MORE URBAN WITH LESS PEOPLE HAVING FAMILIARITY WITH HORSES.
CORRESPONDINLY, EVERY KID HAD A FAST CAR, A FRIEND WITH A FAST CAR OR WANTED A FAST CAR.
NOT COINCIDENTALLY NASCAR HAS EMERGED IN THE LAST 20 YEARS AS THE GREATEST SPECTATOR SPORT, IMMENSELY PROFITABLE WITH ROBUST TV CONTRACTS, WHILE HORSE RACING STRUGGLES FOR THE AIRWAIVES AND FOR ITS VERY SURVIVAL.
RACHEL V ZENYATTA WILL BE A MINOR BLIMP ON ANY SCREEN UPON WHICH THAT PRESUMABLY HISTORIC MATCH MIGHT APPEAR.
BUT, A SAVIOR FOR HORSE RACING? ONLY TO THE SAME EXTENT THE MUSCLE CARS SAVED IT THUS FAR, AND ONLY TO THE SAME EXTENT THE NEXT OMNIPRESENT TECHNOLOGICAL ADVNCE SAVES NASCAR.
26 Feb 2010 at 10:02 pm | #
Upper and lower case would be nice. Whatever you said, I’m not quite sure what your point was. Nascar, fast car. rachel, zenyatta, blimp - what did you intend to say?
27 Feb 2010 at 03:45 am | #
Noelle: Don’t be a martinet about internet etiquette, particularly as it appplies to UPPER CASE/lower case. After all, did those UPPER CASE letters lead to your blindness, or do you just always start the day with something to whine about?
Moreover, it appears you , at least with regard to this article, did not follow the premise, the argument and the CONCLUSION.
The author of the article to which you and I are both responding concluded it as follows; “I don’t know what the NTRA could have done, or what they might be trying to do with this unique opportunity, one that puts thoroughbred racing back on sports map. But to not scrape up the money to buy time on the same network that broadcasts thoroughbred racing’s premiere event, or use that event as leverage with the network, is yet another opportunity lost.”
My response positing that the decline of horse racing as a major sport corresponding with the meteoric rise of NASCAR is, in some part, attributable to the transformation of America from a predominantly agrarian one to an urban one, where dreams of and owndership of fast cars replaced young boys/girls’ dreams of fast horses was offered to counter any notion that Rachel vs, Zenyatta could, in the words of the original author, be a “ unique opportunity, one that puts thoroughbred racing back on sports map.”
I apologize that my previous ALL UPPER CASE post interfered with your ability to read and synthesize a premise, argument, conclusion...the original author’s and mine!
27 Feb 2010 at 03:55 am | #
BTW, NOELLE, I play the ponies nearly every day. I love thoroughbreds. I love horse racing.I love gambling on thoroughnred racing. I hope the steep declines---across the board in hores racing--- are soon abated.
But, a Rachel v. Zenyatta race, even with superbowl Nielsen numbers, will not be a panacea.
There are more fundamental issues dogging horseracing that network(or cable) coverage. After all, we have TVG and HRTV available EVERY day, from England to Dubai, to Australia, to the west coast, to the east coast and every venue in between.
01 Mar 2010 at 10:12 am | #
Rachel & Zen are old news. Time to move on as it’s out with the old and in with the new.
In brief: that’s why…
03 Mar 2010 at 12:29 pm | #
JWP - your point was beautifully made and I agree with much of what you said. I just have trouble reading all upper case - didn’t mean to be a “martinet”. Sometimes what one writes doesn’t come across the way one intends.
06 Mar 2010 at 06:12 am | #
Thank-you, Collette. I’ll try to avoid the cap lock key. I am a two fingered typist who wathces keyboard as I type. Then I look at screen to edit. When I saw ALL CAPS, I was not about to go back and re-type.
We’ll both enjoy the race between Zenyatta and Rachel and among the others.
No value on either horse.
So, I’ll be betting a large TRI; Rachel,Zenyatta/ALL/ R,Z; ALL/R,Z/R,Z.
Good luck to you~~~and they’re OFF!