The latter case seemed to apply when Florida thoroughbred breeders recently embraced Gulfstream Park, and helped to tighten its choke hold on Calder Race Course with yet another race-napping of FL-bred events; this time absconding with the entire card scheduled for November 9th.
This clash of racing conglomerates in the Sunshine State keeps delivering opportunities for parody and sarcasm.
The Stronach Group (TSG) may not yet have completed its conquest of Calder but previous competition from Hollywood Park was eliminated when the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) formally extended Santa Anita’s 2014 winter meet through the end of June. Thus Santa Anita now can host huge crowds on its three days of live racing bouyed by Triple Crown event simulcasts.
Who thinks the undeniable bad blood between Churchill Downs, Inc. (CDI) and TSG will go away with the end of CDI racing operations at Calder? We’ve already seen CDI’s tendency to hold a grudge when it effectively took Hawthorne off the Derby Trail.
Might Churchill Downs withhold its simulcast signal [read Kentucky Derby here] from Santa Anita racetrack? Would TSG answer that salvo by offering a very rich race for three-year-olds on the first Saturday in May? Anything is possible when corporations collide.
CDI is likely less concerned with developing a Triple Crown than maximizing revenue on Derby day and in Derby preps at CDI-owned racetracks. It enjoys the attention their classic gets but privately it likely to care less if Derby non-winners soldier on to Pimlico and, of course, the air rushes out of Belmont’s balloon if the first two legs of the series are split.
In the first year of the new Derby eligibility rules, a different horse won all three TC legs. By forcing most starters to perform well in races run 3-5 weeks prior to the Derby the likelihood of a formful Derby winner may have increased but it made the challenge to come back two weeks later tougher than it already is now.
The only motivation for CDI to be more interested in the success of the entire series is if it becomes the successful bidder when the NYRA franchise is made available and, by extension, the Belmont Stakes, in 2015. But would TSG dare get in a bidding war for the NYRA?
In my opinion, TSG is the stronger candidate because with both the Preakness and Belmont under its control, it would be in a position to experiment with spacing between TC events.
I had always opposed this notion on principle until I noticed that the gritty Moreno kept his form over six races in the course of 20 weeks, including a blanket finish in the Travers against the likes of fully matured Will Take Charge, Belmont winner Palace Malice and Derby hero Orb.
I researched the amount of rest this year's classics winners had between starts and now believe the minimum time afforded any Triple Crown aspirant should be four weeks. At least, serious consideration should be given to moving both the Preakness and the Belmont back one week. The study also took into consideration major races in the summer through "Super Saturday" weekend.
It all comes down to whether one prefers to see all Triple Crown contestants prepared to deliver their best effort in each leg, or wait decades more for a modern-day freak of nature to emerge that's capable of maximum exertion in four races--including the final preps-- from nine to 12 furlongs over a two-and-a-half month period.
And there is another matter to consider, the one about "doing what's best for the horse" that we keep hearing so much about.
01 Oct 2013 at 04:39 pm | #
Will the Battle of Florida become full scale war?
CDI cuts point values for GP and SA preps?
01 Oct 2013 at 04:52 pm | #
On the Triple Crown.
Push the Preakness back two weeks and move the Belmont to the first Saturday in July.
If Pimlico refuses, eliminate the Preakness from the Triple Crown.
The “new” TC becomes the Ky Derby, Belmont Stakes, Travers Stakes.
01 Oct 2013 at 06:17 pm | #
DM,
Without cooperation between the operators of Belmont and Pimlico, meaningful spacing improvement won’t occur. Right now that is NYRA and TSG, and they don’t need CDI’s permission to make that happen.
Both the Belmont and the Preakness could become more attractive and profitable events by improving the chances of producing a Triple Crown winner. What if an alternate path to the TC could be created so that the Preakness became a showdown between two different TC eligibility systems?
Let’s suppose that TSG were to also run a 10f G1 for 3YO on the first Saturday in May which once again made qualifiers of all graded stakes on any surface at any distance, but used a weighted point system based on grade level, age, and distance as opposed to earnings to determine eligibility. Not only would trainers regain control of their path to a TC, but those who believe turf is easier on growing limbs would also have a chance to make the starting gate.
If the alternate first leg winner also won the Preakness and the Belmont, would most still deny it TC championship status; particularly if defeated the KY Derby winner in the Preakness? If TSG were to implement weighted bonuses for top 4 finishes in both the alternate leg and the Preakness, some owners of valuable 3YOs might think twice about trying to negotiate traffic in a 20-horse field with virtually no chance of winning if they are unlucky enough to draw the rail post.
03 Oct 2013 at 07:02 am | #
Don’t pluck with my Triple Crown to attempt to manufacture a Triple Crown winner; manipulating the criteria to get in the gate so as to gain corporate advancement is evil. The Triple Crown is the purest Americana there is. Is nothing sacred. Doesn’t the Bible say something about wars, and rumors of wars, and changing of the dates of the Triple Crown?
TTT
03 Oct 2013 at 09:59 am | #
The Kentucky Derby will always be the Kentucky Derby no matter what anyone else does or how much money is thrown against it.
Thank God.
03 Oct 2013 at 10:07 am | #
If they must, move the Preakness and the Belmont, but don’t touch the first Saturday in May; it’s perfect.
TTT
03 Oct 2013 at 10:52 am | #
Orb would be a better horse today if they skipped the Preakness and waited for the Belmont.
One of these years the owner of the Derby winner will realize it’s better not to run in two weeks.
03 Oct 2013 at 10:56 am | #
This will then force Pimlico to move it in the future.
03 Oct 2013 at 12:13 pm | #
God on the side of CDI, TJ? I don’t think so. Maybe muddy tracks in May are a product of Global Warming, but when have they ever prepared a horse to win the next two legs of the Triple Crown?
TTT,
By altering the path to the Derby, they seem to have undermined the path to the Triple Crown as well. So much for purity! There was nothing divine about freezing out the Illinois Derby either.
A Derby winner will always be a Derby Winner, but a Triple Crown winner will always be a champion.
03 Oct 2013 at 12:19 pm | #
Indulto,
If you got God is on the side of CDI from my post, you need to retake reading comprehension.
I merely was giving thanks that there is nothing racing engineers can do to screw up the greatest two minutes in sport.
03 Oct 2013 at 04:47 pm | #
Derby winner, 2014 IN TROUBLE
03 Oct 2013 at 05:21 pm | #
TJ,
Your initial response could be interpreted as an amen to TTT’s preceding one, but your clarification is duly noted.
What I don’t comprehend, however, is why anyone would be thankful for a race in which a rail post obstacle was “engineered” in 20-horse fields.
04 Oct 2013 at 11:23 am | #
I didn’t say Thank God for 20-horse fields. Until they can solve the protruding rail issue, the field should be cut to 18 or 19. There’s nothing magic or traditional about 20. It’s a relatively new phenomenon.
Not that many years ago, there was a race called the Twin Spires on the undercard that was created for 3-year-olds a cut below Derby caliber.
Maybe they should reinstitute it with a purse sufficient to lure away the Derby non-contenders.
Of course, they would have to guarantee seats to the connections, which I think is why some of the dreamers enter.
04 Oct 2013 at 11:25 am | #
Hot horse,
I’d love to book your action.
You must not have read my column last week.
It’s worth going back to read. It will save you a lot of money in the long run.
04 Oct 2013 at 11:34 am | #
Tom Jicha, does anybody read your column?
04 Oct 2013 at 12:14 pm | #
You do. Thank you.
04 Oct 2013 at 01:10 pm | #
Wouldn’t even know where to find it
04 Oct 2013 at 01:41 pm | #
You found it at least once. I didn’t start this dialog. You did.
04 Oct 2013 at 01:47 pm | #
NO, you said, “You must not have read my column.” And I didn’t.
04 Oct 2013 at 02:25 pm | #
I referred to one specific column. You made a comment on my site, so you must have found it.