(CHICAGO, IL – May 2, 2010) People who see the giant light stands rimming the grounds of Churchill Downs automatically assume that it’s only a short time before the country’s most popular horse racing event will be held in prime time. But Sam Flood, the Kentucky Derby producer for NBC Sports, told the Louisville Courier-Journal in a conference call that he believed moving the race to a later hour would interfere with one of its key components.
“Once you get dusk and darkness, I think it changes the feel for this,” Flood remarked, talking more like an artist than a businessman. “There’s so much history and tradition, I’m not sure being under the lights are going to do anything to enhance that,” he said. Flood noted that what makes the Derby unique has little to do with gambling and much to do with celebrating spring.
Churchill Downs shattered records for its two-day Kentucky Oaks/Derby festival on afternoons that were as different as day is from night. Friday’s Oaks was held in perfectly-designed weather. Saturday’s Derby, except for the two minutes during which it was run, took place amidst dreadful conditions. And, yet, all the key components that define horse racing’s success were met in each circumstance.
Kentucky Oaks attendance was higher by 11 percent. All-sources wagering on the race resulted in a boost of 55 percent; it was up 20 percent for the card. NBC’s Bravo Network held its second-ever Oaks telecast and the number of women that watched the show doubled. A promotional tie-in with Susan G. Komen for The Cure and interviews with
Secretariat movie star Diane Lane and Big Red’s owner Penny Chenery helped broaden the audience.
As for Derby Day, the overnights rose to 10,3 rating with a 23 market share - the highest in 18 years. On-track attendance was also staggering – the sixth largest crowd in history – although counting heads with the human eye would conclude otherwise. With the favorite at odds of 6.3/1 and 20 horses in the field on a sloppy track that portended unpredictability, total wagering on the race increased 7.8 percent. Wagering on the 13-race Kentucky Derby card was $162.7 million, an increase of 4.3 percent year on year. The satisfacotry result was achieved even though equipment failures occurred at TwinSpires.com and at many wagering outlets.
Artistically, the first day of the two days enabled a dazzling fashion show. Churchill Downs decorated the paddock, tote board, saddle cloths and outriders in pink, the charity’s distinguishing color. Blind Luck’s nose victory in the Oaks showcased the extraordinary pluck of this daughter of Pollard’s Vision, no slouch himself when the Lord passed out courage. Rachel Alexandra’s defeat in the La Troienne Stakes at the hands of Unrivaled Belle might have signified the telling development in a shift of power among distaffers.
The second day, drab in comparison on several accounts, had its own fascinations. The Derby connections that made the long walk from the backstretch to the paddock wore clear plastic ponchos. Inebriated fans in the infield wore nothing. Members of the media made side bets on which crazy kid could skid on his stomach in the mud farthest. Meanwhile, most everyone's attention fell squarely on trying to figure out which part of the track was bad and how that might hamper the Derby horses.
It seemed clear that the pace and the rail were disadvantageous until Calvin Borel rode a seemingly over-matched sprinter from Emerald Downs via Turd Paradise named Atta Boy Roy to a stunning ninth race triumph by utilizing speed and the inside. But what the inside is to some was not inside enough for Bo-Rail. The jock set his mount down on the narrowest of strips beyond where the tractors could travel – an inch off the paint not a horse's width. Borel then took to this unharrowed space again two races later and came home with his third Derby trophy in his last four Derby rides.
Super Saver represented something of a historic triumph for WinStar Farm, although few people realized it. Casner, Troutt, Cauthen, Walden et al has started seven horses in the last four Derbies and was set to start four more in quest of its first success this May. Trainer Todd Pletcher was zero for nine in previous Derbies, but Winstar’s team would have ascended to the top spot among the most frustrated owners in Derby history if one of its eventual two runners this year didn’t triumph. At nine starters and no winners, Charles T. Fischer’s Dixiana Farm has that honor.
Several observers have suggested that this Derby had more back stories than others. But, that’s not true. Each Derby is rich in the before, during and after. Those who think that the freak timing of Endorsement’s career-threatening injury was exceptional should think back only 12 months ago to the saga of I Want Revenge. Those who marvel that only a few trainers dominated the race with entries should wonder why the nation’s leading trainer and the world’s richest owner were not represented. If it’s only a game for the privileged, then some horse, owned by cowboys from New Mexico or blue-collared guys in a yellow school bus, such as Mine That Bird or Funny Cide, shouldn’t win. You can’t make sense of the Derby – that’s what’s great about it.
In reading the notes at the bottom of the chart, more than half of the 20 Kentucky Derby horses encountered difficulty. The comments about Lookin at Lucky left you feeling that, if the Derby favorite finds a fast track and a good post, he’ll win the Preakness. But visitors to this site have read things into what has been written before, so there's no guarantee that they'll get this.
Debate makes the sport fascinating. The “Run for the Roses” and the “Lilies for the Fillies” have no shortage of it. Why change anything?
Vic Zast invites you to meet him on Twitter.com and Facebook.com
03 May 2010 at 03:59 am | #
Vic,
You truly get it about the Derby, even among veteran observers.
Pre-race analysts looked at Super Saver’s Ark. Derby in two ways: Was it a hanging third off a perfect trip, yielding neither excuse nor encouragement for the Derby.
Or was it evidence that he could be rated which, when coupled with distance pedigree and an affinity for wet, just what the racing gods ordered? It’s what makes the entire game, not just the Derby, so fascinating.
More than in any other sport, as the cliche goes, it’s this difference of opinion that makes the game what it is.
JP
03 May 2010 at 03:59 am | #
Vic,
You truly get it about the Derby, even among veteran observers.
Pre-race analysts looked at Super Saver’s Ark. Derby in two ways: Was it a hanging third off a perfect trip, yielding neither excuse nor encouragement for the Derby.
Or was it evidence that he could be rated which, when coupled with distance pedigree and an affinity for wet, just what the racing gods ordered? It’s what makes the entire game, not just the Derby, so fascinating.
More than in any other sport, as the cliche goes, it’s this difference of opinion that makes the game what it is.
JP
03 May 2010 at 04:13 am | #
Sam Flood,doesn’t get it. Yes the Derby is unique,but without the gambling aspect,I suspect the Derby would not be as unique or interesting.
03 May 2010 at 05:00 am | #
Aaron, you must admit that it’s the unique nature of the Derby that produces its enormous handle, not the chance to gamble that causes people to pay outrageous prices to attend in droves, dress up in silly, frilly hats and watch horse racing on television.
“The Derby would not be as unique or interesting” without gambling. But to say it’s all about the gambling is putting the cart before the horse.
Look, some people automatically assume that I’m anti-gambling because I admire the historic and social aspects of the sport. That’s not the case. Like you, I wager on every race I watch. I understand that horse racing’s gambling component is the most intriguing feature it has.
Please stop separating the gambling from the participants, the socializing and the culture. These elements complement each other; they can’t succeed on their own.
03 May 2010 at 05:25 am | #
Your answer to Aaron is so true. To emphasis one aspect of horse racing is to diminish the others and horse racing looses. It’s the whole package. And, as a southerner born and bred who hasn’t lived up north a decade, I think Sam Flood has a valid point. For three months out of the year, the only time people come out is to either shovel or play in the snow. I’ve tried explaining springtime in the north to people who’ve never lived here and they don’t understand. When spring hits, everyone comes out and breathes and smiles. The Kentucky Derby is a celebration of life and hope - every year, there is the hope that this could be the year that we see the unveiling of the next Great One. Thanks for a wonderful article.
03 May 2010 at 06:50 am | #
I am not diminishing the uniqueness of the Derby. I am just pointing out that gambling is what drives the game. The Triple Crown is great and I would love to see another winner,but without gambling the races would not be as interesting. Without gambling,I don’t think racings Triple Crown or Breeders Cup races would get the coverage they get. I could watch the Derby without betting,but I would guess that 90% of the audience has a bet,whether it be through the parimutual pools or through office pools.
To me the most exciting part of the Derby telecast,beside the race, was watching the man who won $900,000.
03 May 2010 at 12:34 pm | #
Aaron: Right on! Visualize Thoroughbred racing without the ability to gamble. The Kentucky Derby has been turf writers fodder for decades, even in the current year, we have had to endure turf writer commentary for four months on the thoroughbreds attempting to qualify for the Derby. Just what is the Derby anyway? A bunch of three-year-olds, most bluebloods trained by the usual commentssuspects (Pletcher, Baffert, Zito, et cetera) who have raced against only their age group, and who would be destroyed by a four-year-old allowance horse, gee, perhaps a claiming horse.
And the Derby itself, find me another race this year that has twenty entrants, or even fifteen. At the stop of the stretch it was the charge of the Light Brigadeacing in this country?
03 May 2010 at 12:40 pm | #
VZ,
Why NOT change some things?
While I agree the Derby is a spectacle that succeeds by combining all the elements you identified, I submit that in order to reach its potential as a world-class event capable of multiplying its audience, it must fully address the concerns of the bettor as well as its other constituencies.
On no other day and at no other venue is a competitive, 20-horse field opportunity presented to American racing fans. Exploitation of vertical exotics should be enabled for all bankroll sizes everywhere through the lowest practical minimum in each pool. There is no valid excuse for withholding the dime super from the event.
I understand that the huge crowds dictate the elimination of wagering bottlenecks as well as umbrellas, but common sense must be applied. Simply limit the on-track 10-cent wager to ATMs using betting cards only for the entire day, and cut off all 10-cent wagers after the race prior to the Derby has been run.
This year the fans got to see one of their own make a six-digit wager for a six-digit pay-off. Imagine the ratings if they can show several scoring a six-digit payoff from a two or even a one-digit wager.
Imagine the compelling education the public would have gotten if the software designer from Houston had been able to spread the Churchill $100,000 pari-mutuel subsidy over several pools with his selection in the top slot:
$23,256 on all Superfecta combinations with #4 on top ($4 x 5,814)
$23.256 on all Trifecta combinations with #4 on top ($68 x 342)
$23,256 on all Exacta combinations with #4 on top ($1,224 x 19)
$5,040 on Super High Five boxing 10 horses (half the field) under #4 ($1 x 5,040)
$25,192 to win on #4
03 May 2010 at 01:03 pm | #
My above comments are garbled, the computer or the net being super sensitive today.
To continue: At the top of the stretch is was the charge of the Light Brigade; is this type of race selling racing to the public, which needs gamblers to survive?
I did not go to the local OTB Saturday. Today, the regulars said that it was a zoo. And, today, the OTB was as barren as it is every other day, except for the ‘events’ (about five) throughout the year. What difference a day makes, which delivers a message ignored by turf writers coast-to-coast.
Will I ever read a Daily Racing Form when the front page is not exploiting the feats of Pletcher, Baffert, Lucas; or, the coming stake races involving again, Pletcher, Baffert, and the other four or five trainers who always gather all the ink.
Think I will ever read a front page headline in the Daily Racing Form that reads that racing at Philadelphia Park, Delaware Park, or Finger Lakes have exciting race cards? which they do, but only us hardcore gamblers know this.
To sum it up: The Derby this year was simply a race involving the monied owners who own expensive blue blood thoroughbreds; the Derby is far from representing racing, and is, again, a joke.
And it is going to continue for a long time, as turf writers will be gushing out commentary on the Preakness and Belmont Stakes, while virtually hundreds of races are going on across the country offering an alternative to slot machine players the opportunity to gamble and make some real money.
“Play it again Sam”: It’s all about gambling, all about cashing tickets; without the ability to get a bet down, racing would be dead tomorrow.
Amen!
So, how many cashed a ticket? five percent?
03 May 2010 at 03:39 pm | #
Corrow,
If five percent cashed, that would be five percent more who cashed on your lousy selections on Friday
03 May 2010 at 04:16 pm | #
Dear Indulto: What the public understands is pick a horse, win a bet. You’d have lost the TV audience’s interest from the beginning with providing the guy betting options, just like you lost mine.
If the horse racing industry wants to attract new users by introducing them to the sport’s gambling opportunities, it must sell the game as easy, not complicated.
That’s what has worked for the lottery and slot machines, the country’s biggest gambling industries. It is logical to believe that education can empower people to join up for horse racing. But the solution is right-brained, not left.
03 May 2010 at 09:27 pm | #
VZ,
Hopefully your right-brained/left-brained argument doesn’t evolve into another excuse for racing management to underestimate their customers and dismiss their concerns.
I’m sure there are others capable of presenting the material in a manner, and sequence of attention span-retaining snapshots that all brain orientations would find entertaining. In case you missed it before losing interest, the appropriated amounts were intended as “no-brainers” once the prime selection is made. Many viewers might be further entertained by the process of separating 10 more contenders from the last 9 for the super high five. Interestingly this year’s first 8 finishers came out of Grade I preps; including all 3 from the Bluegrass on Synthetic, and 3 of 4 from the AK Derby—both only 3 weeks prior.
My eyes glazed over listening to the talking heads voicing their selections with little or no explanation of how they arrived at their decisions, and no analysis whatsoever of how they would structure vertical exotic plays for such a closely-matched field. So I can appreciate that showing how to determine the price of all five exotic plays one-after-another would send some viewers to another channel. I also suspect many more would become interested in making such bets if they knew more about them. And isn’t that what racing and Churchill Downs, in particular, wants?
There will always be a place on these telecasts for owner, trainer, jockey and celebrity interviews as well as backstretch shots and race replays. Now, there seems to be a place during 3 hours of coverage for a fan to make a bet that would normally be hypothetical. Why waste that exposure on inane conversations of no consequence. Give that individual an opportunity to show what he/she knows (or could) and what motivates him/her.
03 May 2010 at 11:17 pm | #
Pretzel Logic:
“I stepped up on the platform,
The man gave me the news.
He said, You must be joking son.”
Wendell,
You must be joking son.
You constantly whine about turf writers spending too much time promoting races like the Kentucky Derby, then write, “I did not go to the local OTB Saturday. Today, the regulars said that it was a zoo. And, today, the OTB was as barren as it is every other day, except for the ‘events’ (about five) throughout the year.”
Did it occur to you it was a zoo because races like the Derby and Breeders’ Cup are what interests people?
Did it occur to you that the place is barren the rest of the time because there is too much racing which doesn’t interest people?
Blaming turf writers for racing’s woes is like blaming a rooster for not crowing on a rainy morning. And no amount of your pretzel logic bluster can change that.
04 May 2010 at 01:06 am | #
Mr. Kling: Yes, the Triple Crown races, the Travers, Pacific Classic, and Breeders’ Cup races interest the public, as turf writers who are Thoroughbred racing’s marketing arm, continually promote only them; if turf writers also promoted racing going on at the numerous modern, pristine racetracks around the country it is likely that more novices and casual bettors would get involved.
You cannot tell me, with a straight face, that the Kentucky Derby is a great race that represents the best racing can provide. Nor, can you honestly believe that the Derby creates new ‘fans’. Further, you know damn well that racing at most of the smaller racetracks is no different than racing at Belmont, Saratoga, Santa Anita, et cetera.
Your stating that there is to much racing as the reason people are not interested is a false premise; there seemed to be no problem with racing, which had more racetracks operating thirty years ago, when the grandstands were packed, and the clubhouse required reservations and a sport jacket and tie.
Isn’t the real reason that people are no longer interested in racing the fact that casinos came into existence thirty years ago at Atlantic City, and have spread across the country giving the public an alternative gambling source?
The public left the racetrack because they preferred to gamble elsewhere, so isn’t it logical that racetrack management and turf writers should attempt to regain the public interest by promoting the gambling aspects of racing, and stop wasting time promoting a handful of thoroughbreds, owners, trainers, and jockeys?
The only new horseplayers created last Saturday were those who made significant money gambling. Commentary on owners, trainers, horses, and jockeys accomplished nothing.
04 May 2010 at 02:25 am | #
Wendell,
It’s another convoluted twist of your pretzel logic:
You said, “Yes, the Triple Crown races, the Travers, Pacific Classic, and Breeders’ Cup races interest the public, as turf writers who are Thoroughbred racing’s marketing arm, continually promote only them...”
Then you said, “Commentary on owners, trainers, horses, and jockeys accomplished nothing.”
Which is it Wendell? Are we turf writing Svengalis able to sway the masses toward major races, or, are we accomplishing nothing? It can’t be both Pretzel Wendell.
04 May 2010 at 05:11 am | #
Hey I have an idea!!
Why doesn’t ESPN have a one hour weekly show from 4-5 on Saturday’s featuring races from Finger Lakes/Thistledown and Turf Paradise??
$2500-5k claimers.
Should attract a large audience of one!!
Anyone wish to guess who that viewer would be??
04 May 2010 at 08:48 pm | #
You turf writers and commentators just don’t get it, or you simply to not want to get it. Racing is tanking, not because of high takeout, small fields, or to much racing; it is going out of business because people who formally went to a racetrack to gamble are going elsewhere now. Why is that so hard to understand? If racetrack management and turf writers want to get people back to gambling at the racetrack, then convince them that they can do better gambling on horses. Stop wasting time on horse of the year, Triple Crown spin, and how the ‘sport’ needs a
Triple Crown winner to attract new ‘fans’. The people who left are to busy working the slot machines. If you still don’t get my drift, consider this: Why is Oaklawn Park so successful? Not from live racing, but from racing machines inside that offer races, bang, bang, instantly - action, action, action! Few go outside to watch the live races.
Mr. Kling: What I mean’t by saying that commentary on owners, trainers, horses, and jockeys accomplishes nothing is that such commentary always involves the people and horses involved in the Triple Crown races, et cetera. Nothing is ever mentioned about the owners, trainers, horses, and jockeys, numbering in the thousands, that are involved in racing across the country everyday at smaller racetracks, where racing is no different.
Austin loves beer: If you could tell me precisely in twenty-five words or less just what is the difference between a claiming race at Finger Lakes and a stake race at Saratoga, as observed by the human eye, I would be most appreciative; also inform me how one is easier to handicap than the other; how one will pay more or less than the other, how one will be more exciting than the other. And, above all, please state precisely how you can tell a claiming horse from a stake horse.
04 May 2010 at 08:50 pm | #
Comment #17 should read: wmcorrow says:
05 May 2010 at 01:55 am | #
Mr. Zast: In your comment to Indulto you say that “if the horse racing i
05 May 2010 at 01:55 am | #
Mr. Zast: In your comment to Indulto you say that “if the horse racing industry wants to attract new users by introducing them to the sports gambling opportunities it must sell the game as easy, not complicated.” Just how is learning how to read past performances and make exotic wagers more difficult than learning the rules of blackjack or craps?
It is not the assumed difficulty of learning about gambling on races that stifles the novice, it is the failure of the industry and turf writers to encourage the public to go wager on the ponies at their local racetrack, racebook, or OTB. The novice and casual bettor is led to believe that only racing at a few select tracks are worthy of their attention.
05 May 2010 at 03:50 am | #
wmcorrow,
I beg to differ with you.
You can tell the difference when good horses run.
Half the horses in the Finger Lakes races have trouble keeping up. You rarely see horses make big moves, times are slow.......
The races are not exciting and I’ve seen plenty of them
The only thing you are correct about is payoffs.
There’s no difference there.
05 May 2010 at 10:27 am | #
Brother Corrow,
Your earlier heartfelt “Amen” finally placed your oft-repeated message in proper perspective. Apparently, preaching at HRI is preferable to doing so at OTB except when the pews there are empty. I must protest your abandoning that pulpit on a Saturday swarming with sinners, saving them only from being subjected to the fire and brimstone with which you blanketed the “monied” Derby owners. Are you unaware of – or do you simply refuse to acknowledge—the blue-collar syndicate that purchased Noble’s Promise for a song only to subsequently succeed in the graded stakes you repeatedly scorn?
I share your frustration with the philistines in Albany who have delayed your ministry at the Aqueduct racino along with your scheme to convert slots players to horseplayers. If any people are ever chosen as operators of that promised land, I fear for any of your newly anointed who may be tempted to play a stakes race under the influence of false prophets in the press who promiscuously promote participation in such events.
Blessed are the broken-down, injured, and untalented racehorses along with those who support their continued sacrifice through stubbornness, degeneracy, or blind faith. One man’s paradise is another’s perdition.
05 May 2010 at 11:49 am | #
Indulto: I haven’t a clue what your message is above. Maybe it is because I have drank a couple of beers to much.
I will not comment on your posts at this website, until you indentify yourself.
05 May 2010 at 12:18 pm | #
Austin loves beer: You haven’t answered my questions? As to your comment, if the races at
Finger Lakes are not as exciting, then, you have been sold a bill of goods by turf writers.
As to times are slow at Finger Lakes, please check out the times posted, they are equal to all other racetracks, especially 5F and 6F races.
08 May 2010 at 03:18 pm | #
Love all the the back and forth on this issue. My take is encapusulated through a friend 15 years my junior. I cut my teeth in racing through the Triple Crowns of the seventies. My friend came along about 20 years ago. A bright guy who is a VP at a software firm who emigrated to the Washington, D.C. area six years ago. He says horse racing is invisible where he lives and works. In the backyard of Andy Beyer! He now restricts his racing time to our annual visit to Saratoga. Horse racing requires way too much effort for the new fan. The competition isn’t the poker or crap tables, it’s much more sports betting. Everybody’s got an opinion on this week’s NFL game or NBA game, etc. without any real mental effort. Contrast that to horse racing which requires huge effort in comparison and in my opinion is harder today than it was 40 years ago. The Kentucky Derby succeeds because it is a spectacle, a circus if you will, but that is what it takes to make an impact in today’s 7-24 entertainment overload. On a 12 month basis, I’d love to see “elite meets” such as Keeneland and Saratoga coordinated nationally to better compete with the other entertainment events. Gulfstream in Jan-Feb,Santa Anita in March, Churchill-Pimlico in May, Belmont in June and September, Del Mar and Saratoga better coordinated in July-August,Keeneland in April and October. Hollywood-Santa Anita in Nov./Dec. Unless you create a buzz, don’t expect non-fans or marginal fans to embrace the game. Unless you get captured by the majesty of the sport, there are easier ways to gamble with better payouts! Such a change would require a degree of national coordination that will not happen in my lifetime, and sadly, probably no one else’s lifetime. The rest of the dreary parade, eg. Aqueduct inner track, the Finger, could continue their existing low profile - no one will notice one way or the other.