Back to Pedigree Query
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 12:45 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Is this the new trend?
PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 1:06 am 
Offline
Darley line
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 9206
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Hey everyone. It goes without saying I hate Nyquist lol, so that's not even worth discussing.


No, there's something I've been noticing.. a trend if you will. Not so much a trend, as much as a mass exodus.


It's amost impossible NOT to notice really.


All the good horses now, are from California.


I don't mean "oh we have 2 years where a California based horse has won the derby". I mean literally, ALL.OF.THE.GOOD.HORSES. are from California. as in 5 of the last 6 horses that finished in the money at the Kentucky derby, all are based in California. The best 3YO filly (really the best overall horse, but that's for another thread lol) is in based in California.


I don't think it's a coincidence. I think what you see is a conscious decision by people to send their horses west. For 2 reasons.


Rick Dutrow and the Decline of east coast big time racing


Big brown was the beginning of the end. Better stated, Rick Dutrow going on national TV and making a spectacle of horse racing, pretty much blatantly cheating and so much as admitting to using steriods on big brown, rubbed quite qa few people the wrong way and as they say, the market will always correct itself. Say what you want about people, but most people just aren't going to let you inject Snake Venom into a $400 thousand dollar horse if they know about it. The more they found out about how corrupt the NYRA was and becuase the same circuit runs at gulfstream for the most part, flordia racing was, the more peop[le with high priced yearlings sent them west instead of east,which generally speaking has a better repetition than east coast racing.


You still got your homebreds, your blue bloods like the Phelps who are gonna keep doing phelps things, you still got your people who are based in NY and for better or for worse, are always gonna be based in NY like Repole and such. But there are too many going west to ignore.



TV

For the last 15 years, we've had two TV networks that follow horse racing 24 x 7, based in SoCal. Now one, but still. I think it's a built in advantage. On a thursday you can tun in and listen to Simon Callahan be interviewed pre race becuase they are live on the track before an allowance race and that's a big deal. I think Todd Pletcher made a big mistake not moving his operation out west honestly. Steve A is basically now Barbara Banke's errand boy lol . 1/3rd of the horses today came from Santa Anita park.



I think it would help NY racing if dudes like, Chad Brown could actually win a freaking race. That would go a long way. Every race he has 2-3 in a race and every race they seem to run up the track.

_________________
"When the solution is simple, God is answering.”
- Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 8:19 am 
Offline
Breeder's Cup Winner

Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:34 pm
Posts: 2180
How can you say you "hate" a horse? I mean, what did he ever do to you besides beat horses you like/put money on? I think the connections of Nyquist don't have clean slates and maybe that is what sits wrong for you? It's tough to swallow when a (rather smug) guy you know has multiple drug positives and a whole lot of breakdowns, win a beloved race like the Derby. You have to earn a name like "Drug O'Neill". I definitely don't honour his accomplishments.

I thought California racing was on the decline - small fields, small purses, attendance is low, one of the big tracks is gone. And yet, the last 5 years have seen 4 out of 5 Derby winners come from CA. I definitely think the topic is worth a discussion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2016 10:51 am 
Offline
Allowance Winner

Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 7:08 am
Posts: 412
Location: KY
Wow BDW, not sure where to start with your post....let's do easy first.

I think you mean "PHIPPS" not "Phelps".

Asmussen is not Banke's errand boy, in fact his biggest owner is Winchell.

Chad Brown does actually win races, check the stats.

Regarding East Coast v West Coast, there is no denying the results of recent years. The reasons for the results are a bit more than simply Rick Dutrow and snake venom. There is just as much if not more money spent purchasing horses to be trained in the East as there is for horses trained in the West - clearly Dutrow/snake venom has had no impact there.

"trend" versus "exodus" - "exodus" means movement, I have not noticed East Coast owners moving their operations to the West Coast; can you provide an example?

Are the West Coast purchasers buying the better horses? Maybe, maybe not, could just be luck.

Is the better winter training weather helpful in developing a young horse? Maybe, it certainly could not hurt.

Many things in the horse world defy logical explanation, this may be one of them.

_________________
A difference of opinion is what makes horse racing and missionaries.

Will Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2016 11:50 am 
Offline
Breeder's Cup Winner

Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:35 pm
Posts: 2004
Location: New Jersey
bdw

I believe that Cree and da hossman have made their points, however NYRA had, and continues to have many problems without Rick Dutrow. As to the Cobra venom incident that was Biancone, a trainer banned for life in his home country but is allowed to train in California. If you consider the horses involved, they would be just as good if they had never set foot in California. If you consider the jockeys involved, all were previous Derby winners and the trainers, two of which had the winning touch prior to this year and the other trains old school and has the all time money earning California bred under his care. Your rant sounds like sour grapes to me, and as to hating horses you must consider that horses cannot choose who will raise, buy, train them, or the racing jurisdiction they will perform in.

In my opinion you should move to California and take your attitude out by stomping some grapes, that way you can whine while producing wine.

DDT


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 6:45 am 
Offline
Breeder's Cup Contender
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Posts: 1755
Location: California
California is an island with great horsemen and a lot --a LOT-- of money. I think what you are seeing is Darwin applied to racing. Any California based horse trying to make it on the national stage has got to get through the millions --no HUNDREDS of millions--of dollars of horseflesh bought by Baffert, O'Neill, Sadler, and Hollendorfer. Even trainers far down on the standings seem to be able to pull the trigger on 6 figure yearlings and that is not to mention the serious European and South American imports that find their way to Mandella and some of the more turfcentric trainers like Drysdale. Finally as California Chrome and Tiznow have shown, Calbreds themselves can be serious horses. All of these runners are put in the same venue and there is no second condition book that really exists except for stakes horses that have to leave the state and travel. The result is really, really tough racing that I don't think gets its due back East until someone suddenly realizes that 4 of the last 5 Derby winners were California based.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 7:13 am 
Offline
Allowance Winner

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:29 am
Posts: 326
On the other hand, maybe the competition is unequal in comparing one circuit to another?

In analyzing results of Stakes races over the past year, I looked at the three major thoroughbred tracks in Kentucky, California, and New York:
* Kentucky = Churchill, Keeneland, and Kentucky Downs
* California = Del Mar, Los Alamitos Race Course, and Santa Anita
* New York = Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga

The fields in Kentucky are so much deeper than the other two venues (numbers-wise):
* Kty held 100 Stakes races, of which only 6 had six or fewer runners (6%).
* Cal held 171 Stakes races, of which 52 had six or fewer runners (30%).
* NY held 198 Stakes races, of which 79 had six or fewer runners (40%).

{The percentage of short fields for all other race tracks was 27%, BTW.}

So, just looking at the number of runners a horse would have to face in Cal or NY, as compared to Kentucky, they would have fewer opponents, making it relatively easier to “succeed” in those Stakes. Maybe this is a factor in their recent success? {They don’t get ‘beat up’ on their way to the big dance …} Nearly 60% of those Kentucky Stakes races had ten or more runners: it’s tough to win Stakes in Kentucky, just from a “field size” standpoint! Even if some of the entrants in the Kentucky races were simply outclassed, they still could create traffic problems for the legitimate Stakes horses, or have an influence on the race shape/pace.

I can’t explain why NY has produced relatively fewer TC winners in comparison to Cal, though, using this reasoning. Just food for thought ...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2016 5:44 pm 
Offline
Grade II Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 5:33 pm
Posts: 1421
Nyquist is a wonderful horse. If Suddenbreakingnews gets any kind of trip, Nyquist is defeated.

But I think there are a lot of good points here

jm

_________________
Run the race - the one that's really worth winning.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group