Started by Man o Taz, January 02, 2014, 09:48:17 AM
Previous topic - Next topicQuote from: Senator L on January 03, 2014, 08:57:05 PM
Stillhave not included the Illinois derby either
Quote from: Man o Taz on January 06, 2014, 07:26:37 AM
Its sad.
The notion that contraction is better for the sport is silly IMHO when with more races as a part of the points schedule they managed to have Giant Finish with 10 points and Golden Soul with 14.
Granted Golden Soul finished second in the derby - but the notion that you can have a range of entries between 150 points (Orb) and 10 points to me demonstrates that the system is flawed.
You can get 10 points from a 4th place finish in a top tier race or from 2 second place finishes and a third place finish in two year old races.
Thus, the benefits of a point system which I thought would encourage horses to race more and mean that only the best horses were in the Derby field - is a fallacy.
I know that Churchill Downs has control over who enters the Kentucky Derby, but one would think that the integrity of the sport imposes upon them a certain degree of responsibility to be more inclusive.
Quote from: Flanders on January 10, 2014, 08:19:30 PM
If they are hoping for a spot in the starting gate of the Kentucky Derby, then the trainer should know which races have points and which do not. They announced what the point races for the 2014 Kentucky Derby were a long time ago. If all Shared Belief can muster is a win in the CashCall Futurity, then he really shouldn't be in the starting gate anyway.
Don't get me wrong though, I don't care for the current point system. I'm not exactly sure what would be better though.
Quote from: Zenyatta on January 10, 2014, 08:49:18 PMI'm confused. Why are you amazed there were horses in the gate? It was a $750,000 Grade 1.
That said, I'm amazed there were any horses at all in the gate for that race. I believe Hollendorfer felt he was good enough to gather plenty of points in the future, regardless of the Cash Call being a Derby throw out race.