CANDOR AND THE CUP
By Ray Paulick
I was all set to name Satish Sanan the winner of the first annual John Mayer Foot in Mouth Award for comments he made on Steve Byk’s “At the Races” Sirius/XM satellite radio show last Tuesday from which he was quoted in a Bloodhorse.com article as saying Churchill Downs was the “worst” racing organization and each of the Breeders’ Cups at Lone Star Park and Monmouth Park was a “disaster.”
Then I thought I’d better listen to the show before throwing Sanan under the bus with Mayer, the pop star who made some outrageous remarks in a just-published Playboy magazine interview about former girlfriends Jessica Simpson and Jennifer Aniston, among other subjects. Since the interview was published, Mayer, a profilic Twitterer, said he has “been trying to prove to people I’m not a douche bag.”
For what it’s worth, I don’t think Sanan has to take that drastic of a measure.
He did, however, agree to send out a statement admitting that he “mischaracterized” the relationship between the Breeders’ Cup and Churchill Downs during the course of the interview, which mostly consisted of him responding to criticism from several callers who disagreed with the concept of a permanent site for horse racing’s championship event. The callers especially disagreed with Santa Anita Park being named the permanent site, a rumor that has been making the rounds after numerous trial balloons were sent out by Breeders’ Cup officials but as Sanan pointed out on more than one occasion during the show is a decision that has not been ratified by the board. His personal preference, he said, was for Santa Anita Park to be the permanent site. (Archives for Sanan’s weekly segment on the show, entitled “Our Industry,” can be heard here.)
The full board of members and trustees of the Breeders’ Cup met in Florida on March 3, the day after Sanan’s radio appearance, and the Bloodhorse.com article published that morning apparently caused Breeders’ Cup board chairman Bill Farish’s blood to boil.
Farish issued a testy statement by mid-afternoon: “The Breeders’ Cup board is extremely disappointed with recent statements from board member Satish Sanan with regard to host sites and those views in no way reflect the official position of Breeders’ Cup, LTD. The Breeders’ Cup has longstanding and valued partnerships with Churchill Downs and the New York Racing Association. No final decisions have been made on host sites beyond 2010 and as we indicated in December the board is looking at a permanent host location as a potential option as part of our ongoing strategic planning initiative. We extend our sincere apology to Churchill Downs and the State of Kentucky. We look forward to our return to Louisville and Churchill Downs for the 2010 Breeders’ Cup World Championships.”
Only Tiger Woods has apologized to more people.
Sanan sent an email to all of the members and trustees on March 4, a copy of which was leaked (not by Sanan) to the Paulick Report.
It reads: “I want to take this opportunity to address and clarify a number of issues raised in Bill Farish’s memo and mischaracterization of my comments during my regular show on Tuesdays on ‘At the Races’ radio network. The facts are as follows:
1. The tentative decisions made during our board meeting on February 25 had already been leaked out by someone;
2. I did not disclose any confidential information but merely responded to a number of callers who seem to have this information;
3. I strongly defended the Breeders’ Cup position on our tentative decisions and clearly indicated that none of these decisions had been ratified by the members Board and Trustees;
I did however make some inappropriate comments about Churchill Downs which I regret and have taken a sword for it to save political face. I urge you to listen to the comments yourself before passing a judgment as Bill has done.
Regards,
Satish Sanan”
Sanan said things on his radio appearance about Churchill Downs that almost certainly have been said privately by other Breeders’ Cup board members, but the horse industry is not used to someone who serves on some of these exclusive boards being as candid publicly as Sanan has been. Perhaps Farish is somewhat sensitive because his father, William Farish, is the former chairman of the Churchill Downs board, but he knows the attitude about the Breeders’ Cup represented by CEO Bob Evans and his top executives in negotiations to be host site can be summed up as follows: “We don’t really care if we host your event or not.”
Was there anything to be gained by trashing Churchill Downs, Lone Star Park, and Monmouth Park? No, there wasn’t, and I’m sure Sanan has said other things he’s regretted during the many hours he has spent communicating with racing fans and horsemen on the “At the Races” show. In the heat of the moment, I think Breeders’ Cup chairman Farish was just as much out of line, overreacting publicly to what Sanan was quoted in a news article as saying.
This industry needs people with the candor, the fresh perspective and the creative business acumen that Sanan has brought to Breeders’ Cup and other industry organizations, including the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders’ Cup, where he is member of a committee addressing issues related to structural changes and horse racing’s broken business model.
The candor sometimes gets him in trouble. “There is a group of people particularly pissed off at me,” he said on the radio show, “not as to what I’m trying to achieve or what the group is trying to achieve, (but about) what I had said about the alphabet soup organizations…People are taking it personally, some of the officers of some of these organizations. Candidly, the old saying in business is if you are trying to solve a business problem, generally speaking people who are part of the problem are people who are going to object to it.”
It’s that kind of candor and blunt talk that doesn’t endear Sanan to some people, but I get the feeling he doesn’t really care about that. We haven’t gotten very far in this business by having boards who rubber stamp cautious executive decisions, discourage open dialogue, and keep electing the same people year after year after year.
Copyright © 2010, The Paulick Report
Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
Tags: at the races, Bill Farish, bloodhorse.com, churchill downs, Foot in Mouth Award, Jennifer Aniston, Jessica Simpson, John Mayer, lone star park, monmouth park, Paulick Report, Ray Paulick, santa anita park, satish sanan, Sirius/XM, steve byk, Tiger Woods
March 8th, 2010 at 7:44 am
I agree. While Sanan’s words could be a bit more polished we clearly need change in this Industry. And change is only ever possible when you can be honest about your current situation. Of course those currently in power (including Churchill) will be offended.
We need honest assessment of things (bleak if we continue on our current path), we need to admit that current leadership has failed us miserably, and like Congress in Washington we must recognize that we would be better served if we had a change of leadership across the board.
Again I don’t agree with Sanan’s choice of words but I do agree with someone with the honesty and courage to tell the Emperor that he has no clothes!
March 8th, 2010 at 7:47 am
The last two paragraphs are dead on. Nice work.
March 8th, 2010 at 8:21 am
A lack of candor and courage has gotten us in the mess we are in today.
All power to Satish and may he continue to speak out! He is saying things that need to be said. Let’s hope it is not too late.
March 8th, 2010 at 8:41 am
A great test for the various organizations that claim to represent an important purpose within the industry. Get the Rachael Alexander-Zenyatta race in National television. If you have to buy the air time then do so. Make this a prime time event that exposes current and future fans to the most unique event in our sport in more than a decade. The simple lack of ability or commitment to do so aptly explains the frustration we all feel with the above. Finally i doubt there is a more passionate man in the game than Satish Sanan. Not always right and sometimes inappropriate in his comments but he puts up his money and wants to contribute. We need more rather than less involvement by these kind of owners. jgs
March 8th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Churchill Downs is not “in power”. That first response is simply- idiotic.
Everyone knows, or should know, that the Breeder’s Cup makes it impossible to earn a reasonable profit for the racetracks that put on the show. The fact that they are considering, or have already decided, on making the Oak Tree meeting at Santa Anita he permanent site is telling in one way-the Oak tree meeting is a “non profit” entity, they could care less about profit, and care more about the prestige of putting on the show for the Breeder’s Cup benefit, making them the perfect “partner” fpr the BC.
However, everyone knows that the second that the BC announces their decision to permanently run the BC championship (the championship of nothing) at Santa Anita, that NYRA, once slots are finally in place, and Churchill, once slots are in place, will offer races comparable in purse levels, and completely decimate the importance of the Breeders Cup races, potentially killing the Breeders Cup organization permanently.
It is for that reason that the BC will never, ever, award a permanent site to Santa Anita.
Sorry for the long and comma-ridden sentences.
March 8th, 2010 at 8:56 am
# ace Says:
March 8th, 2010 at 8:44 am
Churchill Downs is not “in power”. That first response is simply- idiotic.
Everyone knows, or should know, that the Breeder’s Cup makes it impossible to earn a reasonable profit for the racetracks that put on the show. The fact that they are considering, or have already decided, on making the Oak Tree meeting at Santa Anita he permanent site is telling in one way-the Oak tree meeting is a “non profit” entity, they could care less about profit, and care more about the prestige of putting on the show for the Breeder’s Cup benefit, making them the perfect “partner” fpr the BC.
However, everyone knows that the second that the BC announces their decision to permanently run the BC championship (the championship of nothing) at Santa Anita, that NYRA, once slots are finally in place, and Churchill, once slots are in place, will offer races comparable in purse levels, and completely decimate the importance of the Breeders Cup races, potentially killing the Breeders Cup organization permanently.
It is for that reason that the BC will never, ever, award a permanent site to Santa Anita.
Sorry for the long and comma-ridden sentences.
************************
Ace’s comments suggesting that Churchill Downs doesn’t hold a position of power within the Industry is ignorant at best. Anyone who deals with Churchill on any basis knows that Churchill thinks of Churchill first, last and only. What’s best for the Sport they serve is far down the list of priorities that Churchill uses in any decision making.
That’s an aside as truly only those lacking intelligence believe that we have anything resembling real courageous leadership in this Industry. We have people in power who have failed us miserably. John Sikura’s comments on the match-up between Zenyatta and Rachel are a prime example. How in the world is the biggest race in 100 years being run on a Friday? And not on during prime time with any other media PR? NTRA absent, Breeders’ Cup absent, TRA absent, TOBA absent regarding leadership and or a role in pushing for this to be a larger Industry asset.
Let’s keep doing more of the same people and hoping for different results. How foolish and ignorant are we?
March 8th, 2010 at 9:31 am
Although I’m unconvinced that the mission of the Breeders’ Cup and the industry overall would be well-served by a permanent host site, there is not a doubt in my mind that if this sport is to experience a renaissance it will be due in no small part to Satish Sanan and other like-minded individuals.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:02 am
I’d like to speak from a fan and breeder’s perspective… I have attended 3 Breeder’s Cups….Arlington Park, Belmont Park & Lone Star. By Far and Away…the best time my guests and I had was at Lone Star Park ( I brought 15 people with me). (Only complaint…the windows were extremely hard to get too…Overcrowed…but wouldn’t that be a good thing at a racetrack?). Arlington was not memorable…but it was not a bad time….Belmont Park was horrible….Talk about uncomfortable…it was so cold, most all the fans stood inside…we bought a t-shirt and left early…My Point…after my complaining…is that I believed that the whole point of the Breeders Cup was to Move from Track to Track…to allow “ALL” Breeders the opportunity to participate. I would suppose as with all other businesses…the bottom line is the money, power and prestige…The hell with the little guy…the hell with all the Breeders that spend their $500 per foal every year (not because they believe or even have hope that the foal is a Breeders Cup quality horse…we sometimes have to spend that money to use a selling point at public auction) Oh Hell…I digress again…Thank God Mr. Sanan spoke Out..(nothing like a good controversy) .But Will all of you….The Powers that Be….will you Listen to Us? What we want…aren’t you elected by us? Arent’ you concerned with what we would like to see happen?…..Yeah…didn’t think so.
I’d vote different and elect different people…but on your ballots….there is no choice for a “write in”…Guess yall plan it that way.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:29 am
To: All Members of the Breeders Cup Board
I urge all of you to LISTEN to Sanan’s words as they will lead you in the right direction!!!!! Very few Boardmembers have the BALLS to ignore THEIR OWN personal agenda’s and help the sport of horseracing!!!
Why not get BUSINESS PEOPLE on the Breeders Cup Board who don’t have to follow their “grandpa’s” business ideas of the late 50’s?
As a horseowner with millions invested in this sport, I WILL NOT WASTE ANY MORE MONEY nominating to the Breeders Cup and will wait until the “GRANDKIDS” are no longer making all of the decisions.
NEW IDEAS AND PEOPLE ARE NEEDED BEFORE THE BREEDERS CUP IS WORTH SUPPORTING AGAIN!!!!
March 8th, 2010 at 10:58 am
Churchill used to be the best before they rebuilt. Now they are sucking the life out of horse racing to pay for it. They had no business buying other race tracks. It’s a two day event and they think their smarter than everyone. They need to be pulled up by all owners and breeders.
March 8th, 2010 at 11:09 am
An excellent synoposis of the situation, Ray, and an even better conclusion as elucidated in your closing paragraph.
March 8th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Gee, I had a wonderful time at Monmouth (a lovely place, by the way). I got to wait hours trying to park, pay $350, and had a choice of a $12.00 sandwich in plastic or a hot dog and $4.00 water. I can’t comment on Lone Star because, although I attended all the Breeders Cups prior to Monmouth, I just decided to stay home after that. This is supposed to be our premiere event. What if you were just a fan who thought it might be fun to go and that was your experience? Would you come back?
I applaud Satish Sanan for speaking out. If others disagree, at least we will have some exchange of ideas. If, as pointed out by Sanan and Mike Maloney in his Blood Horse article, we don’t do something about the problems we face, particularly regarding the promotion of this sport, we won’t have to worry about the market.
March 8th, 2010 at 11:54 am
First let me say I don’t envy anyone who writes for the racing industry, especially now that there’s so much controversy from the bottom to the top in every venue that exists. Players are also on the war path, I’m one of those players but my writing skills suck compared to Mr. Paulick’s, his professionalism showed by checking the facts first before commenting on Sanan’s words. Players opinions are splattered all over the Internet because they are just as passionate about what’s wrong with racing as anyone else that’s connected to the sport. We can get away with posting what we think right or wrong with no repercussion, not so for people like Paulick or Sanan. I screwed up by suggesting the Sanmargarita was going to be changed to a five million dollar purse like the Blossom in the heat of the moment of no consequence to me. I didn’t check the facts, simple as that. I was upset with the idea that a horse could run dead last in the blossom and collect a hundred grand, an obscene purse structure for the rich elites.
Racing is going through a very complex reorganization and consolidation. Players aren’t privy to the inner workings of that process and we like always will be excluded. I would like to think the industry including writers have been taking heed to what we think is wrong because I believe players have been well ahead of the industry on many issues for a long time now. Players that were looking for some representation joined organizations that cropped up only to find out those in charge had an agenda of their own that didn’t address our most important concerns, adding discontent of those that joined. At this point I’ve concluded players need people like Ray Paulick that has the ear of the those in charge and I appreciate the fact we can come here and express ourselves.
March 8th, 2010 at 11:59 am
OK, people take his comments personally.
THEY SHOULD.
These people in charge of these organizations are running the sport into the ground through a lack of attention.
What should he have said? “You’re doing a great job, keep it up.”
Come on!
These people are paid to do a job, plain and simple. Stop being so thin-skinned, roll up your sleeves, and tackle the problems everyone knows exist.
March 8th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Good God…what a bunch of babies!!! Ohhhh somebody said something to hurt my feelings! I’m sure Bill Farish, et al hasn’t ever had to deal with such a “horrible” situation.
This is a perfect glimpse into the mentality of the people who have been “running” this industry. Heaven f’n forbid ANYONE ever have the nerve to question them. Even if the “questions” aren’t presented in a thoroughly diplomatic way, they still deserve to be asked.
GET OVER YOURSELVES!!!! BC, NTRA, JC, et al….The days of hiding behind closed doors have come to pass. Adapt or die.
March 8th, 2010 at 12:25 pm
Satish hit the nail on the head and the “old guard” hates it when someone speaks the truth about our industry.
His candor is refreshing and appreciated. He is the voice of change… and we all know how people feel about change and those that preach it.
Keep up the good work Satish.
March 8th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
There will always be bitterness within the racing’s organizations between the old bluebloods and the new money factions. What really gets me is that many of the old bluebloods have cut their involvement in the sport, yet are still trying to run the show.
Mr. Sanan–you’ve put tens of millions of fresh dollars personally into this sport, raced at the highest level and serve on many industry boards and organizations. In my opinion, you’ve earned the right to speak your mind on any racing-related topic.
March 8th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
The alphabet soup (Cozzene-Illiterate, by Arts and Letters) of racing organizations can be combined into two letters for the fans…and the first is an F and the second is a U. At least Satish Sanan bothers to address us riff raff. Most of the industry has the “let ‘em eat cake” attitude while racing goes down the toilet. Meanwhile, I wish Billy Farish would get one hundredth as upset about the myriad of other problems with the Breeders’ Cup and the rest of the industry as he did about the comments of Sanan. PS: A permanent site in California will lead to the beginning of the end of the relevance of the Breeders’ Cup.
March 8th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
The results of last week’s bloggers poll (115 votes)
Would you approve if Santa Anita is awarded “permanent host” site of the Breeders Cup ?
no 86 75%
yes 29 25%
Can the Breeders Cup Ltd. afford to alienate 3/4 of the fan base ?
March 8th, 2010 at 1:20 pm
#18 perhaps COZY x illiterate?
March 8th, 2010 at 1:30 pm
I always viewed the Breeders Cup as a means to suck money up from the bottom to the top for the elites of the sport. Greed in other words. There’s no reason in my mind why we can’t see the best compete without drowning others in the business of breeding and owning.
March 8th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
I agree w/the comments of #6 above. However, w/regard to BC, most fans and people in the industry are opposed, (myself included) to having it only at SA. The best BC I’ve been to was in NY in 2005…….and it was a one-day affair, as it should be. BC races are to prove the best of the best in the sport, and it’s gets awfully diluted w/all the insignificant races when it’s spread out over two days. One premiere day of racing is all that we ask for……….the two-day event is totally unnecessary…….save the $$ and make the one-day event even more appealing w/larger purses. Definitely less is more when it comes to BC championships…and the races should be at a location with a well maintained dirt track…such as Belmont,. Dirt and turf are the surfaces that horses were bred for and have raced on for hundreds of years. If we have to alternate to a man-made surface, then I would have no problem w/Keeneland’s Polytrack as it seems to be doing much better than the first year or so after it was installed. Haven’t had any problems cashing in tickets there over the past few years…spring and fall meets. However, I suppose much would have to be done to prepare Keeneland for such a large crowd?? It’s one of the best tracks in the country and they know how to treat their customers!
March 8th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
It’s all about more fans— stupid!
Sanan is operating under the delusion that someone expects intelligent, knowledgeable, financially successful horsemen to bring ideas, energy and vision with them when they are added to these boards. Wrong! What is most critical is their ability to respond appropriately when the chair says, “all in favor say Aye” and then to use the proper fork.
That said, while the Breeders Cup has been positive for horseracing in general, after 25 years it has failed to stop the long painful declines in our sport. Granted, perhaps it has slowed the downward momentum a bit.
The problem is simple. We need are more fans, and hopefully fans that bet money. We need not just 1 or 2 days a year type fans, like the big hat Derby crowd, but real fans that live and breath the sport like Yankee, or Steeler or Wildcat fans. All the discussions of BC location, betting integrity, medication rules etc etc are of value but unless we find a way to grow more fans, and soon, we are going to begin to lose big tracks in big markets and then the downward slide may become an avalanche.
Let me ask you a question. Do you know anyone that got hooked on football by watching the Super bowl? Generally, it is the other way around.
March 8th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Absolutely correct, #17. Satish Sanan has paid all dues, so on breeding and racing issues his right to speak his mind cannot be challenged.
So what beef do the panty-waists have? He used coarse language !! Oh, horrors!!
I believe a majority understands that when somebody patiently tries to explain reality to those in control, and they still don’t get it, profanity may be the only way to get their attention.
They may shriek as if ravaged. Good. Give them more punishment. If they can’t take the heat, …………………………………………………………..
So, instead of tut-tutting about Satish Sanan, send him a message of encouragement.
For myself, I say emphatically that for the paying patrons, Churchill Downs is the worst possible venue. I had two Breeders’ Cup experiences there: first and last. Absolutely bloody awful. Disgraceful.
So, Mr. Sanan, please go on speaking your mind. It is refreshing to hear candid comments.
March 8th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
Excellent points Observer. There’s been a huge disconnect between players and the industry for many years and that’s been expressed on many online forums sense they came into existence. Players were very keen to the drug problem well before the media got on the bandwagon. That’s just one example.
March 8th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
Churchill Downs goes to the State of Ky asking for different incentives but heaven forbid that they should do their part in anything. The adage that their people have to work too hard! Who? The Buss boys, waitress’s, bar tenders that can make Derby/Oaks into 4 days instead of two!
The economic impact to any State having the Breeders Cup is huge, so why can’t CD understand that sometimes you gotta give something back especially when one is asking for something!
I am disappointed that the amount of Horse People that have Chaired the Board and owned shares in CD starting with Warner Jones and working it this way has had so little guts to tell those guys they hired what to do and how to do it!
Congrats Satish..keep up the good work!
March 8th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Satish keep up the good work…We need more people like you who aren’t afraid to speak their mind…The old school has been around too long…Our industry is going down the tubes as we speak….A new business plan is needed soon… Also my hats off to Keeneland for the new sales format…
March 8th, 2010 at 2:54 pm
The BC being potentially henceforth parked at SA will only further splinter the sport and tracks all the more. Did anyone read Crist’s article on reworking of the NYRA races and the remark from the one official?
http://www.drf.com/news/article/111244.html
As anyone can presume the cooperation from tracks like CD and NYRA to help promote the lead up to the BC and even dates near the BC has been inherient. To date its been in their best interest even if Arlington Park or Woodbine hosts it one year, etc. Syphoning off interest for the BC by enticing runners was seen as bad form and could’ve jeapardized the chance to host the BC.
Now if the BC is forever out at Santa Anita do you really think NYRA , for example, will just sit on its hands and conceed that much racing - and wagering - to another track? Frankly why should they?
There is a far bigger picture that the Breeders’ Cup officials need to consider. While they may think sending the BC to Santa Anita permanently is a smart move and let the fans be damned they sure better rethink that one. If they do then the BC might shrink to being a slightly bigger version of the Sunshine or Maryland Millions at best.
March 8th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
While Sanan might deserve kudos for speaking his mind, don’t forget that his mind thinks that the BC moving to SA permanently is a good idea.
From that perspective, Sanan deserves no kudos.
March 8th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
Glimmerglass…
In last week’s appearance on “At the Races,” Sanan said the concept of a permanent site was one of several areas the long-term strategic planning group was examining. Perhaps some of the other areas of the plan will address ways to alleviate NYRA or CDI possibily not hosting the championships through significant purse enhancements of some of the big races that could lead to the championships.
I’d suggest we wait and see what the entire plan is before condemning or supporting it.
March 8th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Ray Like I said, there’s many things going on and we have to wait until it all washes out, good or bad. When all is said and done, I doubt players will be any better off then they are now, what’s left of us anyway. Whales will still be skimming the mutual’s and we will still be clobbered with high takeout.
March 8th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
The only ones who will benefit from the Breeder’s Cup being permanently in CA are Netjets and the Airlines.
March 8th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
It will be interesting how it develops. Both Rachel Alexandra and Kodiack Kowboy didnt run on synth at the BC and won Eclipses. I think trainers of good dirt horses might copy that and just run their horses on dirt all year and skip Santa Anita. If NYRA or CD up their November purses, the dirt racing in November might be better quality than the SA BC races.
March 8th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
Bill
don’t kid yourself…the races and quality of them at SA was great. The simple answer is that if you don’t want to race on poly, then don’t go. Having said that, I don’t believe any place deserves to be the host site forever…not even the jerks at Churchill Dwons!
March 8th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
There is a possibility that the announcement of SA as a permanent site for the BC is contingent on SA transitioning back to a dirt surface. Perhaps that is why Frank Stronach is playing games with his announcement last week that no change will take place unless there is some participation from others to help pay for a new surface. Maybe he believes he can get the BC to kick some money into the pot.
March 8th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
is the Breeders’ Cup really about pedigree ?
March 8th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
MOW, do you really think the BC benefitted last year from the loss of Rachel Alexandra, Kodiak Kowboy, Fabulous Strike, etc.?
Last year was no greater than in years past. If anything, it was worse due to the lack of participants who weren’t missing due to injury or not being nominated, but instead due to a crazy decision by the BC to hold dirt championships on a non-dirt surface.
March 8th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
funny cide
well we would not have had Raven’s Pass, Henrythenavigator etc either now would we…there are always two sides of the coin and I would have liked for those horses to have been there BUT they chose not to come…others came!
March 8th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
Raven’s Pass and HenrytheNavigator have never run a dirt race. That they are 1, 2 in a BC Classic probably makes that one of the worst Classics ever.
If you think Zenyatta catching Gio Ponte is as meaningful as Rachel and Zenyatta facing in a BC CLassic for HOY, you’re kidding yourself. Gio Ponte has 1 win off grass, a Grade 3 rained off the turf
March 8th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
So he just confirmed it again: “Our tentative decision had been leaked by someone else.” There was indeed a decision. I think Sanan was right that Monmouth and Lone Star were each a disaster, but that wasn’t the tracks fault; rather, it was the stupid BC Board decisions to stage the BC at Monmouth at a time when everyone in the Northeast knows it pours down rain, and to control the seating at Lone Star in such a draconian manner as to actually discourage people from going. I’m terrifically opposed to creating a permanent site for the BC. I’m sure that would make it easier on the Board, but it will diminish the BC overall. Let’s not forget that this is the same group of geniuses that decided to announce to elimination of the BC Breeder’s stakes program days after we had all paid our fees. I think that CDI did a fine job with the BC in the years that they have been host, but let’s move it around a little and not be so eager to ship all of our purse money off to Europe.
March 8th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
Sandra Warren: “but let’s move it around a little and not be so eager to ship all of our purse money off to Europe”
What’s the point in calling it the “World Championships” if you make attempts to keep international competition at bay?
March 8th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
MOW, we would’ve had Raven’s Pass and Henry — in the turf races, or trying their hand at dirt. I certainly hope you don’t think the presence of either (or both) makes up the lack of one Rachel Alexandra, much less the others who sat on the sidelines.
They chose to not come for a reason, just as turf horses decided to run in the Classic for a reason. They’ve got turf races for the turf horses — let them race in those, and not give both our dirt races AND turf races to the turf horses.
George, the BC “world championships” has been a misnomer ever since the BC rolled it out. Sea the Stars — HOY in Europe, despite not running in the BC. Rachel — HOY and 3yo champ filly in America, despite not running in the BC. Kodiak — champ sprinter despite not running in the BC. Summer Bird — champ 3yo colt despite his BC showing. Zenyatta — good win, had the older F&M sewn up way before the race. Then we could get into the champs from all the other countries who didn’t run in the “world championships.” It’s just a name, and a bad one at that, it’s not reality and never will be.
March 8th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Assume for the sake of discussion that SA reverts to a dirt surface sometime in the near future. If so, then doesn’t it make perfect sense to locate the BC at a track where you are virtually certain to get two sunny and warm days at a world class facility that is sure to have packed grandstands? What other quality facility in North America can offer the same? Isn’t that a better option for this showcase event than the risk of a miserable wet and/or cold weekend at the various other possible locations in the midwest or Northeast?
March 8th, 2010 at 8:46 pm
For one, I’ll give style points to Mr. Sanan and I confess to be a bit disappointed when he felt inclined to back-fill about his comments. I think the sentiment expressed about Churchill Downs (by a majority of the BCL board) to reflect reality. In fairness to Churchill, however, their allegiance is to their shareholders first and then the horse industry. Fact is, some on the BCL board would have Churchill conceding what other tracks would put on the table which, of course, would be not be an equitable deal at all. Churchill Downs and their brands simply bring more to the party than those other guys and should be compensated accordingly. I would encourage Mr. Sanan to continue to lead, as there is certainly not anyone else willing to do so.
March 8th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
#42
Let’s try this a different way….Before the USA fixed a point of racing at one venue outside (or inside) a major city and developed racing on dirt…all racing was done on grass..so the fact that all Major Sire Lines and Broodmares came from grass origins means nothing today and only racing on dirt means anything?
Those same two sires will be a major point in the Breeding Industry in the future but their races mean nothing?
If the Europeans come or don’t doesn’t mean that the fields deminish..if those horses don’t show then we loose…if our own best don’t show..then we also loose but that does not diminish those that do show regardless of the surface
March 8th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
There’s nothing wrong with what Satish said…. Unless you think BC Board members have a responsibility to treat their fellow board members with respect, to abide by what they agree to in board meetings, and conduct themselves appropriately when discussing the organization’s plans, long-time partners and potential host sites. No one’s questioning what he said - just his lack of judgment in saying it.
If you want BC board members to suck-up to the industry press and be radio personalities, as Satish might put it, they can say whatever the eff they want. Satish needs to balance his candor with his responsibility. So far he has had a hard time doing that.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
One thing I agree with that Stronach said was, “racing has bigger problems to deal with than synthetic tracks.” The thing is, we don’t know what he has in mind or what his overall strategy is, there’s a lot on his plate. He did say for now how he’s going to deal with the problems proride has, said he wasn’t going to pay for a change at this point without others coughing up some money. Not a quote verbatim. That sent the anti synthetic people into further rage. I have no position on synthetic tracks at this point, it seems the stats on injuries are skewed from what I’ve read or still in question. Solving the drainage problem may be possible but here again, where’s the money going to come from?
Personally, I don’t care where the Breeders Cup is run and as a handicapper I like the idea of different track conditions so I did just fine playing Cal tracks knowing there would be value there. How the horsemen feel about proride, that’s there department and if they can’t figure out what’s good for their horses or their business, well what can I say. Their actions will determine if they go back to dirt, not only that the Cal breeding industry could also be in jeopardy. For sure players won’t have a say and I know very well the speed freaks ( breeders, horsemen and players) hate any kind of synthetic track, they would hate it even if was safer for horses by a wide margin.
March 9th, 2010 at 9:02 am
IF (and that may be a big “if”) the Breeders’ Cup board is serious about a permanent site for their championship event they should consider taking control of their own destiny and either build a new or purchase an existing race track.
The track would need to be near a “major league” city with an international airport in a state with alternative gaming. They would also need a cooperative state racing commission to award dates for the event itself and for enough days to run one or two festival or boutique meets during the year. Income from on track handle, simulcasting, and gaming could, in the years to come, shore up the BC’s ailing bottom line and potentially add enough to the championship day purses that they would rival The Dubai World Cup. Why should the second most popular event on the racing calendar and, arguably, the most important, share revenues with anyone.
An existing track would obviously need to have a turf course, but if extensive renovations were to be made to the grandstand of an existing facility, a reconfiguration of the racing surfaces could also be engineered. In fact, they could install a synthetic track and write races for all three surfaces. In the event of a Monmouth-like deluge, the turf races AND the dirt races could be moved to the all-weather for the safety of all the competitors.
Since its inception the championship day has been changed to fit the venue. Why not change the venue to fit the event. Build/ remodel the grandstand and dining areas to accommodate the myriad owners/ breeders/ celebrities that attend championship day. If temporary bleachers are required, include them, as well as restrooms and mutual machines, in the design. Eliminate the need to change the distances of some races to accommodate the track configuration of the host. Locate the BC offices on site and eliminate the need to rent office space and the annual move each October to the host site. Foreign shippers would know what to expect each year, as would bettors.
The NYRA has been in financial and political disarray for years; racing in California has been largely irrelevant for more than a decade; Churchill Downs is not really interested in or committed to the future of Thoroughbred racing, so why does the second most popular event on the racing calendar grovel to and argue with last century’s power structure. It’s time for the Breeders’ Cup to become “the tip of the spear” as the central and leading force in Thoroughbred racing.—djf
March 9th, 2010 at 11:52 am
Because several people think I’m an old nut-case, I’ve refrained for making the suggestion David has made in #48. My thought was, as CDI wants to get out of racing, why not buy Churchill Downs as a permanent site.
I overlooked three critical factors.
1: Breeders’ Cup crew would probably ruin the KY Derby.
2: CD is not near a truly international airport, unless Cinci is considered. It is in KY.
3: Good weather cannot be guaranteed. But that is true everywhere.
Possible solution: Buy a Florida track. Hialeah could be a good prospect.
March 9th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
# 48
good thoughts
#49
1) probably right
2) Louisville is International enough
3) absolutely correct
solution: they have tried buying Hialeah before..good luck in dealing with him
ps #48 wants vlt’s to go with this and CD doesn’t have them and neither does Hialeah
Now working something around the soon to be defunct Meadowlands ( Lordy am I saying this?) with an agreement from the State..a guarantee of VLT’s? Would that work? ( I am gonna be struck down for saying that)
March 10th, 2010 at 4:30 am
If Santa Anita goes back to a dirt track, then why not have the BC Classic permanently showcased at this location. You get the benefit of great weather and a historic venue, besides Kentucky,maryland and new york have the triple crown races. Being from the east coast I know the weather is horrendous in November. I see this as win win situation for both sides of the Mississippi.