Posts Tagged ‘belmont’

The Paulick Report is pleased to once again offer the pedigree insights of Edwin Anthony in the weeks leading up to the Kentucky Derby. Ed has lifelong experience in the Thoroughbred industry, has practical experience planning matings for his family’s stable and formerly as a pedigree adviser to Three Chimneys Farm. His perspective is straightforward and refreshingly opinionated, and I advise anyone interested in Thoroughbred pedigrees to pick up a copy of his book, “The American Thoroughbred (Volume One)”—available for purchase here.

In this first of a series of articles, he looks at the pedigree of Fasig-Tipton Fountain of Youth winner Eskendereya. – Ray Paulick

ESKENDEREYA (Giant’s Causeway—Aldebaran Light, by Seattle Slew)
By Edwin Anthony
I wrote a series of eight pedigree profiles for horses on the “Triple Crown trail” starting about this time last year, and recent Fountain of Youth (G2) winner Eskendereya will serve as the first horse in our series this season. It’s interesting to look back at the horses we profiled last year (Friesan Fire, Quality Road, Pioneerof the Nile, Dunkirk, I Want Revenge, Papa Clem, Chocolate Candy, Rachel Alexandra) to see how they fared.

Quality Road is obviously a top horse (he missed the Triple Crown with quarter cracks), while Dunkirk and Pioneerof the Nile were each able to place in one classic race, and I wrote a token piece about Rachel Alexandra because she looked like a very special filly, even though she had not won anything more than a G2 race at that stage.  Only a fortune teller could have predicted Rachel Alexandra’s Horse of the Year campaign after changing hands or the rapid ascension of Birdstone (sire of longshot classic winners Mine That Bird and Summer Bird) as a major classic influence.

Even though I have studied Thoroughbred pedigrees for going on 25 years, no one can get around the folly of bad luck, injuries in training, or the fact that many horses look dominant going nine furlongs (a mile-and-an-eighth) but simply aren’t up to the demanding task of running classic distances at a competitive speed.

That’s the mystery of stamina and genetics that we’re constantly trying to figure out.  Of course, even a horse that is capable of competing at classic distances still needs to put out the effort, and sometimes horses have off-days just like people.

If nothing else, we strive to learn about the strengths and limitations of the stallions and ancestors under discussion and hope to come out smarter on the other side.  At the very least, we want to learn what strategies are working in pedigrees, even if some of them aren’t up to the classic standard.  Who are the soundest horses, where is the stamina coming from, and what ancestors are best to inbreed to?  These are the answers we’re looking for.

Pedigree analysts (like myself) try to identify patterns in graded stakes results as a way of predicting the future.  Given that the Storm Cat line has been a poor source of classic winners, then you probably wouldn’t want to lean heavily on Storm Cat’s sons (or stallions out of Storm Cat mares) in your stallion recommendations for breeders that want to breed for the classics.  The Storm Cat line hasn’t had a winner of a Triple Crown race since Tabasco Cat in 1994, although Bluegrass Cat was second in the Kentucky Derby, Belmont, and Travers in 2006.  You should note that Bluegrass Cat is out of a mare by classic influence A.P. Indy and his dam is heavily inbred to the foundation mare La Troienne, including being from the Numbered Account (champion 2YO filly by Buckpasser) branch of that important family.

So, while the Storm Cat line is dominant in 2-year-old racing and in races contested at distances of 9 furlongs or shorter, it does not appear capable of producing classic types, unless there is a LOT of help on the dam side of the equation.  Of course, when you start to speak in these kinds of absolutes, a special horse can come along and provide us with the exception to the rule.

Storm Cat’s son Giant’s Causeway was a tough campaigner in Europe out of a good racemare by Rahy, with a second dam by English Derby winner and classic influence Roberto.  He was undeniably consistent and high class, winning a series of Group 1 races at more than a mile. In his final start, he gave classic distance specialist Tiznow a real run for his money in the Breeders’ Cup Classic, that being his only start on dirt.  So, Giant’s Causeway was sound, very fast, and capable of competing with top horses at the American classic distance of 10 furlongs (a mile-and-a-quarter).  This makes him an exception among sons of Storm Cat, as most of his sons that have found any measure of success at stud were much better at a mile or less and have passed on this penchant for speed among their progeny.

Giant’s Causeway has already sired Grade 1 winners in America over 10 furlongs like Heatseeker (Santa Anita Handicap), Frost Giant (Suburban), and Red Giant (NWR, Clement L. Hirsch Memorial Turf Championship), so you can see that if there is a son of Storm Cat capable of siring an American classic winner, then Giant’s Causeway is probably the one.

The runaway win by Eskendereya (by Giant’s Causeway) in the Fountain of Youth (G2) was more than visually impressive.  You could see that the horse really relished the opportunity to go two turns, and he is now 3 for 3 on the dirt, his only losses coming in his first start (a maiden event on turf at Saratoga) and a poor effort in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile (G1), contested over the synthetic surface at Santa Anita.  He was reported to have a troubled trip in that race as well.

I have often thought that a true classic type horse is able to simply get into a steady gallop and carve out “12’s,” which is to say that he can consistently complete each furlong of a race in 12 seconds.  It becomes increasingly difficult to do with each furlong, as the muscles begin to tire, and Secretariat’s world record time of 2:24 in the 1973 Belmont (over 12 furlongs) is the best example of a horse being able to accomplish this feat over such a distance.  It’s not about an explosive move or “turn of foot” with classic horses; it’s steady horsepower over a distance.  Classic horses “stay” (as the Europeans like to say), while horses more suited to shorter distances simply run out of gas, unable to maintain a steady stream of “12’s” on the toteboard teletimer.

This is exactly what Eskendereya did to the field in the Fountain of Youth (G2)—he galloped them into submission.  After taking over after a half-mile in a soft 47.92, he completed six furlongs in 1:12.41, a mile in 1:36.54, with a final time for nine furlongs of 1:48.87, echoing the many 12-second furlongs before the last one.  So, like several other sons of Giant’s Causeway, Eskendereya looks capable of running a distance of ground as far as 10 furlongs at a competitive rate of speed.  Let’s look at the bottom side of his pedigree to check for more stamina.

Eskendereya’s damsire, Seattle Slew, won the Triple Crown and has been a very successful classic influence, with descendants like A.P. Indy (Belmont, Breeders’ Cup Classic), Bernardini (Preakness, Travers), Cigar (Breeders’ Cup Classic, Dubai World Cup), Lemon Drop Kid (Belmont, Travers), Mineshaft (Jockey Club Gold Cup, Suburban), and Slew o’ Gold (Jockey Club Gold Cup twice) serving as notable examples.

Alydar (second in all 3 Triple Crown races to Affirmed) is the sire of Eskendereya’s second dam, and beyond the fact that he sired two Kentucky Derby winners (Alysheba and Strike the Gold) and a Belmont winner (Easy Goer), Horse of the Year Point Given (Preakness, Belmont, Travers) was produced by a mare by champion Turkoman, he being a son of Alydar.

We know that inbreeding to the family of Almahmoud (second dam of both Halo and Northern Dancer) has been quite successful, and Giant’s Causeway is a very good example of this, as Storm Cat is a grandson of Northern Dancer and Rahy (his damsire) is out of a mare by Halo.  The pedigree of Eskendereya shows why a six-generation computer program is a good investment, as his third dam carries intensive inbreeding to the Almahmoud family as well.  His third dam is by Northern Dancer himself (giving Eskendereya “balanced” inbreeding to Northern Dancer—through a son and a daughter), and while his fourth dam was sired by the stout stamina influence Ribot (winner of the 12-furlong “Arc” twice) his fifth dam is actually the mare Cosmah, she being the dam of Halo and a daughter of Almahmoud. Thus, Eskendereya is not only inbred to Northern Dancer through  a son and a daughter, he is inbred to Halo’s dam, Cosmah, 6 x 5 and carries four total crosses of Almahmoud.

As the ancestors Northern Dancer, Halo, and their granddam Almahmoud get further back in pedigrees, this reinforcement strategy of crossing horses inbred to Almahmoud should continue to find success and revive their influence in classic pedigrees.  My parents bred and raced Preakness winner Pine Bluff (inbred 4 x 4 to Almahmoud), and I have noticed him working well with reinforcement of Almahmoud’s genes, crossing successfully with stallions like More Than Ready (by Southern Halo—closely inbred to Almahmoud), Menifee (by Harlan—closely inbred to Almahmoud), and Jules (from the Northern Dancer family and carrying Halo in his pedigree).  So, it seems to be a strategy that is paying dividends with stallions and mares already carrying inbreeding to Almahmoud.

Given the fact that Giant’s Causeway has already proven capable of siring runners that excel at classic distances, and the fact that Eskendereya carries a number of other classic influences in his pedigree (Seattle Slew, Alydar, Ribot, and intensive inbreeding to the influential Almahmoud family), I’d say that his classic prospects look very bright indeed.  His clear preference for dirt racing and ability to string together one 12 second furlong after another only boosts his stock, in my opinion.  If Eskenereya can arrive in Louisville with a solid Florida Derby (G1) effort under his belt, he should be a very strong contender.
 
Edwin Anthony was the staff pedigree consultant at Three Chimneys Farm for six years and has penned dozens of articles on pedigree research.  He also published The American Thoroughbred (Volume I) in 2008, which can be ordered via the banner ad link on this web page or on his web site at www.thoroughbredadvisor.com.

By Ray Paulick
It’s Triple Crown season, so owners and trainers have begun to compile roadmaps to Louisville for their Kentucky Derby hopefuls. So much has changed in recent years with the advent of synthetic tracks, a shuffling of dates for important prep races, and the emergence of new graded stakes with purses fueled by casino money.

The Derby is generally the only race in the Triple Crown that has an oversupply of candidates. Derby Fever strikes otherwise knowledgeable horsemen and sound businessman to the point that getting a runner into the big dance is a small victory of some sorts—even if it means the only picture their horse is in at the finish is the wide-angle shot taken from the blimp flying overhead.

Getting into the Derby field is simple. Your 3-year-old has to rank in the top 20 by money earned in graded or group stakes—not just in America but anywhere in the world. The amount to make the top 20 varies from year to year, but it’s generally somewhere in the $100,000-$150,000 range.

All graded stakes, however, are not created equally.

There was an exception to the graded stakes rule in 2009, when Churchill Downs and Kempton racetrack in England offered a guaranteed spot in the Kentucky Derby starting gate to the winner of the Kentucky Derby Challenge Stakes in March (it also included some travel money). The purpose of the Challenge was to stir up some interest in the Kentucky Derby among bettors in the United Kingdom. The fact it was a one-and-done promotion (not to mention that Churchill canned Tom Aronson, who came up with the idea) suggests it was not successful in its maiden voyage.

The reliance on global graded stakes earnings has worked OK, but there are some obvious pitfalls. What if, for example, Sheikh Mohammed owned the first four finishers in the UAE Derby, a graded stakes in his backyard with a $2-million purse, and he wanted to run all horses in the Kentucky Derby. He might have that opportunity, since the winner of the race gets $1.2 million, the runner-up $400,000, $200,000 to third and $100,000 to fourth.

Then we have the imbalance in American Graded Stakes purses. For example, Uh Oh Bango, last year’s runner-up in the $750,000 Delta Jackpot, a Grade 3 race at Delta Downs, is almost assured to have a starting spot in the Derby, thanks to the $150,000 he earned. Same with the upcoming Sunland Derby, an $800,000 race that will be graded this year for the first time (it’s one of the races Mine That Bird didn’t win last year). The winner and runner-up of that race will likely earn enough to make the field.

That relegates traditionally important Grade 2 races like the Fountain of Youth ($250,000 purse) or San Felipe Stakes ($150,000) to lesser roles on the road to the Kentucky Derby. Doesn’t seem right.

The answer is simple, and it’s not one that I can claim as my idea. Churchill Downs should come up with a comprehensive points scale for top three or top four finishes in Grade 1, Grade 2 and Grade 3 races, so that the runner-up in a Grade 3 race doesn’t get put ahead of the winner in a Grade 2 race just because the Grade 3 race carried a higher purse.  It shouldn’t be that difficult, and will be a much more fair process for determining who deserves to be in the Derby’s starting field.

This will not happen in 2010, as the nominations have already been solicited for this year’s Triple Crown races, and the conditions for each of the races spelled out. But with the contract between Churchill Downs and NBC expiring this year (along with NBC’s contract to televise the Preakness and ABC’s deal on the Belmont), it’s a perfect time to address this type of issue.

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

An editorial in today’s New York Daily News does not exactly take a cautious viewpoint on NYRA’s recent stonewalling on an audit request. The unnamed writer says that "Gov. Paterson and the Legislature cannot succumb to such extortion tactics. They should tell NYRA to get lost."

We’re not privy to the inner workings of NYRA and don’t know Comptroller DiNapoli, but might it be suggested that NYRA open their books before the public tarnish becomes overwhelming.

To put this into real world terms, if you were pulled over by a cop and they asked to search your car, would it be worth the hassle to deny them access unless you had something to hide? We’re not suggesting that’s the case with NYRA. We’re only saying that hiding behind a court ruling intended for a charter school so they don’t have to open their books does not pass the smell test.

In a scenario it seems only racing in the US could dream up, perhaps the only thing worse than there not being a Belmont this year could actually be having one.

For the rest of this editorial, click here. Then come back to the Paulick Report and let us know what you think.

- Bradford Cummings

Today, NY comptroller Thomas DiNapoli subpoenaed financial records from NYRA after the organization said there may not be enough money left to run the Belmont Stakes in 2010.

Clearly suspicious, DiNapoli said "Less than six months ago, NYRA said it was financially stable. Now, NYRA says without VLT money it may not be able to stay in operation until the Belmont Stakes. In the meantime, it’s been trying to hide its books from my auditors."

Click here to read the details and then check back with the Paulick Report and let us know what you think.

- Bradford Cummings

Lexington advertising executive Fred Pope has come up with an intriguing proposal for a race between Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta, one that would help explain how racing’s business model for simulcasting is broken and needs fixing. Will any one listen or act on the suggestion? –Ray Paulick

NYRA was reduced to this weak position because the premier track operator cannot make $400,000 from off-track wagering on the race.

That’s because of the upside-down, off-track revenue model, where casinos and off-track betting companies pay as little as 2% to the host track, while they keep up to 18% of the wager themselves.

If $20 million were wagered off-track on the proposed race, the purse account would have only gotten $300,000. The off-track bet takers would have gotten $3,400,000. That’s right, ten times more money just for taking the bet, than for the racehorse owners putting on the show.

Trying to put on a show for racing has become the Theatre of the Absurd. Host tracks cannot make the fillies’ owners “an offer they can’t refuse”. Perhaps the racehorse owners need to step in with some common sense.

Inside the Box Thinking

You are about to read a outrageous proposal for how the owners of the star attractions, Jess Jackson and Jerry Moss, can focus the sporting world on Thoroughbred racing and deliver the Filly Race of the Century.

When you do a Situation Analysis on racing today, you come to the painful conclusion that the host event gets nothing from off-track wagering on its product and nothing from the television networks for its product. Since the basic objective of providing the owners of the racehorses with a valuable purse, the strategy becomes crystal clear:

If you can make 20% from the wagers made on-track, but only 2% from the wagers made off-track, then you need to see how you can maximize the on-track wagers.

No off-track wagering and No televised coverage

Sheer madness? Maybe not, it seems to work for the NFL when they haven’t sold out a studium.

To make a statement for all racehorse owners about the upside-down, off-track revenue model that bled $500 million out of purses this year, the owners of these two magnificent fillies have a timely opportunity.

Jess Jackson knows how to market a product and Jerry Moss definitely understands the entertainment business, so let’s explore how these two racehorse owners can achieve for their sport what the industry around them cannot seem to grasp — You either control your product and its distribution, or someone else will control it.  You can increase demand for your product by limiting supply.

We are about to revisit the revenue model of 1938, when Seabiscuit was a star.

Let’s Go Retro

Hell, Jess Jackson even saw Seabiscuit race at Santa Anita, so he knows the excitement and electricity that fans feel being on the grounds at a closed sporting event.

There are three tracks big enough to handle the crowd — Belmont, Churchill Downs and Santa Anita (I know the surface problem for Jess, but this is a different consideration).

I would go to those tracks and offer the race, with these conditions. The track would get all admissions, concessions, parking, programs, etc. The track and local purse account would get the on-track takeout from a quality-packed under card of races.

For the big event, the fillies’ owners would agree the race would have no set purse amount, but instead they would get 100% of the takeout from on-track wagers on the race. In effect, the racehorse owners take the risks.

By locking out all off-track wagering and televised coverage, if we can get a crowd of 80,000 and drive the on-track handle to $20 million, the takeout for the purse would be $4 million gross. If we paid back to 6th place, there is a huge incentive for the owners of other good fillies to enter the race and drive the handle higher.

To publicize the race, the two major owners could take the satisfaction of the winner being named Horse-of-the-Year and dedicate their share of the winnings to charities like the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure and the Race for Education. A ban on cell phones and computers at the track will further boost the on-track handle.

A replay of the race the next day will allow fans to see the great race, but the attraction of a great sporting event would be live attendance.

The tracks would need their racing commissions to pre-approve a non-traditional day, similar to Breeders’ Cup days.

With all the advances in technology and expanded distribution of wagering, the host track should be able to make a lot more money today than they could in 1938. But, because the off-track revenue model fails to pay the host event for its product, the stakeholders of racing are back where they started.

The real “True Blood”

Last July 2008 the industry was “shocked” by a series of articles I wrote on this subject. But, obviously not shocked enough to fix it.

As a result, more than $1 billion has been sucked out of racing this year. The money is lost forever to the tracks, racehorse owners, trainers, jockeys and everyone in between. The lost money has not flowed down to breeders through the sales as reinvestment in racing prospects. The lost money will not be spent at the upcoming September Sales

This past year I have traveled to Arizona for the Racetrack Symposium and throughout the year presented the problem and solution to the heads of every organization in racing and breeding. To date, not one of these organizations have done anything to change the off-track model or push for the corrections to the IHA.

Each month about $100 million is bleeding out of our sport and the rate is accelerating very rapidly through the cannibalization of bets previously made at the tracks and now increasingly made through phone and Internet companies with no connection to racing.

The Future of Racing

If we can get quick passage of the correction to the IHA and the host event starts getting 50% of the takeout from bets made at other tracks; then gets up to 75% from non-racing bet takers, and finally the future of racing is when the host event can start accepting wagers direct from customers for a virtual “on-track” revenue model. We could have 15% of the wagers going to the host event.

Then on big race days, if we have $50 million in off-track handle, the revenue at 15% to the host event would be $7.5 million for the day. That’s how you bring Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta, or Curlin and Big Brown together in races.

That’s when you have the star power to fill the seats and make racing a viable sport again. So that no matter where the bet is madej, or how the bet is made, the majority of the revenue goes to those producing the show.

Once the IHA is corrected, the opportunity for creative, innovative thinking on how racing is packaged and presented will abound, because the host event can make money on the show.

But, until then we will continue in the Theatre of the Absurd, where the off-track bet takers walk off with all of your money and your sport.

By Bradford Cummings

As I have said many times before on the Paulick Report, I am an outsider looking in on a sport I have grown to love and admire. Like when I had that first drink with my now wife, I could not shake the sentiment “where have you been all my life?” And after a talk with Director of Communications and Media Relations Dan Silver and Director of Marketing Neema Ghazi at the New York Racing Association, it appears to me the new direction for New York racing has new fans like myself in mind. With a little nudging and some tender loving care, the industry would do well to follow their lead and open up this beautiful sport to the masses of potential fans.
 
Catching them in the middle of Saratoga madness, it is clear these two young men take their jobs extremely seriously because they themselves are lifelong fans. In a previous conversation, Ghazi had told me he actually grew up in Saratoga so racing was in his blood. As he would tell me several times in a short period of time, he considered Saratoga to have the best jockeys, best trainers and best horses in the country during its historic meet each summer. I suppose it would be like growing up next to Yankee Stadium, a bit hard to avoid the hype.
 
Silver on the other hand, was a Philadelphia boy who gravitated to horse racing through the television, a medium he regrets we do too little with as an industry. “TV has been neglected,” said Silver. “One of the great mistakes the industry ever made was not jumping on TV like football did.”
 
This regret, though he is certainly not old enough to remember, has informed much of what he puts emphasis on when considering his communications plan. Both Dan and Neema put a lot into the necessity of quality television for the sport to grow. Both gentlemen touted MSG + as a great way to fill that gap, specifically when considering the racetracks under their watch. This well-known regional signal essentially reaches the Midlantic region of the United States and can also be tuned in through DirecTV. This exclusive feed gives NYRA racetracks an advantage others do not have as experts like handicapper Andy Serling among others gets exposure and helps to build a local and national brand.
 
Of course, Andy Serling can now be found online through his Twitter feed, largely the brainchild of these two Young Turks. “You can find Andy Serling, one of the top handicappers in the world, tweeting his picks each day,” said Ghazi. “Currently, his Twitter page has 1,281 subscribers in just four weeks.” With such gems as “Maybe the Linda Rice supporters can tell me why Sextant is 3:1 and not 30:1 in the 5th” and “Kiaran McLaughlin is 0 for 16 with 2YO filly firsters on dirt over 5 years at Saratoga” it is clear this feature will be a mainstay for racing fans during the many years to come.
 
Under their watch, NYRA has created a dedicated YouTube channel with nearly 2,000 archived videos and 36,716 views, a Facebook page with 2,836 fans and a blog called Saratoga Insider that covers the backside at Saratoga from the insider perspective. Most will remember Curlin’s Corner during last year’s Woodward and NYRA is back at it again with Rachel’s Sandbox, an exquisitely simple and effective fan page that leads with a video of the her historic Preakness win. Others in our industry could take a page from this marketing plan which is far more reminsincent of a Lebron James push than the strategies that have made racing a footnote in the American lexicon.
 
Due to these obvious improvements, it is no wonder attendance and handle are both up over last year despite a near depression. While factors like lower gas prices and the propensity for “staycations” play into the hands of improved financial figures, other racetracks could use similar reasons to boast if they had improvement. But just like with Churchill’s successful Downs After Dark, innovation is often rewarded in an industry that oftentimes looks left out of the evolutionary cycle. Much credit should be given to Charlie Hayward and the rest of the NYRA leadership for understanding that in order to move forward, we must try new things and not look back at old solutions.
 
With the economy still not in full recovery and a sport still not back into the spotlight, it is good to know that Ghazi and Silver understand at its essence what they have to sell. “A young family of four can come to Saratoga for as little as $6,” said Ghazi. “They can bring all their own stuff and just have a picnic.” There’s simplicity in this statement that should assure the industry these two and the rest of the NYRA staff truly gets it.  
 
If you get them in the door, they’ll become lifelong fans. Take it from a Chicago boy now writing for the Paulick Report and a Philadelphia guy who stumbled upon racing while flipping the channels on his way to a different destination.

By Bradford Cummings
As the state of Kentucky continues to spit in the eye of the Thoroughbred industry, it is essential the power brokers and decision makers capitalize on the few openings available to improve our product and bring racing to the casual fan. And quite frankly, until this summer there seemed to be little outside of the usual steps taken to grow our sport. That is why Churchill Downs’ extremely successful Downs After Dark has been such a bright spot for the historic racing landmark.
 
Many racing fans chortle at calling nighttime racing at Churchill out of the box thinking. Night racing has been part of the sport of kings for years. But for those of you high-fallutin naysayers, the magic of those three nights this summer came out of an understanding that racing to the average fan is about more than what’s on the track. What few in this business grasp onto is this sport’s greatest advantage is also its greatest disadvantage, the long delays between races. What you do with that gap clearly defines the experience for the casual fan and proved to be the difference between a one-night flash in the pan and a successful budding enterprise.
 
The thought process behind Downs After Dark actually began in 2001 when permanent lighting was part of Churchill’s expansion plan. But after 9/11 and the popular concern that the economy would tank, the lights were cut from the funding package. But as they say, the dream never died and remained in the plans to explore down the road.
 
Fast forward to last year when the folks at CDI decided to revisit the idea of a nighttime extravaganza. Looking at their properties across the country, it seemed only logical to test market the concept with temporary lighting at their flagship track. But even in test mode, they had the foresight to know night racing alone would not expand their fan base over several nights.
 
“We asked ourselves, what can we do to trigger those fans that may have attended Derby and Oaks to come back,” said Darren Rogers, senior director of communications and media services.
 
With this mantra, Churchill set up an evening for people with a wide variety of interests. For those with more expensive tastes, options included everything from high-end dinners cooked by celebrity chefs to dinner and dancing packages complete with multi-course meals. And for those who were not so picky, happy hour pricing and live music all night long gave the track a nightlife feel and an air of excitement that in some ways was better than those historic first Saturdays in May.
 
And yet, after the first event, those in charge of the evening’s festivities found themselves conflicted on the night’s story. As Rogers told the Paulick Report, “We knew this could be something special. And we knew at the end of the night, we messed it up.” While attendance expectations ranged from 12,000 – 30,000, Rogers insisted they should have been better prepared and continued to take full responsibility for the shortcomings and long beverage lines.
 
But it’s not if a mistake is made that shows true colors, it’s how well you respond and clean up the mess. With those parameters in mind, Churchill taught us all a virtual master class in altering public opinion and turning lemons into lemonade.
 
They took out full page ads in both major Louisville newspapers apologizing for the mistakes and promising to make things better. They tripled their food and beverage staff, lowered ticket prices, offered dollar drinks and even had executives work behind the bars shelling out drinks and hot dogs to patrons.
 
And yet still, the question remained, “How much will the food and beverage blunders of the first week affect the second night?” The answer: not by much at all. The second night, exactly a week after the first, brought in only 388 fewer fans, proving they had effectively neutralized the bad word of mouth from the first night. Even better, the same magic was there from the week prior.
 
“Our original plan was to scale back the ancillaries the second night,” said Rogers. But they solidified after that night, Downs After Dark was as much about the nightlife as it was about the racing. “If you weren’t here, it is very difficult to explain to people,” said Rogers. And as most know, their reward for sticking with the concept was a record 33,481 fans on the final evening, the most for any Churchill Downs date not called Derby or Oaks.
 
While they are still going through the handle numbers for the three nights, the early returns prove the theory that night racing was about more than the horses on the track. While the first two nights were significantly above the average race day, attendance was nearly four times more than usual. And if you were judging Downs After Dark on handle alone, the third day of record attendance was a disaster, barely performing above the average for a day of 7,500. There are factors that help explain these numbers with Belmont’s twilight racing being the only action for bettors to play the first and second night and there being nothing accompanying the final night. But still it is abundantly clear that night racing at the Downs is not a night geared for the hardcore horseplayer.
 
When looking to the future, Rogers told the Paulick Report there was no option not on the table at this point. It is too soon to give hard numbers on the business figures, but they are clearly gearing up for another round of this extremely successful experiment by asking how to take the next step.
 
Will they install permanent lights? It’s certainly a possibility, although the cost is prohibitive and may delay a final decision. If you want to be of influence on this decision, Churchill is running a poll on their website and one lucky voter will receive a box seat for six at next year’s Derby. Of course, all decisions of this magnitude will have to be brought to the board of directors, but it would be difficult to believe there wouldn’t be support for more of the same success. When asked if a night Derby was on its way, Rogers said, “There are currently no serious discussions on the Derby being at night.” On the other hand, Rogers reiterated “There is no option that is not on the table at this point.”
 
Could Downs After Dark be the precursor to a primetime Derby that would benefit the sport with primetime ratings? Only time will tell. But one thing is for sure. Churchill Downs has stumbled upon a winner with this new format. It may not be a hit with the institutional gamblers, but if we are to grow this sport it is important we give the average fan what they want: to be entertained. We have a feeling Churchill will gladly plead guilty to that charge.