I've grumbled about the arbitrary system before; seems Mr. Paulick agrees:

https://paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/view-from-the-eighth-pole-sprinting-off-to-the-breeding-shed/

Harness racing seems to have the right idea. They don't use grades (at least in North America)...

Thanks for the link, Tex.  Good solid article backed up with facts.

What I find interesting, as well, is now that there are only approx. half the number of races total and half the number of horses being bred from the top levels from years ago, it should follow that a 50% reduction in graded stakes has taken place.  

By not reducing the number of graded stakes to reflect the breeding and racing population, the actual value of black type has been diluted and reduced.

Quick buck artists work overtime.

And that's the problem with race grades. A race might get great horses several years in a row, get rated G1, then gets a shitty field like that one which is probably G3 at best.

But this year's PA Derby will still officially be called a G1 and it'll take several years of bad horses to get a downgrade.

The solution is a race should earn its grade AFTER it's run.  Or at least, be eligible for downgrade should the field be suspect.  As what happened when a graded turf stakes is taken off, it gets an automatic downgrade and only gets to keep the original grade if enough horses stayed in the race.  If half the field scratches, too bad, you're downgraded.

I mean, if we just did away with grades at the start of the year, we would still know which belong in which "tier" (the replacement for grading, but is not official in any way).

Top tier: Breeders' Cup races for older horses, Kentucky Derby

Second tier: Breeders' Cup races for juveniles, Preakness, Belmont, and Breeders' Cup Challenge Series races in the older divisions (so I'm thinking Metropolitan, JCGC, Pacific Classic, etc).

Third tier:  PA Derby, Travers, etc -- pretty much any of the races that cannibalize the talent from each other but that aren't direct preps for BC older horse races.

Those short fields out in CA with half the field trained by Baffert are 4th tier at best.

I don't think there's even one handicapper and bettor who would care if Grades were done away with.  We look for good betting races and we look for key races for future consideration of entrants, among all the many other things we need to weigh while working out a race.  

Why would the fans and non-bettors care?

The only ones who care are the connections and the breeders.   They've got dollar signs in their eyes.

Yeah, the grades are so arbitrary as to have become meaningless.

I forgot which website or book said this but I tend to agree.  When you're comparing race classes, Grade 1 and 2 can be considered as equals, and then you group together Grade 3 and Listed in the same way.    Think about it, you don't really consider a horse moving between G1 and G2 or between G3 and L to be a major class jump/drop, but it seems to be more significant between G2 and G3.   You look at a G3 race at Woodbine and they might as well be restricted to locals because that's mostly what they get.  But look at our G1 and G2 races and bam, suddenly we have Chad Brown and Bill Mott shipping horses in from New York. 

And then as I said, Breeders' Cup (and arguably the Kentucky Derby itself) belong in a tier to themselves, as they are above the others by so much.  The fields are stacked with G1 and G2 winners already.  Not like a normal G1 where it'll be some G1/G2 along with some G3/L horses stepping up with something to prove.

In a way the grade system is like codifying the "Key Race Method" of handicapping but stupidly, carries over to future years. So if the 2022 race yielding a bunch of future winners and Eclipse champs, it is called G1.  Never mind if the 2023 renewal is so much weaker, it's still called G1 when it doesn't qualify as a Key Race at all.

TexSquared said:

Yeah, the grades are so arbitrary as to have become meaningless.

That's it, in a nutshell.  

TexSquared said...

Second tier: Breeders' Cup races for juveniles, Preakness, Belmont, and Breeders' Cup Challenge Series races in the older divisions (so I'm thinking Metropolitan, JCGC, Pacific Classic, etc).

Agree with everything you say, except The Belmont.   That's blapsemy.  :) 

If it was a choice between the Belmont and the KY Derby, and only 1 could hold 1st tier, I would not put the KY Derby as a G1 if you're going to put The Belmont as 2nd tier.  :)    The way I think about KY Derby, it's custom and tradition to act like this is our best classic distance race, but it's not.  It's basically a total chaos race where the best horse doesn't win because of that.  May as well call it a maiden race but a maiden race at 1-1/4.......because they are all maidens at this distance. 

but in terms of prioritizing ....... before getting rid of Grading system, we should just get rid of Claiming races altogether.   Probably solve the "cheaters" problem by at least 75% right there.  ahhaha

 

What jumps out at me is a number of things, one-Bris awarded the best late number in last race
to 3 speedballs: 99 Saudi Crown 98 Reincarnate 96Il Miracolo. suggest to look at the distance and 

grade of their race. 2 - Bris lists 7 angles for the race and Saudi Crown is first in all 7.

3. They don't recap the best races on a off track, they are listed by each horses data and I suggest
to recap all of those that raced on a off track. BTW Saudi Crown has the best off number 106 triple digit,
Saudi Crown 4 races , 3 triple digits, his 106 was on a Sys.
4. Why are they letting  Modern Era race in a g1 race. Thats crazy.

--