This is a place for friendly and civil discussion of horse racing of all types including handicapping.
Latest 5/15/19 by RAESFAN
Latest Nov-27 by PhatMama469
Latest Nov-26 by Wintertrian
Latest Nov-26 by Wintertrian
Latest Nov-22 by Gerh
Latest Nov-21 by pianot
Latest Nov-13 by Plus2lbs
Latest Nov-10 by DogsUp
Latest Nov-9 by TexSquared
Latest Nov-6 by Northof64
Latest Nov-5 by PISTOL9
Latest Nov-5 by DogsUp
Latest Nov-5 by PhatMama469
Latest Nov-5 by Pedigreestar
Latest Nov-2 by pianot
Latest Nov-1 by Plus2lbs
Latest Oct-30 by PhatMama469
Latest Oct-30 by RAESFAN
Latest Oct-28 by PISTOL9
Since 1981, there have been only three fields under 14 entries: 13 in 1997, 1985 and in 1980. The average field size 1981-1999 was 17.37.
The 1994 Derby (won by GoForGin) had 14 runners
I found this link. I am mistaken - I thought the Derby had a smaller field not too long ago. I guess I was thinking about betting interests. It used to be that horses owned by the same barn would go as an entry, and there was always a “field” entry consisting of several horses...
It's been a high number of entrants ever since 1980. In the 21st century, 19.05 average. 1981-1999, 17.37 average. 1970-80, 14.73. 1950-69, 13.55.
Here are the tabulations I made:
2019-2000: no years under 16 entries
Dubai and Japan Horses are here to stay.CDI wants the revenue generated by the Japanese pools.
I found this link. I am mistaken - I thought the Derby had a smaller field not too long ago. I guess I was thinking about betting interests. It used to be that horses owned by the same barn would go as an entry, and there was always a “field” entry consisting of several horses... https://www.kentuckyderby.com/uploads/wysiwyg/assets/uploads/Field_Size__2017_.pdf
Nice find, Gin!
Sorry to fill you in...it's a GAMBLING event..bigger pools the better..no?
So what if the last two American horses don't get in because of the points system..run better and qualify.
I'll take my lumps either way..
RAESFAN said...a lot of TC runners over the years, have not been the same afterwards. It is asking a lot of these horses, so they are "lucky" to some degree to get out unscathed.
4 horses that make up the KY Derby superfecta can't / aren't runnning in the Preakness.
Let's not fool ourselves. The KY Derby isn't just asking a lot of these horses, the lasix and everything else that comes before it compounds it. The derby is only the culmination of ruining them.
(Winx is standing in her barn, shaking her head). Just racing doesn't ruin horses. We need to get out of denial.
twoshots said...It's all a matter of degrees. Why risk running gimped up cheap claimers at lesser tracks?
No, it's not a "matter of degrees"........it's all a matter of how your conduct your racing programs.
Gimped up cheap claimers shouldn't be running at lesser tracks. No gimped up horse should be made to run at all! Ever been to the backside at those places, late at night... do you hear them pawing the ground, do you hear if they are in pain, etc.???? Do you think the poor barns have veterinary $$ to address all that?
They don't run gimped up horses in cheap claiming races in Hong Kong.
When using the model of "matter of degrees" you have to evaluate the actual "degrees" that are being included within the scope of your model. It's a matter of degrees is like saying at one end of the spectrum you have men who slap their wives open-handed, and compare it to men who hurl their wives against a wall 10' away. *Matter of degrees* has never been an ethical model for me on which to base ANYTHING. Because it usually includes some kind of wonky moral relativity (in which the viewer has the opportunity to justify stuff and to think stuff like "gosh, it could always be worse...").