“Is blogging dead?” was a question posed by my esteemed colleague John of The Race is not to the Swift. He rightfully points out that other options such as Twitter and Facebook are easier outlets than blogging. Indeed.

I commented that as an example, I had posted several tweets of stuff I encountered while twirling around the web last night and had I not been on Twitter that they would have probably ended up as a blog post. As an experiment, of sorts, here’s what I probably would have written had I not had twitter:

While poking around on Hulu after finding an explanation of a tote board to post over here, I found this interview with Mike Watchmaker on Charismatic’s Triple Crown Bid on Charlie Rose. This made me wonder if Charlie Rose did any interviews prior to Big Brown’s Triple Crown attempt, and alas he did!

Since I didn’t really know much about Charismatic or racing in 1999 in general, I looked a little further. I watched the 1999 Belmont to see if any of Watchmaker’s predictions were right (they were not).

And imagine my surprise when I discovered the Charismatic / Chris Antely story, which I knew nothing about! Upon checking out Charismatic’s wiki page I discovered that an ESPN 30 for 30 episode is currently in development on the Charismatic / Antley story (thanks to @raceday360 for the ESPN link), very exciting! Apparently, there’s also a book on the saga entitled Three Strides Before the Wire (via @BklynBckstretch).

And as if all this wasn’t exciting and interesting enough, Haskin also has a compelling post about trainers who are still working that “once ruled the sport“. A true and proven talent not being able to sell themselves and ending up in relative obscurity is not a new phenomenon and certainly not limited to horse racing. History is littered with examples of artists, writers, musicians, etc who suffered the same fate, but as Jessica put it:

I still look at Turner and marvel, that trainer knows what it is to win the Triple Crown.

Here’s a recent trainee of his, Reforestation, hitting the board at 48-1 in the 2009 Grade 1 Prioress at Belmont.

Turner trains for Castle Village Farms, if money bags owners won’t work with the last trainer to win a Triple Crown there’s no reason why you can’t!

Posted by dana on Dec 04 2009    
Filed Under: Big Brown, Internet, Racing History, 2009, Twitter, Steve Haskin, Legend, Belmont, Triple Crown, Belmont Stakes, TV, Racing

(2 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

18 Comments »

One of the points used to prove that Jess Jackson is not a sportsman is that he stated that he wished the Woodward purse was a bit higher.

Is he being a persnickety rich guy or pointing out a genuine inequity in a purse structure that favors breeding your talented 3yos versus campaigning them at 4? He’s probably being a persnickety rich guy (not that I care, see points 1-3), but this also raises an interesting point.

Who among us has not bemoaned the retirement of a talented 3yo colt bound for the shed? Who among us doesn’t want to see our “stars” (because 3yo colts are the only ones marketed to a mainstream audience) race longer?

Let’s face it, there’s no financial incentive for owners to return their talented 3yo to the track and the purse difference between the $1M Travers or $1M Pennsylvania Derby vs the $500k Woodward couldn’t be a better example.

Our friend Frank at That’s Amore Stables elaborated brilliantly last year:

Consider this: on the same weekend that Big Brown contested the $2 million Kentucky Derby, the richest race at Churchill for four year-olds was the $500,000 Turf Classic.

At Pimlico, older males ran in the $250,000 Pimlico Special while Big Brown was cleaning up in the $1 million Preakness.

And in New York, while Big Brown tries to secure the Triple Crown in the $1 million Belmont, older males will tussle on the turf in the $400,000 Manhattan.

In other words, while Big Brown was running for $4 million in purses, your older horse — call him Old Grey — topped out at $1,150,000. Old Grey was running for less than 30 percent of the purses available to Big Brown.

While JJ is probably playing a little poker to see if he can get NYRA to sweeten the pot, he inadvertently highlights systemic measures in place to support the “bred to be a stallion” phenomena. Now there’s something to complain about!

Posted by dana on Aug 23 2009    
Filed Under: 4yo, Industry, Big Brown, 2009, Sportsmanship, 3yo, Breeding, Let Horses Race, Retirement, NYRA, Racing

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

1 Comment »

As Jessica points out, the Oaks is always overshadowed by the Derby and this year is no exception. I make a bit of a joke about in my Oaks Dating post (the opening paragraph) but the disparity between the Derby and Oaks coverage is SO great, it’s as if the Oaks just any other graded race for 3yo fillies. Is it?

I had the pleasure of having just this discussion, via the Horseplayers Teen Party Chat Line (twitter), with Ed DeRosa (who now blogs!). I sort of stupidly took his bait about why there was no outrage re: filly races on Friday compared to the Breeders’ Cup and the party began there. The point I was trying to make is that it’s frustrating to see such a huge disparity between how the races are covered. He freely admits that, in his opinion, not only is the Oaks just another G1 race but that it gets a “tremendous amount of publicity for what it is“.

In trying to make my point, a quick twirl around the mainstream media racing sites at approximately 11am-ish this morning showed the following:

BH.com, all derby above the fold, TT.com, no Oaks above the fold, DRF (from phone), no Oaks headlines.

As of now (roughly 8pm-ish Monday night of Derby week), Bloodhorse is (and will continue to be) all Derby above the fold as their prime section is Triple Crown Mania), Thoroughbred Times is all Derby above the fold (no special Derby layout) and DRF has a new Derby homepage that actually has no news above the fold but 1 of 12 news items are on the Oaks and 10 of 12 are on the Derby (the other was on the tragic accident at Churchill). So, out of the top 3 media outlets, nothing on the Oaks above the fold.

There are currently 50 headlines about racing news, 35 of them are on the Derby while 4 of them are on the Oaks. That’s 70% of all racing coverage devoted to the Derby with 8% of all racing coverage being devoted to the Oaks.

Put aside for the moment the very valid point made by Val that this year’s Oaks is not all that interesting given how much Rachel Alexandra is overshadowing her entry mates. Did that situation slow down the Derby coverage last year when Big Brown was perceived to be a few cuts above the rest? Was last year’s deeper Oaks field covered at a reasonably higher percentage than this year’s? Without having taken the same sample at this time last year I can’t say for sure, but what are the odds that the coverage was noticeably different… 15-1, 30-1, 50-1?.

Publicity and news coverage are (sometimes) different. Just because the Oaks isn’t being well covered (har har) from a racing perspective doesn’t mean it’s not being promoted, as DeRosa points out. Not too long ago when I first started following racing I thought the Oaks was the filly equivalent of the Derby. Churchill, for the most part, promotes it as such. The Derby and Oaks both have a site with similar structure and content. The Oaks is also well attended but as one GbG commenter points out, the stellar attendance and handle might be more of a function of how Churchill structures it’s tickets and perhaps that the locals love their Oaks.

A quick visit to the Oaks Wikipedia page uncovers this:

The Oaks and the Derby are the oldest continuously contested sporting events in history and the only horse races to be held at its original site since its conception.

[…]

The Kentucky Oaks is considered by some to be the second most popular horse race in the American horse racing society due to its attendance. It attracts about 100,000 people in attendance a year since 2001’s 127th running of the Kentucky Oaks.[3] In 1980 it was about 50,000 people and by 1989 it had reached about 67,000 people.[1] The attendance at the Kentucky Oaks usually surpassed the attendance at the Preakness Stakes, the Belmont Stakes, as well as the Breeders’ Cup.

It’s worth noting that the cites are from books on the history of Louisville. I think it might be fair to say that the Oaks is the second most popular horse race in Louisville, but by using the yardstick of news coverage it doesn’t seem to ring true elsewhere.

So, Churchill promotes the Oaks as if it’s the filly equivalent of the Derby but the media either doesn’t treat it as such because it does agree OR thinks the filly equivalent of the Derby only merits 8% of coverage vs. 70% for the Derby. Either way, I stand by my original point… annoying!

Posted by dana on Apr 27 2009    
Filed Under: Big Brown, 2009, Twitter, Rachel Alexandra, Industry, Kentucky Oaks, Triple Crown, Kentucky Derby, Marketing, Media, Racing

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

21 Comments »

(gueds)

Tonight I had an appointment with my chiropractor. It’s been at least 6 or 7 months since I’ve been in to see him. This time last year I was going weekly and every week we’d discuss Big Brown, IEAH, or something Triple Crown related. And he always started the conversation “I saw something about a horse racing hedge fund” or “what do you think of Big Brown?” or “what’s up with Big Brown’s trainer?”. Obviously horse racing was out there in front of general public.

At some point this afternoon I remembered this and wondered if what, if anything, he had been seeing about horse racing. Would he ask me who I liked for the Derby or what I make of Dunkirk or I Want Revenge? How about Mullins or Paragallo? I decided not to bring it up and see what happened, to let him be the canary in the coal mine of racing’s current mainstream awareness.

Mind you, we had a lot of catching to do re: the various knots in my neck and back, but I did bring up that I had been working on a horse racing related project, in addition to my day job (as an excuse for why I had let things get a little out of hand in the health maintenance department). He did respond with an enthusiastic “nice” but no follow-up mention of anything Derby or horse related…. not even the tragedy of the polo ponies.

The whole appointment was a little devoid of “small talk” so perhaps the fact that he didn’t bring up anything is not really a good indicator that racing’s current awareness level in the mainstream. My next appointment is the Monday after the Derby, let’s see if the canary is still singing then.

Posted by dana on Apr 23 2009    
Filed Under: 2009, Big Brown, Iavarone, Dunkirk, I Want Revenge, Mainstream Media, 3yo, Derby Trail, Triple Crown, Kentucky Derby, Media, Racing

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

No Comments »

Winter racing at Aqueduct (Walter Kobbe)

Those of you on Facebook have no doubt already seen this fine little meme floating around and perhaps even done it yourself. You do a Google search with your name and needs, e.g., “dana needs” and then write down the first 10 results.

As of yesterday mine were… dana needs:
1. some breathing room
2. three imaginary girls
3. help
4. a self-embedding of a U-Box
5. some advice about her old girlfriend
6. a lot of comforting
7. a dose of transarency, accountablitilty (sic)
8. emergency prayers
9. to slay the beast
10. to eat some breakfast

So why not ask Google what racing needs? It did a pretty good job on my list. I’d say 1, 3, possibly 4 (if I knew what that was), 6, 7, 9 and 10 are definitely true. Not sure I’d limit 2 to only three and I’m happy to report that at this time 5 is not valid, but if it were then I think 8 would also be in order.

According to Google, horse racing needs:
1. an authority figure
2. Big Brown vs. Curlin
3. a revolution
4. a permanent fix
5. to get jockeys into position
6. more than a slogan
7. to change
8. to look at it’s future
9. U
10. to change it’s approach

Go Google! All but 2 & 5 seem right on to me. Forget committees and reports and studies… that takes time and money, Google can identify and prioritize issues in 0.24 seconds! But why stop with just racing in general, I’m sure Google can be of more assistance.

NTRA needs:
1. to show it supports it’s stars
2. to address this
3. to do everything in its power to prevent the closure of any more racetracks
4. the AQHAs money for lobbying efforts
5. to elaborate and defines what is
6. needs to talk
7. to go unless they become an all encompassing regulatory body that enforces across the US
8. to get a load of this too
9. to embrace the obvious
10. to be more democratic, more open

Breeders’ Cup needs:
1. to change conditions if it is to compete with international rivals
2. Some Fine-Tuning
3. to put a plan in place, like NASCAR did
4. to find a new announcer
5. Another Race
6. to name a race in honor of Wayne Lukas
7. to focus less on hustling a quick buck at the expense of the fans
8. to plan well in advance
9. to get the color-coded saddle towels
10. a star

NYRA needs:
1. to stop the temper tantrum and realize that they screwed up
2. to rethink its focus
3. a bailout
4. to review how it provides passes and boxes to public officers
5. your help to continue moving forward
6. dramatic reform
7. to do is create a Belmont week that features live racing and family-friendly festivities through the Belmont Stakes
8. a response blog
9. your help
10. new – not just new, but better – direction

And there you have it. Racing, 99% more efficient thanks to Google! Too bad Google doesn’t have a “how to implement” algorithm.

Posted by dana on Feb 25 2009    
Filed Under: Industry, Big Brown, Walter Kobbe, 2009, Internet, NYRA, Curlin, Breeders' Cup, NTRA, Racing

(2 votes, average: 3 out of 5)

 Loading ...

13 Comments »