New system needed for gaining entry to Derby

[Lucy]

The comparison to QH futurity qualifiers doesn't quite fit here - those qualifying races are held at the same track & over the same distance as the main Futurity. Derby prep races are not - indeed, I can't think of any that are run at 10f, never mind 10f at Churchill.

They are also based solely on time, not on finish order. If there are, say, two heats of ten horses each, and the last-place horse in heat #1 runs the distance faster than the winner of heat #2, then it's tough beans for field #2, none of them are getting in.

[bdw0617]

very true.

[ct2346]

The point is that they are trials. I wouldn't suggest that they be run at CD or based on time. I would suggest only that they are the Sole means of being allowed into the finale...that is really the only similarity.

Mile and an eighth is fine...leave some intrique as to the last 1/8. Top three finishers in the Wood, Ark, Fla, Blue Grass, SA, LA. Move things around so they're all run on the same weekend.

[wangkw]

Kentucky Derby should adopt a knock out system...with two divisions run as G1 for qualification.

Kentucky is all along a no one wants to miss event. Just like a countryside debutant who would dress to kill for the party.

The Final run of Derby will come from a field of 12 best in those 2 divisions. The current field is too crowded for comfort.

At the divisional level, the selection criteria shall stick to the current earnings system.

Viable ?

[bdw0617]

I like it. I would add :

The winner of the UAE Derby

The winner of hte race in england

and possibly 1 wildcard horse. maybe not. 14 is fine. I see 14 horse fields all the time.

[oliverstoned]

Thankfully Churchill would never in a million years adopt bdw's plan. Bdw the only agreement we could ever have on this one is they should change the system. Twenty horses in the Derby is one of reasons that makes the Derby so great and unique it brings an element of luck yes but thats what makes it so fun. You know I think they ran 24 one year..a little crazy, but 14...14......sacrilegious.

[bdw0617]

Thankfully Churchill would never in a million years adopt bdw's plan. Bdw the only agreement we could ever have on this one is they should change the system. Twenty horses in the Derby is one of reasons that makes the Derby so great and unique it brings an element of luck yes but thats what makes it so fun. You know I think they ran 24 one year..a little crazy, but 14...14......sacrilegious.

thankfully there are pepole a little bit more open minded than you.

5 years ago I probably would have been laughed off the forum if I suggested there was a win and you in race... IN GREAT BRITIAN to get into the kentucky derby

[Mickey the Marcher]

I like it. I would add :

The winner of the UAE Derby

The winner of hte race in england

and possibly 1 wildcard horse. maybe not. 14 is fine. I see 14 horse fields all the time.

The winner of the UAE derby is more often than not ineligible to run in the KD, and it would look funny to say you'd give the spot to the " best-placed northern hemisphere born 3yo in the UAE Derby".

The problem that comes with the Derby is that there is a limit on the field size (and some people want to make that problem worse by making the field smaller!!.. I personally don't have a problem with 20 horse fields myself). How this problem is dealt with in other places is the cut-off is the horse's handicap rating, i.e the 20 highest ranked horses. Now one could say that GSE does the same thing, but that's not really true as a horse can win a 2yo race with a big purse and practically book their ticket then and may come out the next year and have regressed. A handicap rating is fluid and takes into account the competition they are running against.

The Derby field size didn't always used to be a problem though, seems like 30 or 40 years ago there wasn't always 20 horse fields with horses getting bumped out. What happened to make it where everyone wants to have a runner? Surely if some of those owners exercised good judgment they wouldn't be wasting an entry fee and clogging the field with horses that don't belong.

[wangkw]

Yoyo...for a 2012 meter runway any field above 14 is crowed..can not compare it with competitive as well as long distance
races ike Melbourne Cup(3200), which goes beyond 20 always.

In fact for long ones, esp 4000 or above, horses are using the first 2000 for warm up...so traffic congestion is hardly a
problem, and even if it does, wont ikely be hazardous..they and their riders are usually quite polite untill the final 2000.

[Mickey the Marcher]

Yoyo...for a 2012 meter runway any field above 14 is crowed..can not compare it with competitive as well as long distance
races ike Melbourne Cup(3200), which goes beyond 20 always.

I guess you've never seen a 30 runner 5f sprint?
Now there's excitement for you.

[wangkw]

Then you must be referring to very low level races..that kind of races la...you have horses, donkeys and moles together..after
2 furongs, it is over for 2/3 of them...and the sky is clear ahead.

Straight courses can have 50 in one go, no sweat.

[bdw0617]

Then you must be referring to very low level races..that kind of races la...you have horses, donkeys and moles together..after
2 furongs, it is over for 2/3 of them...and the sky is clear ahead.

Straight courses can have 50 in one go, no sweat.

i had completely forgot about the southern hemisphere horses in the UAE derby.

we need a straight sprint course in america. those are more exciting to me for some reason. and you can jam pack horses in there as well.

[oliverstoned]

Thankfully Churchill would never in a million years adopt bdw's plan. Bdw the only agreement we could ever have on this one is they should change the system. Twenty horses in the Derby is one of reasons that makes the Derby so great and unique it brings an element of luck yes but thats what makes it so fun. You know I think they ran 24 one year..a little crazy, but 14...14......sacrilegious.

thankfully there are pepole a little bit more open minded than you.

5 years ago I probably would have been laughed off the forum if I suggested there was a win and you in race... IN GREAT BRITIAN to get into the kentucky derby

C'mon dude I love ya like a cyber brother, I agree with you more often than not and am quite open minded, I just think your idea is crappy thats all.

[wangkw]

Then you must be referring to very low level races..that kind of races la...you have horses, donkeys and moles together..after
2 furongs, it is over for 2/3 of them...and the sky is clear ahead.

Straight courses can have 50 in one go, no sweat.

I had completely forgot about the southern hemisphere horses in the UAE derby.

Age is not a problem..just need to redraw cut-off point for geograhical factor...idea is to trim advantage to the minimum...another way
is to mimic the existing handicap format as moderator..currently filies are given 5 kg against boys.

But why Kentucky Derby ? Are people valuing it above all those in other places..each horse nation runs its own derby almost
uninterruptedly...The perception to its worth and impulse can differ from one place to another.

One thing..after the KD's purse was raised to 2 million in recent years..at least the mercenary perception has started to make sense.

[Bid]

I like the idea of having a few "win and you're in" races along with the earnings system. We need to cut down the number of starters in the race itself. A good horse shouldn't have to suffer a bad post or heavy traffic.
The Mafaaz win works out very well for me personally , however I think we need to encourage horses from overseas to run. If we don't mix in some strong distance (and dare I say turf) pedigrees we are eventually going to be running quarter horse races with thoroughbreds in this country.