Ben's Cat fiasco a joke

Blue feather · Postby **Blue feather** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:47 am

Terrapin Flyer,
He does still own the mare and you make a good point. I am also dumfounded why he wouldn't take a shot with his own money. At his age and with his experience and his likely financial stability, I would think the money would take a back seat to the opportunity to race in the Breeders Cup considering it's a once in a lifetime opportunity and so few have the chance. If he was a young and struggling trainer, it may make more sense to skip the BC. He should watch the movie, Good Will Hunting, for some inspiration. Will Hunting was also"...sitting on a winning lottery ticket and to scared to cash it in!". I believe the experience of a Breeders Cup race would be something money could not buy.

Footfalls echo in the memory,
Down the passage which we did not take,
toward the door we never opened.
T.S Eliot

zinn21 · Postby **zinn21** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:15 pm

Interesting thread. I think the "selective" concept Terrapin alluded to is probably the way to go. I used to nominate all foals from my small operation; then I stopped nominating. Now I have one my trainer is as high as a kite on. Probably should have nominated. But Breeders Cup is like hitting the lottery. If Leatherbury believes in his horse he should pay the fee without complaint. He didn't nominate or bought the horse with knowledge that he wasn't nominated. He knows the game.

The Breeders Cup and perhaps they do should have some sort of late nomination fee schedule for unraced, winners and stakes winners.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:20 pm

zinn21 wrote:Interesting thread. I think the "selective" concept Terrapin alluded to is probably the way to go. I used to nominate all foals from my small operation; then I stopped nominating. Now I have one my trainer is as high as a kite on. Probably should have nominated. But Breeders Cup is like hitting the lottery. If Leatherbury believes in his horse he should pay the fee without complaint. He didn't nominate or bought the horse with knowledge that he wasn't nominated. He knows the game.

The Breeders Cup and perhaps they do should have some sort of late nomination fee schedule for unraced, winners and stakes winners.

it really doesn't make sense when compared to the triple crown nominations.

If you have a promising 2YO that breaks his maiden pretty easily and you throw him in allowance company in January and he wins again, pretty easily, and hell, even then in February, you throw him in a graded stakes just to test the water, and he wins the race.. you can still pay a small (few thousand dollar) fee if i am not mistaken.

The only time you have to pay the huge fee Rachel paid, is when you missed the last deadline, which is like the end of march or something like that, and you still want to get in the race.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:02 am

well he runs on maryland millions day, let's hope he wins and he gets a change of heart.

Terrapin Flyer · Postby **Terrapin Flyer** » Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:25 pm

well he runs on maryland millions day, let's hope he wins and he gets a change of heart

You mean, he makes another $60k that he wouldn't dare spend on nominating him and once again bang the sponsor drum.

Hops · Postby **Hops** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:23 pm

We used to nominate a few. Then the BC lowered their contribution to enhance the purse of local stakes races. Then last year they dropped the stakes program altogether.

Why the heck would I nominate? I know that I will not get a horse of BC-caliber. Unless they keep adding races and finally add one for $10k claimers. We don't race elsewhere.

The best horse we ever had was NOT BC-nominated and he missed out on about $40k in extra purse money in the local stakes. Not a huge deal.

I am very disillusioned with the BC right now with all the changes they are trying to make (but mainly for DROPPING THE STAKES PROGRAM.) I can put that $500 bucks to much better use (like nominating the horse to the LOCAL stakes series, in which my horse may actually compete.)

Crystal · Postby **Crystal** » Thu Sep 29, 2011 6:58 am

It's not worth nominating every single foal you breed your entire life for a 1 in a thousand shot.. Murphy's Law will tell you it is the runty, sick, small, crooked, cross eyed foal that will be a stakes winner anyway.

Its the BREEDERS CUP. It is something breeders should inspire to achieve with their stock but there is a certain level of the game that plays that high. A smaller regional breeder who doesnt have a BC supported state-bred program may not find it appealing.

Blue feather · Postby **Blue feather** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:06 pm

Bens Cat won the md Million Turf Sprint. Based on the interview of Leatherburg on HRTV, looks like he has something in the works as far as racing Bens Cat in BC turf Sprint. I would love to see him be given the chance to compete and see if he is as good as he appears to be.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Wed Oct 05, 2011 2:25 pm

I just heard something quite interesting on HRTV. Jeff is implying that the Breeders cup, basically waived John Henry's nomination fee because he was not nominated.

Joltman · Postby **Joltman** » Wed Oct 05, 2011 8:01 pm

Pay to play

Leatherbury is a money guy - the prospect of entry into a BC race is not that big a deal. If it were, like the rest of us, he would shake a $100k worth into the pot.

jm

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Thu Oct 06, 2011 9:11 am

his biggest threat, at least north american based IMHO was bridgetown and he's not going to the BC per pletcher.

I mean, he's just as good as the rest of the horses in the race. he should not be afraid of unzip me, etc

majxmom · Postby **majxmom** » Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:35 pm

The Breeders Cup rules were very clear in the beginning: breeders had better pay the $500 fee, or it was going to cost the future owner a lot of money later. That's what made a Breeders Cup nominated foal more valuable at auction, and made consignors who sold BC-nominated horses a better bet. So now King owns a horse that isn't nominated, and the horse seems like he belongs in that company. Well, there's a remedy: PAY THE SUPPLEMENTAL. If he doesn't care to pay that, he doesn't run! Simple. This is King's choice. Asking someone else to pay the supplemental fee is childish.

John Henry's owners faced the same situation in the first BC. They diddled around, asked Hollywood to pay the fee, finally came to the conclusion that no one would pay it but themselves, paid up, and he had to scratch within hours. It seemed like karma to me.

bdw0617 · Postby **bdw0617** » Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:04 pm

majxmom wrote:The Breeders Cup rules were very clear in the beginning: breeders had better pay the $500 fee, or it was going to cost the future owner a lot of money later. That's what made a Breeders Cup nominated foal more valuable at auction, and made consignors who sold BC-nominated horses a better bet. So now King owns a horse that isn't nominated, and the horse seems like he belongs in that company. Well, there's a remedy: PAY THE SUPPLEMENTAL. If he doesn't care to pay that, he doesn't run! Simple. This is King's choice. Asking someone else to pay the supplemental fee is childish.

John Henry's owners faced the same situation in the first BC. They diddled around, asked Hollywood to pay the fee, finally came to the conclusion that no one would pay it but themselves, paid up, and he had to scratch within hours. It seemed like karma to me.

that' what i am saying, Jeff siegal is insinuating that the BC actually paid his fee. He said verbatim on HrTV 2 days ago that he basically went to the BC and said "you need me more than i need you" and the thought of running the BC without John Henry, the first BC was just too much and they (breeders cup) paid it.

Terrapin Flyer · Postby **Terrapin Flyer** » Sun Oct 09, 2011 5:35 pm

Even "if" that did happen...Ben's Cat is no John Henry so it's not gonna happen

casallc · Postby **casallc** » Thu Oct 13, 2011 11:58 am

There is nothing to knock Leatherbury about; he is just playing it smart. He probably could put his own money up but it wouldn't be very smart. Leatherbury is a handicapper (not a great trainer as someone has said - King even admits it), so he is playing the odds and wanting to spread the risk if he enters the horse. There are plenty of people with more money than brains that will put the $ up in hopes of getting their picture in the win circle and possibly on TV, King knows it. Smart people look for win - win situations - King is being smart.