Breeders' Cup Win and You're In Nonsense

[Vince P]

Two of the most respected horse racing folks imo, Steven Crist and cuzin Greg Avioli, recently had a discussion regarding "Win and You're In" races that the Breeders' Cup has been hosting the past two years.

In a nutshell, Crist felt that NYRA is being snubbed with limited Win and You're In races this year while Greg Avioli rebutted and explained that it was actually NYRA's doing along with a couple of other mitigating factors why NYRA was selected with so few Win and You’re In Races. He also explained details, contracts, ESPN shows, etc, about the selection process - see links. Both points are well put and explained rather eloquently in the articles below.

However, I have a major problem with the whole concept of the "Win and You're In" theme. I understand the marketing aspect of it can generate additional interest in the Breeders' Cup as the public watches and wagers on races they presume count towards who's running in the BC.

The truth is, aside from marketing, these races mean absolutely nothing as to who will run in the Breeders' Cup. The winners of ALL of these races (most of them are GRIs) was going to run in the BC regardless of whether or not it was designated as a "Win and You're In" race.

Aside from potential marketing, the idea of "Win and You're In" is bogus. If they really wanted it to work properly, they would pay the winner of these races all travel and entry related expenses. But since the BC is actually cutting costs and possible races in the near future as we speak, that will never happen.

I challenge anyone to show me one horse since this "Win and You're In" idea came about that would not have run in the Breeders' Cup if that race wasn't designated a "Win and You're In" race.

Crist's point of view: http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NI ... bs=0&arc=1

Aviloi's response: http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NI ... bs=0&arc=1

VInce P

[Alaidekman]

Vince, I agree that "win and you're in" is a misnomer, since you still have to pay the stiff entry fee. And winners of many of the top prep races (Pac Classic, Vosburgh, Goodwood) would go to BC whether it is officially win & you're in or not. The one thing the win & you're in event does is make it possible for a latle blooming horse to get in. Let's say you were a former Grade 1 or Grade 2 horse injured most of the year, but had a huge win in an alw race or ungraded stake in late summer. You'd like a shot at the BC, but don't have the graded stakes earnings in the current year to make the field. Then you would try to find one of these win & you're in races, especially at a less than top tier track, so you'd at least have the option of going to BC if your horse is back in form.

Not saying exactly the right races are chosen, but it does give more owners a chance to dream, and gives owners of the best horse at smaller tracks a shot at making the field in the big time. Of course some spots in the field are by invitation, not by graded stakes earnings, so some of these horses would also possibly get in anyway, but it gives the owner of a less than top flight horse a path if he wants to give BC a try.

Now once the BC comes along, maybe this will put a no-chance horse in the field, and don't know if that is a good thing, but overall I think the concept is a good one. A better name, however, would be "win & you qualify" not "win & you're in", but "win & you qualify" doesn't quite have the ring to it.

Al

[Vince P]

Vince, I agree that "win and you're in" is a misnomer, since you still have to pay the stiff entry fee. And winners of many of the top prep races (Pac Classic, Vosburgh, Goodwood) would go to BC whether it is officially win & you're in or not. The one thing the win & you're in event does is make it possible for a latle blooming horse to get in. Let's say you were a former Grade 1 or Grade 2 horse injured most of the year, but had a huge win in an alw race or ungraded stake in late summer. You'd like a shot at the BC, but don't have the graded stakes earnings in the current year to make the field. Then you would try to find one of these win & you're in races, especially at a less than top tier track, so you'd at least have the option of going to BC if your horse is back in form.

Not saying exactly the right races are chosen, but it does give more owners a chance to dream, and gives owners of the best horse at smaller tracks a shot at making the field in the big time. Of course some spots in the field are by invitation, not by graded stakes earnings, so some of these horses would also possibly get in anyway, but it gives the owner of a less than top flight horse a path if he wants to give BC a try.

Now once the BC comes along, maybe this will put a no-chance horse in the field, and don't know if that is a good thing, but overall I think the concept is a good one. A better name, however, would be "win & you qualify" not "win & you're in", but "win & you qualify" doesn't quite have the ring to it.

Al

"but it does give more owners a chance to dream, and gives owners of the best horse at smaller tracks a shot at making the field in the big time"

Excellent point and reasons Al.

That's something I wasn't thinking about. If these "Win and You're In" races give hope to horses (owners) who otherwise wouldn't plan on running, then I can see them as a good thing.

I'm just waiting for that to happen, lol.

Vince P

[Thinkinproblem]

The connections for Assessment, this years winner of the Longacres Mile "win and you're in" race, have publicly announced that they ARE going to the BC this year. Apparently they are willing to shell out the nomination fees and other expenses associated with running in the BC. Apparently they will prep the horse with a stakes race at SA.

And it seems they are sticking with the local rider Mitchell. Wow, what a chance for an relatively anonymous local rider to hit the big time.

[Syncopate]

The marketing tool of " Win & you're in " must have thought up by the same people who brought us the guaranteed
Pick 6. Both are just hype & spit in the wind.