Fairmount:
Can you point to an instance in the points system era where a runner with a
decent chance of winning the Derby... a legitimate contender... was excluded?
Can you remember winners of major preps who flopped at CD?
If both California maidens end up in the Derby, it is more an indictment of
poor quality preps in NY (the weakest "bracket" by far, extending your NCAA
analogy) than the point system. Regarding Lani, given adequate preparation,
acclimation and training, I have no doubt he would have been a major factor in
either the Gotham or Wood, though unless his Derby preparation is exceptional
I do not see him as a Derby factor.
I do not see any need for a committee which would just add a human element to
statistics which are the true selection criteria (NCAA model). Instead of a
straightforward points system, where points are pre determined for certain
races, set up a prep performance ranking system which would take into account
numerous variables-- some measure of the adjusted speed of the race (factoring
weight, ground loss, etc), the distance of the race, graded earnings. Most
importantly, the strength or competitiveness of the race.
The true weakness of the points system is that two different preps may be
assigned the same point weighting in advance (lets say the Risen Star at FG
and the Gotham), but in retrospect one race was much stronger (field size,
quality of competition, adjusted pace and final time) than the other. A
ranking or rating system which incorporates many factors, rather than pre
assigning points, might be the best way to assure the best possible field of
3YOs is standing in the gate.
Regarding a "major TV event", you would be lucky to get a half hour on ESPN,
the first ten minutes of which would be pre-empted by women's softball.
