Fairmount,
Cool post and interesting concept.
Everyone will have their own valid opinions on this.
I happen to like the current format as it rewards the horses who are a) in better form coming into the derby and b) who can run their race at longer distances.
I think the issue with a committee approach (while a very cool concept) is that it would be nearly impossible to take the human connection element out of the decision. The game is too small and everyone knows everyone else and has connections to certain people.
For example, JB is very close with the Winstar guys, how much pressure would he be under to add a Winstar horse to the final list that might be on the bubble? One of my good friends and a guy I own two horses with owns interests in Exaggerator and My Man Sam. There would be no way I would ever leave his two horses off the list. It would be tough to find any impartial committee members given how close everyone's ties are in the game.
Maybe something like what the Breeders Cup does could work where the top 10 or the top 15 slots are determined by points and/or Win and You're In races and the rest of the slots are determined by a committee. But even then, when you are dealing with only rapidly developing spring 3 year olds, many of the horses that would be on the bubble on that list have real chances to win the race. My Man Sam would be a bubble horse in that construct and I don't think there's a person on this board that doesn't think he has a chance on May 7th (I'm assuming he paired or moved slightly forward with his fig on Sat).
Regardless of where one comes out on the selection criteria, I was having a good discussion with some sharp handicappers yesterday who were focused on how the selection criteria has made the race more formful (sp?) the last few years.
Without as many speed balls in the race who have no chance of getting the distance (and yes I ran one of those myself a few years ago and it was the best non-family related experience of my life and I would do it again in a heartbeat), the race is simply more likely to produce a winner that is one of the best horses as opposed to one that takes advantage of the chaos that can ensue when a bunch of horses that don't belong in a race are in a race.
Someone made an astute comment on the board yesterday that the best figure doesn't always win the race when there is a pace meltdown and we can extend that to any scenario where we introduce weaker horses or horses in poor form into the race.
Between likely more reasonable pace scenarios created by the selection criteria and the very transparent coverage from the folks at DRF and other outlets enhanced by Twitter, etc where everyone who wants to know how the horses are training into the race can get informed opinions, you are less likely to have the kind of price horses winning than you have historically.
Doesn't mean the favorite is going to win every year but it does mean that we will all know on the morning of May 7th if that bo in the stretch of the Florida Derby was Nyquist being green, tired from only one 7f prep into the race or if he is hurt. Even 10 years ago, the only people who would have that information had to be pretty plugged in. Not the case anymore.
Similarly, everyone will know thanks to DRF and Twitter, etc. if Destin skipped the final prep in which he would have been a heavy fav in a $1m race because of sheet theory or because he has physical issues.
BTW, I believe those are the two most important questions to answer for this years Derby at this particular point but obviously other questions will emerge over the next 3 weeks.
Good stuff. Gonna be fun.
