An article by one of the best racing writers in the world - Joe Drape - appeared in yesterday's International Herald Tribune. The article poses the interesting (albeit thorny) question of how a race meeting can be on one hand one of the richest in the world (and attract entrants from across the globe) yet, on the other hand, struggle to attract a solid local following. The reasons are said to spread from lack of familiarity with international form, to increased competition from other sports, to the Breeders Cup's lack of history compared to the Derby, to crowd favorites from the 5 week Derby/Preakness/Belmont marathon having either been retired, injured, or put out for a spell.

From a marketing perspective (and the eternal challenge of how to keep fans attending the track) the article is well worth reading.

"There is no disputing that the annual afternoon of eight races, with a total purse of more than $14 million, brings together the best horses from around the world and has been a success within the industry. In its inaugural year, 1984, at Hollywood Park in Inglewood, California, more than $19.4 million was bet worldwide; last year, when it was at Lone Star Park in Grand Prairie, Texas, more than $120 million was wagered.

Still, its marketers have struggled to make that Super Bowl metaphor resonate with a broader audience. The event has not come close to drawing the more than 100,000 people who attend the Kentucky Derby, and its television ratings have never approached those of the Triple Crown races. In fact, the most widely watched Breeders' Cup telecast was its first, and its least watched was last year."

The full article can be read at the following URL.