Where are all the horses?.

Have you got any stats to back up this rose-tinted rant, pd?!

Firstly,looking through rose tinted spectacles is done by a person who sees a POSITIVE outlook.Mine is the opposite.
As for stats,you don't need a lot of savvy to notice how field sizes have deteriorated.Were you not around when the Triumph Hurdle and the Tote Gold Trophy[Schweepes] had 30 runners in the field ?,etc, etc.
Look at 2000 Guineeas day,the supporting card had 30 runners in the 6 furlong sprint virtually every year.Last year 13 ran.And so on.Do you really find this opinion of mine strange?.

It's going to be quietish until Cheltenham. Same every year.

What about the flat season?,they used to say that the flat season did't start till the Craven meeting.Now it's so bad it's not even on telly!!!!!!!.

Plenty of good class handicaps with big fields every year.

Firstly, pipedreamer, you are looking back at the past through rose-tinted spectacles.  That's the definition.  Someone who moans about the present and thinks things used to be better than they actually were. 

Let's look at the comparable races from Sandown's card 25 years ago.

Decs

Juvenile Hdle
(1991) 6  (2016) 5

Scilly Isles
(91) 6  (16) 6

G3 H'cap Hdle
(91) 15 (16) 11

3m H'cap Chase
(91) 4 (16) 8

2m Hdle
(91) 5  (16) 4

2m H'cap Chase
(91) 6  (16) 6

Sorry if the facts get in the way of your rose-tinted rant.  Carry on.

How long have you been punting Headmaster?.you only have to look at midweek racing,esp on the all weather to see how small the fields are in comparison to 20 years ago,i';m not just talking about this particular week
I remember Linden Tree winning the 18 runner Blue Ribbon Derby trial at Epsoms spring meet.The other year 4 gorses turned up for the race 3 weren't even entered in the Derby.That meeting is a shadow of its former self.How about the Derby Meeting.A 4 day meeting was't it?.Now it's two days.What about the Lincoln meeting?,a 3 day meeeting,i still have the papers,20 runners 25 runners.16 runners,25 runners etc,all on the same day!!!.
I get fed up with this forum.Its a question of perception.Field sizes have been getting smaller for years.They used to have a maximum 25 runners for a 5 furlong sprint at Thirsk,now fields in most races there are a maximum of 14 runners,it's all there in print!!!!.

Linden Tree finished 5th of 10 in the Blue Riband Trial, pipedreamer.

He then won the Chester Vase, beating four others in a field of five.....

Btw I'm not trying to prove that field sizes are exactly the same, or bigger, as they were 50 years ago.  That would be plain daft. I well remember Novice Chases dividing - two fields of 18 - at Newbury, Leicester etc etc.  Can you imagine that happening now?  Although, to be fair, there is a very obvious reason why that doesn't happen these days.

But I also remember cards at Devon where you'd have one walkover, 2 races that were a match, a 3 runner race, a 4 runner race and, whoopy-do...a massive field of 5 going to post for the feature.

And if you look back at cards for Cheltenham outside the Festival they were truly shocking.  Littered with 4 runner races.  So it's not all bad, hopefully, is it?

Maybe it was the Lingfield Derby trial?,can't dig out the annuals at the mo.Anyway,I'm not suggesting that we go back to 60 runners in the Lincoln as 1948?,but bigger fields and less dross  meetings.What would be easier if big meee=ts had more Qualifying races where only the winner was allowed to qualify to run.All Cheltenham races,Royal Ascot races and other big meetings are there where Qualifying races  could be highlighted.
Imagine a small meet midweek at say Exeter being given interest by a Cheltenham qualifier race.Punters will watch and make a note of the winners.[If they are suitably impressed].
The benefit of this would be that come Cheltenham,punters would not be knee deep in form books,sorting out the form,especially the handicaps.They would already know the horses that they want to back!.One proviso would be some races closer to the raceweek,so that horses that were coming back from injury could qualify,lets say the first 4 finishers.
One other point is about quality.I was there when Dawn Approach won the Guineas,which was virtually a match race.A way of getting more in the race somehow?,the supporting card since then has been very poor.I had opportunityn when in London Colindale Library to look up the old Cambridgeshire races.In 1958 the race boasted runners whose form read;1111111 and112112211 1011011,i mean virtually the whole field of some 30 odd runners.Now thats competitive racing.Way back then Guineas winners raced in that race.As i say quality is lacking.Back in the early seventies pun ters would tell me that they could make out a strong case for even 16-1 winners at Cheltenham.I myself used to get 33-1 winners there.But now i see no good things for races,i only see horses that appear good but have question marks on them.Not enough plusses for me to have a punt on them.
I only remember Idole First,Cool Dawn,Snitton Lane,Niad Du Misselot,Miracle Man,Indefence,Kings Curate,etc,could do with more of those around.

Headmaster i wrote my last post before in saw your last one.Yes there were blips with fields 20 years ago.The BBC being at Chepstow for two 3 runner races.They have said that they are trying to do something about it.But i have absolutely no confidence in the BHA.Their messing about with the Dewhurst and Champions day has everybody confused,they keep changing everything.
Sponsors should be told that they have to retain the name of the race somewhere.Big dispute the other year,sponsors wanted to do away with the name Bunbury for the handicap on July Cup day.
Seems to me that the BHA haven't a clue.Wasn't Michael Howard the Chairman of Northern Racing?.I heard he lives in Folkestone on the South Coast!!!
,nuff said!!.

I'm sure the BHA have the best interests of the sport at heart, pd.  Most, not all, other factions tend to see the game very much through their own eyes. 

Unfortunately no-one else has any say over commercial agreements between racecourses and sponsors, but there are moves afoot to prevent web-based casino operators, or whomever they may be, dumping titles like the Bunbury Cup and Stewards' Cup.  It's exasperating, but those tanks should be parked on Newmarket's and Goodwood's lawns respectively. There is a whiff of selling the family silver, for sure.

Of course, the racecourses would, and do, say that without that money races like these would be run for half the prize fund and these sponsors aren't growing on trees.  So do owners and trainers want to run for a big pot in the 31Black Stakes or compete for half that amount in the Stewards Cup?  While I'm sure they would applaud the handle of the race being retained, on raceday they'll shoot at the 100K rather than the 50.

The Cheltenham October meeting is now very competitive but I can remember when there were 3 and 4 runner fields for that. The real issue is the number of opportunities for flat horses on the AW, Dubai and even Australia, reducing the pool of novice hurdlers.

Checkout the runners for The Betfair Chase, The Game Spirit Chase and the Kingmaker Chase this Saturday!

Utter filth.

The Betfair Chase field tomorrow would be more at home at Fontwell on a Wednesday. I do think the bad ground has had a big effect on the staying chasers
Tough race on this type of ground only 4 weeks before the festival could bottom a lot of them and trainers don't want to take that risk

Newsboy has picked up the baton on this in his steaming column.
    Makes the same points about lack of quality racing and here's his idea to tackle it.
  'Do we really need a million pound bonus for winner of betfair chase, king george, gold cup. With some imagination- a big pot here, a bonus scheme there- the incentive for good horses to set foot on the road to Cheltenham returns'

Isn't it great when people who pretend to know something about racing (and get paid to write about it) come out with generic, bland ideas with absolutely no detail attached at all.
 
"A big pot here, a bonus scheme there"....dear oh dear.  How much do you charge for that, Newsboy?

At least Muscat had some sort of 'go' at it.....

Gary Moore has just found out that giving good horses a prep run on heavy ground can be risky. Very sorry to read that Violet Dancer and Ar Mad are both injured and miss Cheltenham.