The Caulfield Cup is one of Australia’s great handicaps over 2400m, first run in 1879. One of the races of the year looks like it will be set for a dramatic and underwhelming shift to weight-for-age conditions.
The Herald Sun reported the news last night, with the Melbourne Racing Club (MRC) stating it was keen to switch the race even as early as this year, and almost certainly from 2018 and beyond. It has the support of other race clubs and Racing Victoria.
The race will also get a prizemoney boost to $4 million from the already rich $3m purse, taking it past the Cox Plate ($3m) and making it Victoria’s second most valuable race behind the Melbourne Cup ($6.2m).
It’s a massive change to the spring racing carnival and the flow of distance races in spring, where the Caulfield Cup sits just a week before the Cox Plate (2040m) and just over two weeks before the Melbourne Cup (3200m).
So why shift to weight-for-age (WFA)?
Handicappers are penalised for the Melbourne Cup
One big element of the move is to attract more elite international runners, whether that’s a good thing or not.
Part of beating the handicapper for top horses that don’t need to win to get into the Melbourne Cup field has been to whack home late to do well without necessarily winning, or avoiding the race completely to dodge a penalty. More horses seem to be graduating through races like the Cox Plate, where winners are exempt from a re-handicap for the Melbourne Cup.
The new Caulfield Cup run under new WFA conditions would seek exemption status as well.
MRC chairman Mike Symons stated that European stars Highland Reel and Order Of St George did not run in the Caulfield Cup in 2016 because of the handicap conditions and ramifications for the Melbourne Cup.
Jameka won the 2016 Caulfield Cup and was given a 1.5kg penalty that saw her finish well back in the field of the Melbourne Cup.
The rise of WFA
Australia offers a great curiosity in our handicaps at the highest level. We’re one of the few racing jurisdictions to offer this.
One reason thrown up to move to WFA is to join the international competition. It’s likely to be a boost to global wagering, which is seen as a growth opportunity for clubs and jurisdictions, who don’t think that the local scene will be hurt too much.
Caulfield isn’t what it was
The Caulfield Cup carnival isn’t quite what it was. The Caulfield Guineas has been overshadowed by the Coolmore Stud. The Toorak is now second to the Cantala Stakes. The Caulfield Stakes isn’t a shadow of the Cox Plate.
The Caulfield Cup remains a big race but it can’t be argued that it has lost something with the Melbourne Cup hugely more popular. The MRC aren’t content to let that go on.
A great race ruined, or overdue for a shake-up?
The reaction has been a mixture of curiosity to outright rage.
Yes, Australia should be able to attract the best horses, and quality international runners add depth, glamour, and a way to measure up.
There’s also no question that the spring carnival in Victoria could benefit from some changes. And there’s also no question that Australia lacks a high-quality deep-purse 2400m race run in spring. There’s really only the BMW (nee Tancred) in Sydney at that level, and that’s in autumn. (As a relevant extra, The Roar looked at a re-shuffle of spring races in a highly-enjoyed series. The Caulfield Cup was retained with the first three home exempt into Melbourne Cup)
To make that 2400m WFA race, the Caulfield Cup takes away a lot of the joy that the great handicap races bring where anything has a chance.
I’m not in favour based on the reasoning of attracting international horses alone. I’m not as angry as some, more bewildered that administrators would be so quick to change something that feels the general public own.
Pandering to international horses won’t be a justification enjoyed by many punters. Bringing the best to Australia should be encouraged, but not at the sacrifice of a great race.
Many have suggested that a lot of the issues would be solved by simply seeking exempt status for the Caulfield Cup. Other races, such as the Herbert Power Stakes over 2400m, could be shifted to WFA without affecting one of the ‘grand’ races of Victoria.
For mine, history matters. Moving the Caulfield Cup to weight-for-age drains a huge amount of the great colour of the race. The fields will be smaller. Attracting absolutely top-liners will scare off the hopefuls.
There are valid reasons for a wider spring shake-up that would still likely do away with some traditions.
But this move alone decimates one of the great races in a year in order to attract a few good horses from overseas and more gambling revenue. And that just doesn’t sit well.
sheek
Roar Guru
Indeed, the list of winners of the CB Fisher Plate was impressive: Wakeful (1902), Mountain King (1907), Trafalgar (1911), Kennaquhair (1918), Artilleryman (1919), Eurythmic (1920), Violoncello (1922 - also won 1st Cox Plate), Amounis (1929), Phar Lap (1930), Rogilla (1933), Hall Mark (1935), Ajax (1938), High Caste (1939-41), Hydrogen (1952-53), Rising Fast (1955), Sailor's Guide (1956), Tulloch (1957 & 60), Dhaulagiri (1961), Even Stevens (1962), Fileur (1970), Leilani (974) & Salamander (1978 - the last year the race was run). Also including the four winners 1965-68 I mentioned previously.
sheek
Roar Guru
Tristan, I had forgotten that long ago there was indeed a 2400m wha during the Spring Carnival. It was called the CB Fisher Plate & run the following Saturday after the Melbourne Cup (normally Stakes Day). But of course, the VRC have now moved the LKS Mackinnon Stakes to that day, which I'm not convinced was a wise move. The CB Fisher Plate allowed very good/great horses such as Craftsman in 1965, Galilee in 1966, General Command in 1967 & Rain Lover the following year to announce themselves as genuine wfa horses when each of them won. I don't know, too much tinkering. The program is brilliant as it is, I believe.
michael steel
Guest
Yes. I can see a mature 3 year old maiden filly winning the Caulfield Cup in a 7 horse field with 49 kgs or maybe it's 46 kg at 50/1. Leads by 15 lengths at 1200 and they can't run her down. Never races again.
Tristan Rayner
Editor
That makes sense Michael - the WFA stuff can be a little monotonous. I will say that the people who make these decisions certainly have a different set of criteria for their KPIs than ours. As I said above, increasing global wagering, getting some fancy big name horses and getting the race Melbourne Cup exempt will be big ticks for them. Rob Waterhouse pointed out that current rules, all races over 2300 WFA or not attract a penalty. RV are understood to be aware of this and will create a further exemption... I wonder if the Melbourne Cup will benefit or not from this. Winning a Caulfield Cup for no penalty sure seems odd to me.
Raimond
Roar Guru
This is largely a consequence of the Melbourne Cup going global, and the Caulfield Cup being relegated to just another lead-in race, rather than being a "cups double" cousin. The charge from a big field down the straight, past the winning post, and heading into the back, is one of the Caulfield Cup's cultural attractions. Imagine just 8 or 9 runners dawdling out of the gate, like a European stayers' race -- would the atmosphere be the same? These are the little things that administrators don't seem to think about.
Raimond
Roar Guru
there would be few 3yos compete let alone win it I take the opposite view. This would be a juicy target for someone with a mature 3yo esp. if there's a small field. Compare this to the conditions under which you'd compete in the Vic Derby.
michael steel
Guest
I would have thought the VRC or the Caulfield people would be looking at why they don't have a Group 1 sprint in the Spring. The Schillaci should be Group 1 and get a Group 1 field. They have the Group 1 Rupert Clarke dropped in from nowhere over 1400 metres while Moonee Valley has a few Group 1 sprints which for example damaged the reputation of Lankan Rupee because he needed a bigger track. Make the Herbert Power your Group1 WFA 2400 as Bart Cummings wanted for over 40 years. Didn't anybody at Caulfield read his book?
michael steel
Guest
Correction. I meant to say I have no interest in Caulfield Cup as 2400 WFA Group 1.
Nathan Absalom
Roar Guru
I don't think a 2400m wfa race with a large amount of prizemoney in the Spring is a good idea at all. Such a race needs to have the best racing against the best in the same way as the Cox Plate and the TJ Smith do. The trouble with a 2400m race in the Spring is that, unlike the Arc or the King George, there would be few 3yos compete let alone win it. And at that stage, who would know which ones deserve to be in the field anyway? It's hard enough getting the best 3yos in the Cox Plate, I just can't see it happening over a longer distance a week earlier. But like a few people here, I think this is a solution looking for a problem.
peeeko
Roar Guru
i reckon its fallen from 4 recently
michael steel
Guest
Basically I agree with everyone who thinks the idea stinks for all the reasons given. The Caulfield Cup which is now one of the BIG FOUR will rank withe BMW/MERCEDES/WHATEVER at about number 15 or 16. Already I have has much interest in 2400 metre Group 1 Caulfield Cup as as I do for the BMW/MERCEDES/WHATEVER which will be on in one week, two weeks or three weeks time, and that is mild interest. It comes back to my core belief in life, just because people score themselves high paid jobs, does not mean they have a brain.
michael steel
Guest
Or make it a maximum 1 kg penalty for the winner.
Adam Page
Roar Guru
To say it would have attracted Highland Reel and Order Of St George is ludicrous. The Caulfield Cup is poorly placed in that regard, because there is Champions Day at Ascot, The Arc, the Japan Cup and then HK. The race will never attract the top tier internationals, even with the change to WFA. It's just mind numbing that we will have a $4 Million WFA race over 2400m, then seven days later have a $3 Million WFA contest over 2040m. It's bad enough when the states don't work together two 1600m Guineas in one day, but when clubs in the same state/city can't work together...there's problems. I agree in the sense that the 2400m WFA brand isn't here in Australia. The BMW just doesn't have the aura that it once had 10-20 years ago. But there are certain races you just don't touch, and the Caulfield Cup is one of those. I love the fact that we get a capacity field of 18 or thereabouts, it's a great betting race. Now with WFA, I am sure we won't get a max field.
Cameron Rose
Expert
I pretty much agree with most comments written here. I just love the Caulfield Cup as it is. My fear is that this is a change being brought about by an executive more concerned about leaving a legacy rather than putting the great race first and foremost. What a shame is would be to throw out more than a century of tradition. Some of Australia's great races are handicaps - Melbourne Cup, Caulfield Cup, the Doncaster, the Stradbroke, and they invoke the Aussie spirit - everyone can have a crack. Make the Caulfield Cup WFA, and half the field will be visiting Godolphin second stringers. Wow. How exciting.
Razzar
Guest
Dont like the idea at all. WFA, it would lead to smaller fields, and advantage on frequent occassions, on-pacers. Dont touch wots not broken.
Connor Bennett
Editor
It has its ups and downs but on first thought, I don't think I'm sold on it either. They're trying to pander to international trainers and runners and it's probably going to impact the local talent and basically push them right out of contention, and could even just force them to stop showing up. Hopefully they don't rush the whole thing and make the change for this year. At least let it go until next year and hopefully it will give them more time to think it over.
James Henville
Guest
Why not just remove the penalty for the Melbourne Cup?
no one in particular
Roar Guru
The race won't get more elite international runners. It's smack bang in the middle of the Arc and Breeders Cup. The second stringers aren't travel to Melbourne with a month gap to Hong Kong and Japan. It's smells of desperation and some sort of inferiority complex It ain't broke...
Peeeko
Guest
I think it's good for Melbourne cup punters. Hopefully we will have less horses running in the big one without a prior run in Australia
sheek
Roar Guru
Hi Tristan, Do these guys who make these changes ever sit zen like & try to invoke the spirit of their forebears, & understand why they made decisions back in antiquity. Sometimes, they had better clarity of thought back then. Atlas they weren't obsessed with revenue to the same extent. We certainly need our own Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe. I always thought the obvious race to fill this role was the HE Tancred Stakes (The BMW) but alas that race has been eclipsed by the Queen Elizabeth Stakes. The other option was to extend the distance of the Australian Cup, but it looks that won't happen either. I don't know. My big fear is unintended consequences. You mess with the caulfield Cup, even though the idea has merit, & you don't know how that affects associate races around it. I've long thought the Melbourne Spring Carnival from Caulfield Gns/Stakes day through to Sundown Classic, a span of six weekends, was the best collection of racing in the world. But changing Caulfield Cup to WFA might ruin or enhance this delete balance. But which way will it tip?