Curlin is about as close to a lock as your going to get in the Belmont, I guess if Hard Spun freaks or something on the front end, but I highly doubt anyone is running by Curlin from behind.

When did you actually start using pps and not just having a vision or going to the fortun teller?

I'm no fan of Curlin, but pedigreewise and running style he's awfully similar to Afleet Alex and he had no problem with 12F. If there's anything I can knock him on it's an absolute MUST that the winner have raced at 2. I'd be shocked if he doesn't hit the board simply because the field is horrific beyond the top 2 and 2:31 might be good enough for 3rd.

Why?

If anything is going to beat Curlin on Saturday, it will be if Hard Spun gets loose on an uncontested lead while rating kindly....or if Rags to Riches can find the much needed improvement that she projects for on the three furlong stretchout to 12 furlongs.

it's a shame for curlin--nice horse, but no way i can hope for a win for him here-or anywhere for that matter.


any geldings running?

This is what I'm banking on. . . I think her 104 beyer @ 1 1/8 was the highest run by any of these horses at three- With her ped she should be able to improve a good deal with the added distance. . .

I have no idea. It's just worked that way for a long time and given the grueling nature of the race, logically it makes sense to have needed that 2YO foundation. Rules are made to be broken, of course- and your analysis is the only way I see it as well.
This race interests me zero, therefore for every 5 minutes I spend on it I'll take an hour on the undercard races.

I havent made my choice yet. The popular opinion that HS will run out of gas, sure dosent add up. Yes he had been passed by 2 very nice co;ts in the last. He was still running and none of the others was threatening him.. Think about it . They all run the same distance unless the are caught wide. Mabe Curlin will tire from the added distance and not be ble to eat into the frontrunners lead. Front runners with staying power can win therse races by just getting too much of a lead and compromising these tiring closers.

That's a bit coarse.

What does it matter if somebody is just a fan of the sport and doesn't care all that much about reading a racing form or making a huge wager?

Last time I went to the track there were about 10,000 empty seats. There's plenty of room for fans of the sport.

Just going off pedigree (I got these #'s from pedigree query)-

I am just wondering why everyone seems to think hard spun will have no problem with 12 f and is bred for it. Danzig is more known for sprinters I thought. His DI is 2.67 and his CD is .66. According to http://www.chef-de-race.com/dosage/review.htm those numbers would make him most effective at 9 - 9 1/2 furlongs, which would compliment his run in the Derby. I dont understand how that makes him great for 12 f.

I'll go through the other horses-

Curlin DI 4.00 and CD 1.05 - bred for 6 - 7 furlongs

Rags to Riches - DI 3.00 CD .86 - bred for 7 to 9 furlongs

I'mawildncrazyguy - DI 6.00 and CD1.07 - bred for short sprints!

Tiago - DI 1.91 CD .31 - bred for 12 furlongs and beyond

Slews Tizzy - DI 2.00 CD . 67 - bred 9 - 12 furlongs

Digger - DI 4.33 CD 1.00 - Bred for eating and pooping

Time Squared - DI 3.25 CD .91 - bred for around a mile

Circular Quay - DI 2.08 CD .66 - bred 9-12 furlongs (probably wont run)


So if you are going off only pedigree, Tiago and Slews Tizzy are your guys (may want to keep them in your exotics). Granted horses dont run to their pedigree always (Curlin), but I wouldnt say Hard Spun is a lock at 12f.

I'll go through the past 10 Belmont winners and their pedigree for distance, maybe we can put things together.

Jazil - DI = 3.00 CD = 0.89 Bred for 8 - 9 furlongs

Afleet Alex - DI = 2.11 CD = 0.71 Bred for 11 furlongs

Birdstone - DI = 1.77 CD = 0.33 Bred for 12 and beyond

Empire Maker - DI = 1.88 CD = 0.42 bred for 12 and beyond

Sarava - DI = 4.50 CD = 1.00 Bred for sprints

Point Given - DI = 3.00 CD = 1.00 Bred for 9 furlongs or shorter

Commendable - DI = 5.00 CD = 1.07 Bred for quarter horse races

Lemon Drop Kid - DI = 2.62 CD = 0.79 Bred for 10 furlongs

Victory Gallop - DI = 3.27 CD = 0.81 Bred for a mile and 70

Touch Gold - DI = 1.82 CD = 0.46 Bred for 12 furlongs

So of the past 10 years, 1/2 of the horses were bred for 10 f or beyond.

I guess this means that pedigree really has nothing to do with the Belmont!

The distance is fine with him from a pedigree standpoint---his father has sired a Belmont Stakes winner--and his mother won a minor stake at the distance of 12 furlongs (albeit on turf)

However, off of recent form, which trumps pedigree, he never really shows a race that indicates the 2.5 furlong stretchout from 9.5 furlongs to 12 furlongs will be to his benefit...if anything, it would figure to play against him, unless he is able to relax on an uncontested lead...in which case he would be VERY dangerous.

Dosage numbers are cooky....and they give me a headache. Unlike a very helpful tool like speed figures--the logic behind them isn't that sound at all...and IMO, they are fairly useless.

I am more suspicious of Asmussen's ability to train a horse properly for 12f. The man comes from the SW QH tradition, like Baffert and Lukas, who depended on the horse's innate talent and class to carry it a distance rather than proper conditioning for longer races.

I can't shake the vision of Came Home winning the Pacific Classic when it comes to questioning whether or not Hard Spun has what it takes for the Belmont.

I laughed! Too funny.

Culin hasn't been asked to a do a thing in the morning since Asmussen got him...he's basically trained him for stamina and endurance since the moment he got him.

When he got the horse about three and a half months ago, he got a horse who'd just won a MSW sprint race in wire-to-wire fashion, in supersonic time.

Through Asmussen's "Quarter horse training" -- he's managed to turn what looked like a speed sprinter/miler, into a deep closing router....who was 13 lengths off the pace in the Preakness, inspite of constant urging from his rider to try to get him to pick it up.

Dosage is garbage. Garbage in, garbage out.

Check out Conduit Mare Profiles for these horses, which appear at the bottom of the pedigrees for subscribers at PedQuery. Curlin's has 9 presences on the speed wing, and 13 in the stamina wing. Hard Spun has 10 on the speed side and 13 on the stamina side.

Another thing to note is the GSV (Genetic Strength Value), developed by the man behind the matings that produced St. Jovite and Farda Amiga, etc. Curlin's is 69.80 and Hard Spun's is 79.96; the higher the number, the better quality the pedigree is for classic distances. (Teuflesberg, in contrast, has a GSV of 58.94).

If you have to have numbers rather than a reasoned analysis of the entire pedigree, I suggest both of these in concert as a replacement for the deeply flawed Roman Dosage numbers.

Pedigree Ann--

You may think dosage is gargage, but missing out on the chance for this brilliant insight was well worth all the ciphering:

Digger - DI 4.33 CD 1.00 - Bred for eating and pooping

Many horses who are not sprinter/milers win their debuts over sprint distances and do so brilliantly because of their superior class. Swaps, Nashua, Tom Fool, Affirmed, Buckpasser, are those who come to the mind of this old fogey and they managed a distance beyond 10f just fine.

PedigreeA--

While Asmussen is suspect of certain "things", winning races isn't one of them. Your notion that he's not a route trainer--and basically a quarterhorse trainer-- is just plain silly.

Read the current issue of The Bloodhorse for a background story about Asmussen.

Here's the Cliff's Notes version:
"Not only has Steve Asmussen broken the single season record for wins by a trainer, he is one of only three trainers to win 400 races in a year, the others being Jack Van Berg and Scott Lake. As of November 20, 2004, he was at 497 wins and counting. When he broke the record he was third in earnings behind Todd Pletcher and Bobby Frankel, and his horses were winning 24% of the time, and finishing in the top three 55% of the time."

Has one ever gone from winning his debut wire-to-wire sprinting....getting a better figure than a couple of Graded Stakes around one turn on the same card...and than won a race just three months later from 13 lengths off the pace....being that far out of it, at 9.5 furlongs, inspite of their jockey urging them to put them in the race?

Anyway...the fact that Asmussen once came from a quarter horse background will have nothing to do with this horses ability to see out the distance Saturday.

He's done a remarkable job of training (prehaps I should say draining) the speed out of him so far. It's hard to argue with the results he's got from doing it though.

This is a bizarre comment. The speed is still there, it is merely being used at a different time during the race.

While I don't agree with PA's claims about Assmussen not being a good route trainer, his win record doesn't prove anything. . . He races a lot of horses at lower level tracks where there are a ton of shorter races and very few classic distanced races. . .

Well stated, DrugS

In track (bike) racing, the rider who can push the bigger gear has a huge advantage. While he can go faster than the other cyclists while spinning less RPMs, he also needs to be stronger and have more stamina in order to push the bigger gear. Given enough distance of ground, and assuming an UNobstructed path, this rider will always win. The others might spin smoother and quicker than he can but in the long run he'll be going the fastest. Simple physics.

And that's exactly what happened in the Preakness. Curlin took a long time to get into gear. Despite lagging early, a needlessly wide trip, and taking longer to change in the lane than the others, when he finally got that big gear moving, it was all over. That was a TURF TYPE late move on the dirt.

Now, how does this horse lose in the Belmont? There won't be a 20 horse obstacle course (like the Derby). Hard Spun can go as slow or as fast as he wants. If he goes too fast, he's cooked. If he goes too slow, when it comes time to sprint in the lane, he can't match the bigger gear pusher.

Simple as that.

He can regress and there is a good chance he will regress. The problem is nothing in the race besides Tiago can come get him if he doesnt run as well as he has. Hes due to come back to earth on Belmont day.

Doesn't this assume that all the horses/bikers are travelling at a constant velocity?

Does this still work if Hard Spun gets a soft pace and essentially gets a "head start" on Curlin?

This is a bizarre misunderstanding of the truth.

Since you don't know what DrugS said, " training the speed out of " a horse refers to taking a horse with strong natural early speed and getting it to come from off the pace, which is exactly what was done with Curlin.

For another example of this I suggest you find the lifetime pps from Cryptoclearance.

WTF?!

Yeah, I'm not sure what he meant.

Hard Spun has without a doubt the best distance pedigree of any colt in the race. You can't go by dosage. Even the creator of the system says its tremendously flawed.
So here is the case for Hard Spun. His sire (Danig) sired a Preakness winner (Pine Bluff) and a Belmont winner (Danig Connection).
Far more important than that however is Hard Spun's dam-side pedigree, which is generally considered the more important side of a horse's pedigree in terms of distance. Look at the stallions in the three key positions of Hard Spun's dam-side pedigree. They are Turkoman, Alydar, and Roberto. Two of those three were multiple G1 winners at 10f and the other was a multiple G1 winner at 12f. They have all sired their share of routers as well. You can't ask for much better than that.

Now, pedigree certainly DOES matter in the Belmont. It probably matters more in this race than any other race run all year. It is important to use it as only ONE tool however. DrugS is spot on with what he says about Hard Spun. He has a great pedigree for this race, but his form will probably still prevent him from being effective at this distance. The colt doesn't seem able to relax. That trumps pedigree. The key is to find a horse that has a pedigree and (more importantly) a running style that will allow him (or perhaps this year....her) to be effective at this distance.

Why are people so quick to dismiss the "wise guy" Kentucky Derby flop angle. It's a mile and a half race so anything can happen.

Tiago just reminds me of Birdstone. I think Birdstone also finished 7th in the Derby. Besides that, Tiago is lightly raced so who knows how good he could be?

I am not going to say that Tiago has no chance at all, but Birdstone had a couple things going fo him that Tiago didn't.
1) Birdstone certainly had a 12f pedigree. Tiago's isn't bad but look at Birdstone's. His pedigree (horses like Hush Dear etc.) was perfect.
2) Birdstone had alread won a major stakes race over the Belmont surface.
3) Birdstone was, in my opinion, simply a better horse. I still believe he was an underrated animal on a dry surface. He ran on a wet surface in the Derby and one of his prep races (maybe the Florida Derby? I can't remember for sure) and he ran poorly. On a dry surface though he was pretty good.
Tiago hasn't raced that many times, so maybe he will still turn out to be a good one, but I wouldn't compare him to Birdstone quite yet.

I think he was talking about me at the end of a mile and an eighth.