Blame the breeders for that. That is where this starts. It is not toughness these horses lack, but the fact that breeders have been breeding for speed and not soundness.

Thanks for the laugh.

I'm with you Justin -- couldn't agree more.

Taking into account what horses have done after winning the Belmont, I think it's in the best interest of the horse to sit this one out and get ready for the summer/fall campaign... What do people like to say?? Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it??

They -- at least Nafzger -- just about admitted as much when he said that it was clear that the Derby was just a learning experience for Curlin. Why run now against him, with a possibly tired SS, instead of waiting, especially when that means there is a chance that SS would never risk a second defeat by Curlin, i.e., if he doesn't make it back for the Travers or BC. At this point, Eclipse award strategies start weighing in. If SS lost to Curlin in the Belmont, he'd probably lose 3 YO status unless he did significantly better than him in the BC. But if Curlin wins the Belmont, and SS doesn't face him in the Travers and wins it, SS wins 3 YO, no? All probably silly conjectures, but I think SS's people want to make sure that he gets the Eclipse 3 YO award, do or die, and they don't want to do anything to jeopardize that. Curlin in the Belmont isn't looking appealing right now, not with a colt like SS that has a good chance of hanging once he hits the front in that long, long Belmont stretch...

That was really greaaaaaaaat.

I disagree. I happen to feel that the Travers is a more important race than the Belmont. The Belmont is only really important when a horse is going for the TC. Look at the ratings and attendance difference when there is not a TC on the line. The Travers carries the same purse and grade as the Belmont does. And if I'm not mistaken, it's been around even longer. Plus, it's run during a more prestigious meet at a more prestigious track. Back in the older days, the Belmont had more significance because it was 12f. But in those days, there were other 12f races. I believe the Woodward was 12f and the JCGC was 16f. The Belmont served more of a purpose. U got a chance to see which 3yo's were going to be able to step up past 10f to be able to compete with the top older horses in the fall championship races at Belmont. But that's no longer the case. The 12f of the race have made it irrelevant as far as determining which 3yo's are the best. It's more important to know who's the best at distances that they contest the championship events at. These days, it's more important to know who's the best 10f horse, not 12f. Because of that, the Travers is a more important race to me.

This is what I've tried to say. It's a 12F race, and his 3rd race in 5 weeks.
Whether you're happy with it or not, the race loses some of its luster when the triple crown isn't on the line.
Running in the Belmont for the sole purpose to be "sportsmanlike" or to help gain interest in the sport instead of keeping the horse sound and ready for late summer/fall is a risk that his connections don't want to make. I can't blame them at all.

Hopefully we'll see Curlin and Street Sense hook up again sometime, but I'll still enjoy the Belmont without Street sense included.

The Travers is the most prestigious 3YO race outside the Triple Crown. There's no chance it's more prestigious than the Belmont. Zero.

Let's say the Curlin wins the Belmont over a field that doesn't include Street Sense. Then he hits the sidelines for a break. Then let's say that Street Sense wins the Haskell and then they face each other in the Travers. The winner of the Travers would then be the leader of the division. Curlin winning the Belmont will only have him in the lead if he is to beat Street Sense again. If Curlin wins the Belmont and Street Sense beats him later for a 2-1 advantage heads up, how could Curlin have the lead?

Hopefully this defection opens the door for Rags To Riches anyway.

Make no mistake though---everyone from the racing fans to the betting public wanted to see Street Sense run.

As a fan, I sure do. But as a realist, I understand what's going on. I may not like it but I know what the trends have become and I understand the reality. While there is never any guarantee of even the next day, I do think that for the long term, this gives Street Sense a better chance of having a summer/fall campaign than if he had ran. I have no doubt that he COULD run in the Belmont AND have a summer/fall campaign. I also believe that more horses SHOULD do that. But that doesn't change the fact that recently, more and more DON'T. To ignore that and keep saying what horses SHOULD be able to do is not recognizing what is going on.

Who is your favorite horsey...if I may so inquire?

Let me get this straight. U are saying Street Sense could have a 2-1 edge over Curlin in head to heads but Curlin would still win the title because he won a race Street Sense wasn't even in?

The Travers is the oldest race in North America. Good post.

http://www.nyra.com/Belmont/mediagui...orySection.pdf

Page 5


Not what you were looking for, but it does help out a bit.

As someone attending the race, I had hoped he run. But if it allows Rags in, it would be a worthwhile trade-off. I doubt that will happen, however.

For a change I am actually in agreement with you. You make some good points here.

See: Funny Cide/Empire Maker.

Empire Maker, 2-1 edge over Funny Cide.

Funny Cide 2/3 of Triple Crown... and the Eclipse.

Good stuff. This shows that the Belmont crowd has been over 70k nine times. Eight of those times was when there was a TC on the line. The only non-TC attempt to draw over 70k was Point Given in 2001.

Looks like the crowd hasn't been over 70k once for the Travers. However, I think u do have to take into consideration the sizes of the two facilities. If Saratoga was as big as Belmont, I'm would be willing to bet that some of those Travers days would have gone over the 70k mark.

I think all his owner is thinking is the more grade one's on the resume,the higher the sale price/stud fee.That is all I gather from this defection.I would be shocked if this horse runs as a four year old.

The difference here is that Funny Cide won the biggest of the races. Curlin doesn't have that same advantage. If Curlin had won the Derby and Street Sense had won the Preakness.......then Curlin comes back to win the Belmont (minus SS) and SS beats Curlin in the Travers for a 2-1 edge, I think Curlin would get it. But in the scenario I first gave, not only would SS hold the 2-1 egge head to head but he would also have won the biggest of the races. That's what makes it different than FC/Empire Maker although that was a close example.

so, since no tc is on the line, should they just cancel? how ridiculous that it only makes sense to run if the tc is on the line. why would anyone other than the derby winner run in the preakness or belmont? just have two walkovers and put the pretender in the record books. whoopie, tc winner #12.

and good question about why they worked him! i don't think this was done in the best interest of the horse, but in the best interests of the horses next career. they didn't see enough to think he could handle 12f and the competition, so sit out...

wow, a seven race career at four. makes bernardini look like old school in comparison.
where's mineshaft when you need him? or medaglia d'oro?!

someone wrote that street sense was all out in the preakness (think in another thread) and that he may need a break--he was not all out, and would have won the thing had he not decided to loaf at the end..

I wonder this myself. I think it's even more of a risk running Curlin than SS.

The thing I want to be clear about is this. I don't think that running in the Belmont means that it necessarily increases a horse's chances of getting hurt afterwards. That's why I've said that I know it's not always for physical reasons why so many horses get knocked out later. I understand that horses like Point Given and Empire Maker were retired as much for economical reasons as physical, if not more. But what happens is that once a horse wins one of these TC races, and especially if they win two, they become so much more valuable that more precaution is taken with things that otherwise would have been seen as minor (thanks Sniper for helping me articulate this better). It's sort of like in other sports. A guy that u are paying $200k to, u might treat him and send him right back out. But if u are looking at someone u've invested $20 million into, u treat him different.

Those tight turns at Pimlico did him in.


He liked the surface at Churchill.






Don't ya just hate that?

someone wrote that street sense was all out in the preakness (think in another thread) and that he may need a break--he was not all out, and would have won the thing had he not decided to loaf at the end..
----------

Oh phooey.

Boy you said it Morty!

OOOOOOOOOO




Your friend,
DaHoss

And these old schoolers remember the days prior to BC when the Travers was almost as and just as prestigous of a race to win.

The Breeders Cup has changed and IMHO ruining the sport.

Has the thought ever occured to you guys that perhaps the horse isn't sound as a dollar and they'd rather not run the risk of permanently injuring him? There's a reason he trains and races in wraps.

Nafzger ruled out the Belmont in a quote that came from him right after the Preakness was run---I guess he opened the door up a little bit later on---but, the fact the he seemed to make his decision right after the results had been posted kind of makes it harder to buy into any speculation that this horse is only skipping the Belmont because he's not sound.

I'd actually cast my vote for the impossible to root for Steve Asmussen.

IMO, Larry Jones wasn't being a "straight-shooter" with some of the things he'd said after the Southwest Stakes with Hard Spun. I realize he trains for an owner who seems like a pest, and he's not a "big name" trainer---but, that wasn't straight-talk coming out of LJ's mouth. He may have "cowboy" as his nickname...and may try to act like he's not the sharpest tool in the shed...but I've heard other quotes from him that suggest to me that he has a racing IQ above the average trainer.

To Asmussen's credit....he's stayed the course with Curlin. He didn't go out of his way to make a case that his horse ran as well as Street Sense in the Derby inspite of the 8 length margin of defeat---and believe me, it wouldn't have been hard to make that case. And, he was also the only trainer who took the heat and allowed HBO's Real Sports to interview him in the story they did about top trainers and their bad tests.

While Nafzger may not win any awards for "best sport" --- I'm sure he's doing only what he believes is right by the horse...and how much can you really fault him for that?