Curlin
 

Am I alone in thinking these guys are crazy to run Curlin back in the Preakness? I understand with the $$$ paid to purchase him privately they wanted to take a shot in the Derby, and I also understand he is a talented horse, BUT he made his first start in February, and therefore will be making 5 starts in 15 weeks. If I owned this horse I would much rather freshen him a little and point for a Summer, Fall campaign, as I would rather try to win the Travers than the Preakness. Just seems if he doesn't finish "on his feet" next weekend he could be gone for quite some time.:confused:

If he came out of the Derby well, they would be foolish to not run him in the Preakness.

WHY?

Because he is one of only three horses in the race with a serious chance of winning...and while soundly beaten by the top two last time out, he had a much tougher trip than the winner--and the 2nd place finisher is once again likely to get caught in a pace battle.

There was nothing glaringly bad that happened to Curlin during the running of that race...

However, he broke far more flat footed than usual, he got squeezed back by Storm in May during the run into the first turn...he took a lot dirt in his face for the first time....he had sneaky trouble at the 3/8ths pole when he appeared to have a lot of run...but a few horses were stopping in front of him, and he simply had no place to go. And while he did pass horses once finally in the clear...it's simply unrealistic to expect a horse to go from a wire-to-wire debuting winner sprinting...to win the Kentucky Derby closing from 14th...in less than 100 days time

He gained something from that race, and with a clean break, he can be dangerous using his preferred stalking tactics.

Curlin is the likely winner of The Preakness in my opinion.

I must agree that barring injury, they would be foolish not to run him. They bought him to race, and he very likely will win a Triple Crown race in the Preakness which will help recoup their purchase price and enhance his value.

On what grounds would you not run him?

Do you think 5 races in 15 weeks is really too much?

Let me add that in three of his four starts he essentially had a workout.

This horse basically has had one start. The Kentucky Derby

Think of the stud value for beating Street Sense.

Curlin: 2007 Preakness champion.
Defeated BCJ and KD champion Street Sense
$100,000 fee

exactly

FTFY

hahaha

so, you're expecting stonewall to stand him??

Its asking a lot for him to run another big race being 5 races in 15 weeks.

i don't think curlins early races took much out of him. 5 lifetime starts by mid-may--no way that can be too much.

i like his chances in the preakness. it looked to me that the only running he did in the derby was in the stretch so he's probly ready to go for the preakness. also, should be a fair price behind street and spun.

i won't be pulling for curlin--different trainer, well then i would..

maybe hard spun will carry it all the way this time.

Only problem is he needs to win ....Going take a major effort to beat the two horses that kicked his ass in the derby

I never understood why send the 2nd and 3rd place KD finishers to the Preak.

They did their jobs in the Derby. It's the other horses that did not fire that day that should be pointed and have something to prove.

Your assumption makes no sense--a horse that ran poorly should be immediately run back in a Grade I race, on two weeks rest? No one would buy that logic in any month but May (and I wouldn't buy it then). Seems like time to regroup for Saratoga, Del Mar and the fall to me.

Also, I don't think all the other horses "failed to fire"--some are just not good enough, period, while others are not suited to that distance.

If a horse ran badly but had a legitimate excuse (i.e. boxed in for good chunk of the race), then I have no problem seeing them run back. Otherwise, drop back and punt.

I think Curlin has a great shot at beating Street Sense here...

Perhaps it's too much (and too soon), but if he came out of the Derby fine, why not take the chance?

While it is true that he is being asked to do a lot of racing in a short span of time....

It should be said that he's been exceptionally undertrained in his workouts. I only saw his final two works leading into the Derby---and he was pretty much restrained throughout both of them.

I don't agree with you at all.
There is nothing outrageous at all about 5 starts in 15 weeks. What IS outrageous is that people (not just you....some trainers too) have seemingly come to believe that running in the Derby and the Preakness means a horse must rest for 5 months before running again.
In 1948 Citation ran in the 10f Jersey Stakes (and won) in between the Preakness and Belmont (both of which he won) and yet that taxing schedule did not prevent him from winning another NINE stakes races after the Belmont including the then 16f JCGC.
Now I am certainly not suggesting that Curlin is even remotely in the same league as a horse like Citation, but the point is....running in races two weeks apart does not have to ruin the rest of a horse's year. Curlin is one of the better 3yos in training this year. Years ago the best 3yos tended to run in a lot of the big 3yo races. To me.....that makes sense.

Exactly. He is a race horse. Run him. It is about time some of these horses actually set foot on the track against competition on a regular basis. As it stands right now, Invasor will be trying to win back to back HOYs with a total of 10 starts in two years. Outrageous. Citation ran twice that much in 1948 alone winning 19 of 20

People need to understand that u can't bring up what horses used to do in the past and say that today's horses should be able to do the same. This is a different game and the horses are different.

I wouldn't run Curlin back in the race either. I'd much rather back off of him and regroup for the summer in races like the Haskell and Travers and Super Derby. Personally, I feel that the Travers is a more prestigious race to win than the Preakness or Belmont. And the purse and grade are the same. By that time of year, the ranks of the 3yo's have been severely depleted by needless runs in the Preakness and Belmont. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here but I think u have to go back to Thunder Gulch in 1995 to find the last Derby winner that ran in the Travers.

For all that are saying that if he came out of the Derby fine, two weeks is not too soon so why not, how often would u do that? Would u run him every two weeks for a year? Or at some point, would u take a break with him? The horse had a very condensed schedule to get him to the point that they got him so fast. Squeezing the lemon dry at this point would not be the right thing, IMO. If there was some kind of incentive, maybe the point bonus or if the purse of the Preakness was significantly higher than the late summer races, then maybe I could endorse it more. This is not 1948.

A lot of people thought it was a mistake for Bernardini to run last year. He was lightly raced, didn't break his maiden until March, had never been beyond a mile, had never raced around two-turns etc etc.

From a workout standpoint, Curlin was babied going into the Derby more than any other horse. Even the sheet players, who are as prissy as people come with patterns and time between races, I believe should be ok with his pattern and timing coming into this race.

Keeping one of only three serious contenders in the barn for a classic, and hoping all will be well and you'll have the best horse come Travers day, that isn't wise. A lot can go wrong from now until August...you can't take a chance at winning the Preakness for granted.

Yes but Bernardini, skipped the derby, so it wasn't the same as Curlin who is a lightly raced horse attempting back to back classics in two weeks. I can see both sides. I'd run him in the Preakness, providing that it looks like he handled everything in the derby well.

I guess I don't see anything wrong with running him back, but I also think that not many horses start so late and go immediately to back to back classics in races 4 and 5, so you do have to pay close attention.

I think he can win it too.

Can someone let me in on why everyone dislikes SA? I don't have an opinion one way or another...but I'm very curious. Or is he just like Frankel? i.e. something about the guy just grates on you...

He's a cheater.

Thanks...but meaning what exactly?

I was one who tossed Bernardini in the Preakness. Oops.

He's served MULTIPLE suspensions for drug violations, including 6 months or so in 2006. His horses ran in his assistant's (Scott Blasi) name for quite a while.

I never suggested that "today's horses should be able to do the same" as Citation did in 1948. If Curlin's connections decided to run him in all three TC races AND another 10f race in between the Preakness and the Belmont like they did with Citation.....I would criticize them. The point was just that a "taxing" spring campaign does not eliminate a good horse's chances from having a good late summer/fall campaign. The idea of what constitutes a taxing campaign have certainly changed over the years, but nobody would dispute that....so I don't really know who you think you are arguing with.
You say you would rather see the horse regroup for a races like the Haskell and the Travers as if running him in the Preakness will ruin his chances in those races. Those races are literally MONTHS away and this horse has only raced 4 times in his life.
Is the breed more fragile than it was decades ago? Yes, but the animals are not THAT much different that running in the Derby and the Preakness will automatically ruin the rest of their careers.
Will Curlin win the Preakness.....who knows, but if he is close to 100% he definitely has a shot, and if the trainer feels he is close to 100%, then not running him would just be stupid.

thanks for answering for me!

my kids got a kick out of me yelling cheater every time they showed him on screen.

that's what i've said many times over the years. got absolutely roasted by a few for suggesting nick zito was wrong to skip the bcj a few years ago when he seemed loaded for bear, that plum ripe for the picking. he wanted to 'save' his horses for the following spring. er, that went well.
when a horse is ready and raring, run him. when he's not, don't.

That of course is the other good reason to run Curlin. Whatever physical ailments he may develop from running in the incredibly exausting (:rolleyes:) 5 races in 15 weeks, I am sure his slippery trainer will have some chemical solution for it.

oooooooooooohh.....

We agree to an extent. We both feel like a horse should be able to handle a testing spring and still be around for the summer and fall. But are we living in a fantasy world? How many of them actually DO this? There can be many reasons, some physical, some economic, for why horses aren't campaigned the same way anymore. But let's just look at simple facts. The FACTS say that, since this decade began:

2000-Fusaichi Pegasus, Red Bullet, Commendable
2001-Monarchos, Point Given
2002-War Emblem, Sarava
2003-Funny Cide, Empire Maker
2004-Smarty Jones, Birdstone
2005-Giacomo, Afleet Alex
2006-Barbaro, Bernardini, Jazil

That's 16 horses that have won a TC race. Out of those 16, the majority DID NOT finish their 3yo season. It's not something I'm making up.

Fusaichi Pegasus (Jerome-II)
Point Given (Haskell-I, Travers-I)
War Emblem (Haskell-I)
Birdstone (Travers-I)
Bernardini (Jim Dandy-II, Travers-I, JCGC-I)

That's only five of the 16 that have gone on to win a graded stakes race after the TC.

and he is the only one......

the only one people want to talk about it would seem.