Is it possible....

[justindew]

...that the "change in training tactics" that we've heard so much about in recent years is to blame for what has to be the most depressing spring in quite some time? In other words, maybe a horse needs solid juvenile form, three preps at age 3, and all that jazz. Maybe the horses who bucked the trends (Barabro, Street Sense, Curlin, etc.) were just superior, and too many trainers thought there was no need to do things the old fashioned way anymore based on insufficient evidence that "the breed has changed."

We had 20 starters in the Derby, 12 in the Preakness, and nine in the Belmont. That's 41 "performances" in the Triple Crown. How many of those performances would score a rating of "above average"? Three? Four? How about if you include the entire spring? Seven?

I admit I know nothing about training horses, but I have to wonder if the horses we just saw compete in the Triple Crown were adequately prepared.