Jackson passes on Belmont with Rachel Alexandra

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

As you said, there have been some great horses such as Curlin that ran well in all three legs of the Triple Crown and then were still able to run some more great races later in the year. But there aren't many horses that can do that. There have been far more horses that were either never the same or who needed a long rest to recover. And most trainers know this. That is why they didn't run Street Sense in the Belmont. They knew there was a high probability that it would knock him out, so they decided to skip the race.

Why would it have knocked out Street Sense if it didn't knock out Curlin and Hard Spun? Street Sense was trashed by those two later in the year, so who really was "knocked out"? Like I said, if you're ducking, say so. If the horse has no soudness issues, don't give me "long-term health" as your reason. It's hollow, and I'm surprised so many people not connected to the horse blindly nod along with it.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Why would it have knocked out Street Sense if it didn't knock out Curlin and Hard Spun? Street Sense was trashed by those two later in the year, so who really was "knocked out"? Like I said, if you're ducking, say so. If the horse has no soudness issues, don't give me "long-term health" as your reason. It's hollow, and I'm surprised so many people not connected to the horse blindly nod along with it.

Hard Spun would have buried Rachel

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Why would it have knocked out Street Sense if it didn't knock out Curlin and Hard Spun? Street Sense was trashed by those two later in the year, so who really was "knocked out"? Like I said, if you're ducking, say so. If the horse has no soudness issues, don't give me "long-term health" as your reason. It's hollow, and I'm surprised so many people not connected to the horse blindly nod along with it.

Street Sense was probably not as sound or as strong as Curlin. Horses like Curlin and Hard Spun are not the norm. They are the exception to the rule. I could go down the list and come up with tons of horses like Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex who were never the same after the Triple Crown. It is a rare individual who can do what Curlin and Hard Spun did.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Street Sense was probably not as sound or as strong as Curlin. Horses like Curlin and Hard Spun are not the norm. They are the exception to the rule. I could go down the list and come up with tons of horses like Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex who were never the same after the Triple Crown. It is a rare individual who can do what Curlin and Hard Spun did.

Yeah, Curlin was so sound he made his debut in February of his three-year-old year and drifted out into the middle of the track in winning it.

The best counter-argument you can come up with is Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex, two horses anyone with a brain knew would probably never race after the Belmont, injury or no?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Yeah, Curlin was so sound he made his debut in February of his three-year-old year and drifted out into the middle of the track in winning it.

The best counter-argument you can come up with is Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex, two horses anyone with a brain knew would probably never race after the Belmont, injury or no?

Just because a horse doesn't start as a 2 year old, that doesn't mean the horse is unsound. If I buy a very sound-looking 2 year old at a sale, I know the chances of that horse running as a 2 year old are probably no more than 20-30%. Not because the horse is unsound, but because the horse is bound to come down with some minor issue that will require a little time. You can have a horse that is close to racing in July and if they come down with a shin or something minor that requires 45-60 days at the farm, that horse will not run until January or February of the next year. If you turn a horse out for 2 months, they won't be able to run for 5 months because of the lost training.

I'm sure you are right that Curlin had a minor issue that prevented him from running as a 2 year old. But that hardly means he was an unsound horse. We know quite to the contrary that he was very sound. He was an "iron horse". He lasted all year as a 3 year old and then ran great as a 4 year old.

I don't know how you can say that Smart Jones or Afleet Alex would not have run again if they didn't get hurt. They were absolutley going to run again if they didn't get hurt. I've never heard of any sound 3 year old retiring only half-way through the year. There is this misperception out there that owners and trainers make up stories about their horse being injured. It is just the opposite. They will often lie and claim their horse is sound when in fact the horse is not. A good example was the filly Sweetcatofmine. When she was retired relatively early in her 3 year old year, the owner proclaimed that she was "retiring sound" which was total nonsense. If a horse is going to the breding shed, you certainly don't want people to think that the horse was unsound or that the horse was forced to retire due to injury. All things being equal, most people would rather breed to or buy the yearling of a sound horse than an unsound horse. So you would never want to say that your horse was unsound if it wasn't true.

Guys will downplay injuries and deny injuries. They don't make up stories about horses being injured. Owners don't feel the need to feign injury to justify retiring a horse.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Yeah, Curlin was so sound he made his debut in February of his three-year-old year and drifted out into the middle of the track in winning it.

The best counter-argument you can come up with is Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex, two horses anyone with a brain knew would probably never race after the Belmont, injury or no?

How about adding Charismatic, Point Given, Monarchos, Real Quiet, Silver Charm, Empire Maker, Giacomo, and Big Brown as horses that ran in all three over the past dozen years and couldn't finish out their 3yo seasons. Does that help the counter argument any? How about some more horses that ran in at least two of the TC races with one of them being the Belmont that didn't finish out their 3yo seasons? Horses like Bluegrass Cat, Jazil, Rags to Riches.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

How about adding Charismatic, Point Given, Monarchos, Real Quiet, Silver Charm, Empire Maker, Giacomo, and Big Brown as horses that ran in all three over the past dozen years and couldn't finish out their 3yo seasons. Does that help the counter argument any? How about some more horses that ran in at least two of the TC races with one of them being the Belmont that didn't finish out their 3yo seasons? Horses like Bluegrass Cat, Jazil, Rags to Riches.

Empire Maker didn't run in all three, and he was made out of glass anyway, I'm pretty sure Silver Charm had a nice career, Charismatic had a freak injury, Giacomo was slow before the TC and slow after it and he did "finish" his three-year-old season with a good showing in the BCC, Big Brown and Bluegrass Cat both came back in two months to win the Haskell and the former had notoriously bad feet and was retired early because of a stud deal. Sorry, this ain't doing it. And why isn't everyone who's applauding this decision so loudly equally decrying the decision to run Mine That Bird? He's a nice little horse, yet nobody seems to mind him facing the supposedly inevitable TC knockout.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Empire Maker didn't run in all three, and he was made out of glass anyway, I'm pretty sure Silver Charm had a nice career, Charismatic had a freak injury, Giacomo was slow before the TC and slow after it and he did "finish" his three-year-old season with a good showing in the BCC, Big Brown and Bluegrass Cat both came back in two months to win the Haskell and the former had notoriously bad feet and was retired early because of a stud deal. Sorry, this ain't doing it. And why isn't everyone who's applauding this decision so loudly equally decrying the decision to run Mine That Bird? He's a nice little horse, yet nobody seems to mind him facing the supposedly inevitable TC knockout.

I should have included Empire Maker in the second group and not the first. Sure, Silver Charm and Real Quiet came back the next year but neither of them ran again after the Belmont in their 3yo season. I don't consider SC coming back in the Malibu as running again. Charismatic's injury may have been a fluke. Giacomo was slow but for some reason, I don't remember him running again as a 3yo. You can make excuses for any or all of them. Fluke injuries, fake injuries, whatever. The facts are that all of those that I named didn't finish their 3yo seasons. Running one or two more races is not finishing it. Big Brown, Bluegrass Cat, Empire Maker, Rags, and Point Given all came back after the Belmont but they didn't finish their seasons.

I also wouldn't run Mine that Bird. I don't think there is anything at all to gain by running him or Dunkirk or any horse that a trainer has high hopes for later. If it's a situation like the Zito horses or where you don't think you really have a top level horse and know that now is a good chance to catch a sorry field in an irrelevant race, yeah, I'd run.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

You can make excuses for any or all of them. Fluke injuries, fake injuries, whatever. The facts are that all of those that I named didn't finish their 3yo seasons. Running one or two more races is not finishing it. Big Brown, Bluegrass Cat, Empire Maker, Rags, and Point Given all came back after the Belmont but they didn't finish their seasons.

They're not excuses. They're extremely important circumstances you have to consider. You can't just rattle off names and completely ignore the value or previous health of the horse when attempting to use "they didn't finish their seasons!" as a knockout blow to running in two TC races. It's ridiculous.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Given your stance regarding the Belmont Stakes -- an anarchronistic distance -- winning the Triple Crown is not such a big deal, is it?

I think winning the TC is a big deal. I don't think winning the Belmont when it's not part of winning a TC is a big deal. It used to be. But it's not anymore. When I first started watching racing, the BC was new. For many people, including myself, while the BC was the year end championship, the fall races at Belmont were almost nearly as important. The JCGC was for years the championship defining race. During those years, the race was 12f. It made the Belmont a lot more significant to me because you wanted to know which 3yos could step up to that distance to take on the top older horses in the JCGC. But then they stopped running the JCGC at that distance. So for me, the Belmont didn't matter anymore. The only time it matters to me is when it's the final test for a 3yo trying to win the crown. Otherwise, it becomes much ado about nothing. Doesn't mean that some good horses haven't run in it and won it. But, especially the last 20 years, some pretty average to mediocre horses have also won it. I think that more horses win that race that would be considered below the standard for what we'd expect for the race than maybe any other top race.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Empire Maker didn't run in all three, and he was made out of glass anyway, I'm pretty sure Silver Charm had a nice career, Charismatic had a freak injury, Giacomo was slow before the TC and slow after it and he did "finish" his three-year-old season with a good showing in the BCC, Big Brown and Bluegrass Cat both came back in two months to win the Haskell and the former had notoriously bad feet and was retired early because of a stud deal. Sorry, this ain't doing it. And why isn't everyone who's applauding this decision so loudly equally decrying the decision to run Mine That Bird? He's a nice little horse, yet nobody seems to mind him facing the supposedly inevitable TC knockout.

I agree with you that there are some breakdowns that are freak injuries. But I wouldn't consider Charismatic's breakdown a freak injury. Did you see Charismatic train the week leading up to the Belmont? That horse was as sore as any horse I have ever seen.

I agree with you that Giacomo was never really that great a horse to begin with so it's hard to say if the Triple Crown ruined him or not. The TC certainly knocked him out badly. He didn't even run after the Belmont until February of the next year. His respectable 4th place finish in the BC Classic was not in his 3 year old year. It was in his 4 year old year.

I would agree with you about Big Brown and Bluegrass Cat. Both came back to win again. After Big Brown's wins in the summer I think he ended up with another quarter crack. But I think he could have come back and run again if it wasn't for his stud deal.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Street Sense was probably not as sound or as strong as Curlin. Horses like Curlin and Hard Spun are not the norm. They are the exception to the rule. I could go down the list and come up with tons of horses like Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex who were never the same after the Triple Crown. It is a rare individual who can do what Curlin and Hard Spun did.

How do we know what Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex were after the Belmont? We got repeatedly fed lines of bullsh1t so they wouldn't have to run again. Both of them were fine coming out of the TC series, according to those that weren't involved in the protection schemes.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by philcski

How do we know what Smarty Jones and Afleet Alex were after the Belmont? We got repeatedly fed lines of bullsh1t so they wouldn't have to run again. Both of them were fine coming out of the TC series, according to those that weren't involved in the protection schemes.

Name me one line of bs that we were fed.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Name me one line of bs that we were fed.

Smarty Jones was retired after a phantom "bone bruising" injury which takes 15-30 days to recover from, if even that. Unfortunately for Three Chimneys and the Chapmans, Dr. Larry Bramledge 'accidentally' blew the lid off their moneygrab by saying that it was something that horses come back from after rest all the time, and doesn't require surgery. If you think I'm sounding bitter, you're right. We were cheated of seeing a potentially GREAT horse for no reason whatsoever. I followed him from his first start ever, is probably my favorite horse of all time, and talked to everyone 'in the know' about it. There was NOTHING wrong with him, other than the normal risks of racing. The thing they were worried about was SJ was never really cut out to be a great sire, and unfortunately for his fans (myself included of course) it's proving to be true as he hasn't even had a US stakes winner yet despite some decent maiden winners.

In comparison from the same year, Stronach had no reason to try to bring back Ghostzapper at 5, as he was already proven to be the best horse of the generation and was a home run as a stallion, yet made the attempt anyways. He actually got hurt and had to be stopped on, but at least we got to see one more dynamite race.

And in no way am I suggesting that this has anything to do with Rachel, because I feel going to the Belmont isn't the right move for her anyways. She deserves a break and will come back to dominate again.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by philcski

Smarty Jones was retired after a phantom "bone bruising" injury which takes 15-30 days to recover from, if even that. Unfortunately for Three Chimneys and the Chapmans, Dr. Larry Bramledge 'accidentally' blew the lid off their moneygrab by saying that it was something that horses come back from after rest all the time, and doesn't require surgery. If you think I'm sounding bitter, you're right. We were cheated of seeing a potentially GREAT horse for no reason whatsoever. I followed him from his first start ever, is probably my favorite horse of all time, and talked to everyone 'in the know' about it. There was NOTHING wrong with him, other than the normal risks of racing. The thing they were worried about was SJ was never really cut out to be a great sire, and unfortunately for his fans (myself included of course) it's proving to be true as he hasn't even had a US stakes winner yet despite some decent maiden winners.

In comparison from the same year, Stronach had no reason to try to bring back Ghostzapper at 5, as he was already proven to be the best horse of the generation and was a home run as a stallion, yet made the attempt anyways. He actually got hurt and had to be stopped on, but at least we got to see one more dynamite race.

And in no way am I suggesting that this has anything to do with Rachel, because I feel going to the Belmont isn't the right move for her anyways. She deserves a break and will come back to dominate again.

Even if Smarty Jones only needed 30 days at the farm, by the time he would have been ready to run again, it would have been November. He would have missed all the good races. He was retiring at the end of the year any way so it was pointless to bring him back. I don't have a problem with an owner retiring a horse at the end of his 3 year old year. It's a business and if you get a big stud deal, sometimes it makes more sense to retire than to run.

From what I have heard, Smarty had more than a bone-bruise. I heard that his cartilage looked terrible on the x-rays and he would not have had many races left in him.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by philcski

Smarty Jones was retired after a phantom "bone bruising" injury which takes 15-30 days to recover from, if even that. Unfortunately for Three Chimneys and the Chapmans, Dr. Larry Bramledge 'accidentally' blew the lid off their moneygrab by saying that it was something that horses come back from after rest all the time, and doesn't require surgery. If you think I'm sounding bitter, you're right. We were cheated of seeing a potentially GREAT horse for no reason whatsoever. I followed him from his first start ever, is probably my favorite horse of all time, and talked to everyone 'in the know' about it. There was NOTHING wrong with him, other than the normal risks of racing. The thing they were worried about was SJ was never really cut out to be a great sire, and unfortunately for his fans (myself included of course) it's proving to be true as he hasn't even had a US stakes winner yet despite some decent maiden winners.

In comparison from the same year, Stronach had no reason to try to bring back Ghostzapper at 5, as he was already proven to be the best horse of the generation and was a home run as a stallion, yet made the attempt anyways. He actually got hurt and had to be stopped on, but at least we got to see one more dynamite race.

And in no way am I suggesting that this has anything to do with Rachel, because I feel going to the Belmont isn't the right move for her anyways. She deserves a break and will come back to dominate again.

Good stuff, Phil. I remember Bramledge's comments, too.

The other comparison is with Roy Chapman, who, like Jackson, was a very sick man with not much life expectancy. You'd think he'd have liked to see his one big horse keep racing, maybe even as a 4-yr-old. The family was hardly poor. But noooo, off to the breeding shed.

Forgive me, but I like Jackson. On HIS way out he buys a filly to see her run.

--Dunbar