Curlin

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Barbaro had just two races over dirt in his career coming into last years Derby.

And had only five races in him.

Barbaro debuted a little earlier than Feb. 3.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Barbaro debuted a little earlier than Feb. 3.

Barbaro raced twice at two and three times at three prior to the Derby, all his races were 8f or further with his last three preps being 9f! Yes he raced 3 times on the turf...he was an outstanding turf horse as well, certainly he had a good base! Blaming the two weeks between the Derby and Preakness for a bad step early in a race is hardly supported by the facts!

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Barbaro raced twice at two and three times at three prior to the Derby, all his races were 8f or further with his last three preps being 9f! Yes he raced 3 times on the turf...he was an outstanding turf horse as well, certainly he had a good base! Blaming the two weeks between the Derby and Preakness for a bad step early in a race is hardly supported by the facts!

My point is that he had a lot more foundation (race-wise) than Curlin does, so comparing the two is a weird thing to do.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

My point is that he had a lot more foundation (race-wise) than Curlin does, so comparing the two is a weird thing to do.

Yeah, I agree...I was just pointing out that Barbaro had a much more solid base...the idea that he ran on the turf should somehow compromise his conditioning I don't buy...for a horse to come into the Derby off three straight 9f races...well, he was obviously fit as the world saw!

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I believe Bernardini debuted in Jan--only managing a 4th, and didn't break his maiden until March....had he run in the Derby, does anyone sane really believe he'd have run worse than 2nd?

Every year, you hear all these trends leading into the Derby---and they are presented as if they really matter....they don't.

How many seriously good horses who've had 3 or fewer starts in the Derby, or have debuted as late as Feb, have run in the Ky Derby? You'll have enough fingers to count them on.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I believe Bernardini debuted in Jan--only managing a 4th, and didn't break his maiden until March....had he run in the Derby, does anyone sane really believe he'd have run worse than 2nd?

Every year, you hear all these trends leading into the Derby---and they are presented as if they really matter....they don't.

How many seriously good horses who've had 3 or fewer starts in the Derby, or have debuted as late as Feb, have run in the Ky Derby? You'll have enough fingers to count them on.

His connections didn't start him in the Derby for a reason, I guess you know more than them but they must have thought the Preakness was a better spot...he might well have run a lot worse than second, we'll never know...just like we'll never know if he would have won the Preakness if Barbaro hadn't broken down. In past years, I have listed some very good, even outstanding, horses who fell victim to those angles...many have run in the Derby but none won. Maybe this year will be different, I never say a horse can't overcome an angle but when you have "no winners since 1918 or 1882"...well, I'd at least consider that before making a huge bet on any horse.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

He didn't run in the Derby because he ran in the Withers the week before.....

Every year another one of these meaningless stat/trends gets broken---I can't wait to see which one it is this year.