Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Birdstone did---I'm pretty sure he finished behind Azeri (who ran 5th) in the Classic that day.

Originally Posted by miraja2

Here is my point. Curlin had the opportunity to win a big race right then. His connections would have been foolish to pass on that opportunity just because of some nonsensical notion that skipping that race would somehow help win some other big race down the road. As you know, I am not just saying this in retrospect now that I know he won. I told you that at the time. Horses can get injured/sick at any time. Hell you could skip the TC races and the horse could break his leg in a workout the next day. If you have a healthy and fit horse and there is a G1 million dollar classic that he could win right then, take your shot.

Originally Posted by Danzig

there is no guarantee of anything. street sense could lay out, and still be out later this year. he could run, win, and be out later...or he could run, lose, be out...or he could run, and run later, win some and lose some.

who knows??? that's why it's under the umbrella known as gambling! if the horse can run, run him. if he can't or shouldn't, don't. but don't keep him in the barn now, if he's ready, as tho that is some guarantee that he'll remain ready down the road! just ask nick zito!


and i agree with the poster who said had he won by a head, rather than lost, we wouldn't even be having this discussion! shame that a few inches means the difference between 'what's best' and running....

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

There is a much better chance of the horse lasting if they skip the Belmont. That's what it comes down to. There are never any guarantees. If I eat really healthy, there is no guarantee that I won't get cancer. Does that mean that I shouldn't eat healthy? All you can do is do the smart thing and put the odds on your side. But even then, there are still no gurantees.

I don't think the fact that SS lost the Preakness is the reason they're not running. If anything, I think the fact that they lost would make them more likely to run because they would want to come back and reverse the tables on Curlin.

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

That's not a great example. I don't see Bernardini's situation as comparable with SS. They're just not the same type of horse nor do they have the same seasoning. Bernardini was fairly new to this level of competition and 2 TC races would've been a bit much potentially. SS has been handling the tough contests for awhile. The Belmont isn't s'much a 'stallion maker' as it was back in the day and Bernardini'd already won a Classic to go with his pedigree. The work was done. I don't subscribe to the idea that a well-seasoned, healthy/happy horse would face harm going for it in the name of sportsmanship. Now if he's not as bright and shiny as he has been and isn't training as Nafzger would like, totally fine to say they'll go for the big prizes later. If Curlin wins it, their backs will be up against it for the Eclipse is all I'm saying. Of course Nafzger knows how to do a Derby/Classic double.

Originally Posted by zippyneedsawin

Of course it's a reason they're not running.. Just not the only factor. If SS had won the Preakness, you telling me they'd skip the Belmont anyway? I seriously doubt that.