Curlin
 

He is probably a very nice horse. I think he will win the Ark Derby. With only two races under his belt as of right now, I am kind of hoping they give this guy a break and maybe think of the Preakness. Probably won't happen.

Why exactly would he need a break after only three starts?
He had 6 weeks in between his debut and the Rebel, and a month in between the Rebel and the Arkansas Derby.
If that schedule is too taxing for him to make the Derby......he isn't much of a horse.

It's not a matter of space in between races, it's a matter of too much, too soon. The Derby is a whole different animal than the Preakness, so I agree that the Derby might be a lot to ask of this horse, even if he does indeed win tomorrow.

The derby is a lot to ask, that's why its the derby. Rapidly developing horses have won on occasion. If Curlins wins at OP he deserves a shot..

Such as......???

None in my lifetime.

Unless you count the reincarnation of the ex-claimer from Lukas....who had like 15 races.

I cant even remember a horse who ran in the Derby with only 3 races let alone won.

Wouldn't that make them undefeated?

Well sure, if the connections don't feel the horse is ready for the Derby, they shouldn't run him there.
The original poster mentioned giving the horse a "break" which I took to mean literally a break, which made no sense to me at all.
If Curlin wins tomorrow (and comes out of it healthy) I don't see how anyone could blame them for sending him in the Derby. It would be awfully hard to have an undefeated winner of a major "prep" race.....and then skip the Derby.

Who?

Never mind. Meant horses with three starts going into the Derby.

Do you know any?

Did Valhol run in the Derby? Didn't he run very few times prior to it?

I must be tired....this thread is confusing me....

None I know of. Of course the problem is as we keep going into the Derby with less and less horses prepared for it then it keeps making it easier for the horses to win with 3 career starts or two 3yo preps or 8 week layoffs.

Showing Up last year. . .

I meant like horses that suddenly started getting better in their sophomore seasonn. Charismatic is the example I was thinking of. Real Quiet had not won as a sophomore. Dust Commander was a claimer at 2, then all of a sudden won Blue Grass and Ky Derby, he didnt win any other major stakes.
Going back aways Count Turf was nothing going into the derby and I think Dark Star was too.


What about War Emblem? He hadnt won any stakes races at 2, he wins an ALW, then IL derby, then Ky Derby. Isnt this the sort of thing w/ Curlin: maiden...Rebel stakes..???

SO read what I said. I didnt say "had only 3 races." I said "rapidly developing". Dont put words in my mouth:mad:

He's still only had three races, and I think that's the crux of the issue.

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

And had only five races in him.

win or lose today i dont think he has much of a shot in the derby, and im confused how he is getting bet down to the favorite in the derby future pool.... he has been green in both starts, he has been very impressive but in the derby facing 20 other horses i dont give him much of a shot, not with only 3 races going in

The fact that he is now the favorite in the future pool gives me faith that it still might be possible to make some money in this game.

lol thats what im saying i wouldnt take 10-1 on him. hes talented but not off of 3 starts.

That worked real well when they brought him back in two weeks after never racing on less than five weeks rest in his life. It was the same thing the year before. Closing Argument skipped his March prep and went in with huge spacing between his 3yo races. He ran huge in the Derby and then suffered a career ending injury in the Preakness. I think you can absolutely get away with babying your horse up to the Derby but then that horse is not going to be prepared if you try and bring him back in the Preakness.

I believe the last horse to win the Derby with less than 5 lifetime starts was Exterminator in 1918.

How many trainers intending to run in the Derby are worried about how much horse they'll have left for the Preakness?

I think you worry about the Derby--and if you're first or second in the Derby, you seem to almost have an obligation to run back in two weeks.

I agree though, in theory, a lightly raced horse with a lot of spacing between starts will figure to have a much more difficult time coming back in two weeks after a big effort in the Derby.....

That's pretty much the case/reasoning I used to bet Sweetnorthernsaint over Barbaro in last year's Preakness.

How many starts did Bernardini have going into the Preakness? I'm almost positive it was three starts.

Time is changing....

I think that is exactly the problem. Every trainer is preparing their horse for a huge effort in the Derby with no thought given to getting it prepared for the whole Triple Crown. Everyone seems to think the lack of preparation makes these horses tosses in the Derby which I disagree with. I think it is just going to make it a lot less likely we'll see a Triple Crown winner as long as we have so many horses peaking on Derby Day and then not prepared for the next two races.

And none around two turns.

The Preakness is the Preakness and the Derby is the Derby....you can laugh at history or consider it, up to you. Fact is that it's been since 1918 that a horse with less than 5 starts won the Derby, Exterminator was an exceptional animal and he had four! Times change but so far a lot of very good horses failed to break this angle, same with the stat that no horse without a start at two has won the Derby since Apollo in 1882...yeah I know FuPeg started in late December but the angle still stands. Additionally, no horse with less than 3 starts at three prior to the Derby has won since Sunny's Halo in 1983, prior to that it was Jet Pilot in 1947. An exceptional horse will no doubt overcome any of these angles sooner or later (Barbaro broke the RAN Curse last year) but all are worthy of consideration before going "gaga" over a horse.

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!

then how can you like nobiz? it's a similar situation. curlin is green due to only having a couple starts, but nobiz should be further along maturity-wise, but he isn't. he's facing the same type field in ky, same 20 horses, same high-stress situation. you don't seem very consistent in your thinking. curlin is very talented, and if he gets his head in the right place, he has a good shot.

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!

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.

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.

If yall are getting all up in arms about Curlin,,,,how bout Olympic Chief who is a first time starter making his racing debut in a Grade 1!! And the ARK. was his 2nd choice, Keenland didnt let them enter the Wood. I have been amazed when maidens are entered but a first time starter????????? :eek: Can u say dumb?

But the Preakness is a much different race, often with less than 10 horses unlike the Derby which is unique with its field size

I actually had Bernie in mind when I started this thread.

With regard to horses going into the Derby with only three starts. I think that is all Regret had, but that was 92 years ago. If I am not mistaken Charlie Whittingham started Strodes Creek in the Derby with only three starts. He finished 2nd.