If anyone knows off the top of their head....
 

...or if anyone can research this since I am too lazy and don't know where to find the info...

....is there any historical "requirement" to have a prior Grade I win in the Belmont Stakes? I know Birdstone was the only runner besides Smarty Jones in 2004 to have a GI win. And Lemon Drop Kid was I think only one of two besides Charismatic in 1999. Both paid big.

Jazil didn't have one. Neither did Sarava or Commendable. But I'm not sure if anyone other than War Emblem had a GI win in any of those years. I guess Bob and John did if the Wood was a GI then. Wasn't it a Grade II for a while?

Anyway, if anyone has the info I would be curious to see it. Looks like it will just be BB and Tale of Ekati this year.

Let me really quickly run through the past 140 years of Belmont winners pp's I keep handy just for questions like these...

Really? I don't need a PhD in The Kentucky Derby to know it had been twelve million years since a horse won the Derby without a start at 2. Or ten-thousand years since a horse won with only three career starts.

But if you don't know, you don't know.

By golly, I think you're on to nothing!

By the way, the Wood has been a G-I for a while now.

Or three and a half weeks.

Neither here nor there, really.

HAD.

outside of 2yo stakes (someone else will need to look those up) you only have the fl derby, wood, blue grass, kentucky derby, and preakness available to provide grade 1 winner's this year.

that's a pretty small pool to be providing a "winner's" condition. i doubt there's been much of a trend there.

Both Birdstone and Lemon Drop Kid's Grade I wins came at age 2.

When Tale of Ekati surges past Casino Drive in deep stretch to win, you can thank me.

I would put the odds of that exacta at about 1000-1

At 2: Won Futurity S. -G1; 2nd Champagne S. -G1
At 3: Won Belmont S. -G1, Travers S. -G1; 2nd Jim Dandy S. -G2; 3rd Peter Pan S. -G2
At 4: Won Whitney H. -G1, Woodward S. -G1, Suburban H. -G2, Brooklyn H. -G2; 3rd Pimlico Special -G1

Those look like 3 year old and 3+ races to me for Lemon Drop Kid

I think he means before the Belmont. . . Not that this angle means anything whatsoever. . .

I think you're being generous in calling it an angle.

Brilliant point. And totally irrelevant to the discussion. Well done.

Yeah, class means nothing. Good point.

Can you define class please?

I guess I would define a horse's class as the highest level of competition at which the horse can reasonably be expected to be competitive.

didn't you really answer your own question? an angle, to really be considered one, shouldn't have very many exceptions, right?

I just thought it was worth noting that some of the recent Belmont upsets were pulled off by horses that were the only/among the only Grade I winners in the field, besides the favorite. I'm a tad surprised that no one else finds this notworthy, but whatever.

And I never said it was an angle. I was wondering if someone with a larger frame of historical reference than I could either say "yes, I have noticed this", or "no, there is nothing there."

Also, in the cases of Jazil, Commendable, and Sarava, I don't think there were many horses in those respective fields with Grade I wins. So saying their wins were exceptions is not a fair characterization, in my opinion.