Lawyer Ron returns in St. Louis Derby
 

By Joel Cunningham
Wire to Wire Editor

If you would have asked trainer Bob Holthus earlier this spring where he envisioned campaigning one-time Derby favorite Lawyer Ron in the late summer, he would have probably mentioned a premier 3-year-old event such as the prestigious Travers (G1) to be run Saturday at the famed Saratoga Race Course as a likely possibility.

One of those possibilities, however, would not have likely been the St. Louis Derby at Fairmount Park.

But much has happened since Lawyer Ron captured his sixth consecutive win with a sparkling victory in the Arkansas Derby (G2). The son of Langfuhr entered the Kentucky Derby (G1) as one of the race favorites in what was considered a wide-open affair, but he incurred quite a bit of misfortune in that race – one that is so dependent on having luck on your side. Lawyer Ron had a rough trip in the full field of 20, subsequently breaking his win streak by checking in a disappointing twelfth, beaten more than 21 lengths.

That wasn’t the worst thing that happened. Lawyer Ron, who had just been purchased by majority owner Stonewall Farms days prior to the Derby, was found to have returned from the race with a chip in his right hind ankle, requiring surgery and sidelining him for most of the summer.

Installed as the 2-1 favorite on the morning line for Saturday’s $250,000 event for 3-year-olds, Lawyer Ron makes his return since that dreadful experience in the Run for the Roses at Churchill Downs in May, and he’ll meet a full field of 12 sophomores when he lines up in the gate for the mile and-a-sixteenth event. If workouts are an indication, the speedy chestnut seems primed for a big effort, which would be bad news for his rivals.

Lawyer Ron, who will be piloted by regular rider John McKee from post No. 4, figures to get his sternest competition from stakes winners Lewis Michael, More Than Regal and Casino Evil, as well as up-and-comer Cielo Gold, and a good run Saturday will set him up for a probable start in next month’s $500,000 Super Derby (G2) at Louisiana Downs – where earlier this year he romped in the Risen Star (G3) at the Fair Grounds at Louisiana Downs meeting, which was potentially his finest performance to date.

Joel, nice piece. Check your PM.

if he's healthy and fit LR should romp.

FYI: Fairmount is in Illinois not Missouri.

Holtus said LR had the chip all along his campaign and finally had it removed after the KD disaster.

troubling...


St. Louis treated me really well last weekend....fingers crossed

Michael Lewis wins if he's in

:D ...yeah, Bogey made me aware of that....I had only just heard the name of the track prior to a couple of days ago....Needless to say, it sin't one that I wager on very often...:D Sorry for the mistake....

That is not how I understood it........I was told that he vetted out clean when his new owners bought him...I think your info may be a little off because I know that there is no way that a stud farm would invest millions in a colt that didn't vet out and then turn aroudn and jeopardize breaking him down in a tough race like the Derby....just wouldn't happen...no way

No real need to apologize. This $250k race just upgraded it from a track that can be completely ignored and forgotten 365 days a year, to a track that can be completely ignored and forgotten for 364 days, 23 hours, and 58 minutes a year. If I didn't have family that lived in both Collinsville and St. Louis, I probably would not have been able to tell you which country it was in.

war emblem had chips when the t'bred corp bought him. mineshaft ran with a chip or two. they acknowledged that down the line it could be a problem with them, but until the time came...

didn't kittens joy have one he ran with for a bit, until it started to bother him?

i searched and i could not find anything to substantiate my recollection that Lawyer Ron had known chips in his ankle prior to the KD.

That's my pick.

I thought the chips were discovered after the Derby, but Holthus said he wouldnt have had surgery except for the fact that he was a graded stakes horse. if he were a claimer, he wouldnt have had it.

well, another thing with chips is unless they become a hindrance, you can pretty much pick your battles with them. had he not had a setback when he did, they wouldn't have fooled with him....instead they decided to lay him up for a bit, he was certainly due a break after his campaign! now they crank him back up. the timing is perfect if he comes out in a big way here. the super derby, and then maybe (maybe??) the bc--third off a layoff.

ambitious, yes. but if you're going to dream, why waste your time if it's not a BIG dream?

Yeah, but my point is that there is no way that a stud farm would have bought him with chips for the money they spent...they wouldn't be able to insure him for the right price...think about it...trust me from knowing a little bit about that facet of the game, if he didn't vet out they wouldn't have spent that kind of cash on him.....or I would be VERY surprised because it is not normal or correct practice....he is giving up a lot already as a stallion prospect IMO...he is smallish and is by Langfuhr...those alone hurt his value...just can't see Stonewall buying with a chip..

forgive my ignorance....but why would a stud farm care if he had a chip? esp when you consider some of the horses at stud who have rotten conformation...
a chip is enough to pass on a horse?
then you consider unbridleds song...he didn't vet out, and the owner had the last laugh, hell he's still laughing now.

i guess i don't see the huge problem, considering the price the japanese paid out for war emblem and his chips.

why does being a son of Langfuhr hurt his value at stud ? i know Langfuhr stands for $20k.

and LR is a little light on reines de course. has 5 in his first 5 gens wchich limits some inbreeding possibilities. he's o/o a Lord Avie mare which opens up a possible Secretariat/SIr Gaylord cross.

Langfurh is no world beater and by no means an established sire of sires....sorry, but bloodstock agents won't like his second-hand blood until he proves something
.....

becasue they wouldn't want to invest in a stud that wasn't 100% to risk breaking him down and not getting him to the original reason they bought him - for stud duty...if the horse retires and goes to stud and then doesn't vet out then it is no big deal, But if he is stillr raicng it is a VERY big deal from a risk standpoint....the insurance wouldnb;t go for it first of all..