The Belmont Stakes...the double Bunny

[moses]

Originally Posted by Rverge

i agree in part, but does one think JUSTIFY is like or better then AMERICAN PHAROAH?

I don’t know but all he needs to do is be better than the horses he faces in 18 days. It doesn’t much matter if he’s equal to or better than AP.

[songbird]

Originally Posted by knickslions2

Looking at the probables for the race so far I can't see how Justify is not in the lead. If his conditioning is there he will wire unless someone comes in with early speed and presses him.

i think Baffert will use the same strategy he did with Pharoah: put him on the lead and catch him if you can

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I'm feeling that if Audible and Noble Indy are kept out of the Belmont in order to help Justify's chances, then there ought to be an asterisk next to Justify's TC, should he in fact win it versus the reduced competition.

The question needs to be asked, i believe.

Would you still feel this way if you were the owner of the horses??

[moses]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

The question needs to be asked, i believe.

Would you still feel this way if you were the owner of the horses??

Didn’t people used to say that there was a conflict if an owner ran multiple horses in one race? Now there is an issue if an owner doesn’t run multiple horses in one race?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I'm feeling that if Audible and Noble Indy are kept out of the Belmont in order to help Justify's chances, then there ought to be an asterisk next to Justify's TC, should he in fact win it versus the reduced competition.

Noble Indy was NEVER under consideration for the Belmont. Pletcher told ATR Tuesday afterwards that they would look for different kind of opportunities for him.

Should we asterisk Citation? His Calumet stablemate Coaltown (widely considered the crop's 2nd best horse) was 2nd to him in the Derby and not brought back out for Preakness or Belmont?

And for the record comparing 'reduced competition', Justify already beat more horses in the Derby (19) than Citation did in his entire Crown run (15). Five in the Derby; Three in the Preakness; Seven in the Belmont.

[Kasept]

And since we're on the topic of 'competition', Citation beat only a TOTAL of 12 different horses in the Triple Crown with 3 of the 15 (Vulcan's Forge, Better Self, Escadru) having run in 2 legs apiece..

Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua in the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense.

[57rick]

Originally Posted by Kasept

And since we're on the topic of 'competition', Citation beat only a TOTAL of 12 different horses in the Triple Crown with 3 of the 15 (Vulcan's Forge, Better Self, Escadru) having run in 2 legs apiece..

Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua i the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense.

I’m officially old!
Had to Google GTFO!
Don’t have any kids so I cut myself a little slack��

[knickslions2]

Originally Posted by Kasept

And since we're on the topic of 'competition', Citation beat only a TOTAL of 12 different horses in the Triple Crown with 3 of the 15 (Vulcan's Forge, Better Self, Escadru) having run in 2 legs apiece..

Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua i the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense.

The language is hurting my virgin ears lmao. I was waiting for you to hammer this. In my opinion Audible running or not running isn't a big deal The race is full of his style of running and I don't think he is much better then a lot of these. Would like to see Noble Indy run as he would keep an honest pace with Justify and I thought that LA derby was a gutsy win. That being said Justify still needs to run well to win this and will be a well deserved champion if he completes it. Horse just ran two taxing races so not sure what's left in the tank.

[Dawgswin]

We keep talking around and around about this but no one has answered the real question. IF Justify wins does Bob change the license plate on his Bentley?

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Rverge

i agree in part, but does one think JUSTIFY is like or better then AMERICAN PHAROAH?

What the heck does better really mean? Who would win a hypothetical match race? Who would be better at what distance?
Assuming Justify wins the TC, his established accomplishments are extraordinary, shared by the very best of the breed, isn't that enough?

[South Beach Luv]

Originally Posted by Kasept

And since we're on the topic of 'competition', Citation beat only a TOTAL of 12 different horses in the Triple Crown with 3 of the 15 (Vulcan's Forge, Better Self, Escadru) having run in 2 legs apiece..

Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua in the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense.

Citation also won a race between the Preakness and Belmont at the KY Derby distance. Back then it was 4 weeks between the Preakness and Belmont though.

Please don't yell at me.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Noble Indy was NEVER under consideration for the Belmont. Pletcher told ATR Tuesday afterwards that they would look for different kind of opportunities for him.

Should we asterisk Citation? His Calumet stablemate Coaltown (widely considered the crop's 2nd best horse) was 2nd to him in the Derby and not brought back out for Preakness or Belmont?

And for the record comparing 'reduced competition', Justify already beat more horses in the Derby (19) than Citation did in his entire Crown run (15). Five in the Derby; Three in the Preakness; Seven in the Belmont.

Originally Posted by Kasept

And since we're on the topic of 'competition', Citation beat only a TOTAL of 12 different horses in the Triple Crown with 3 of the 15 (Vulcan's Forge, Better Self, Escadru) having run in 2 legs apiece..

Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua in the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense.

Okay, just to be sure I understand your position… Once a horse has beaten a lot of horses in the Derby and Preakness, then it’s fine for the ownership to increase the horse’s chances of winning the TC by not entering a strong competitor they also own, whose trainer is lobbying for entry, and which would otherwise almost surely have been entered. In fact, not only is it “fine”, but for anyone to suggest otherwise is downright contemptible, drawing enough ire that many of us had to run to the Urban Dictionary to understand the insult. I hope I haven't misstated your position.

There’s some irony here. When California Chrome’s owner bitterly complained about how unfair it was that there were no rules restricting which horses could enter the Belmont, he was roundly laughed at. This year we have an ownership that’s actually in a position to exert some control over which other horses will show up to attempt to deny the TC bid. But no one else at Derby Trail seems to find that the least bit troublesome.

WinStar’s president, Elliot Walden, is at least wrestling with the decision, according to this article at Bloodhorse.com: https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...n-to-the-track

Audible, who finished a fast-closing third to Justify in the Kentucky Derby, is slated to work at Belmont Park May 25 for trainer Todd Pletcher. After that, Walden said they would have a conversation about the son of Into Mischief 's Belmont status.

"Obviously, you have a Triple Crown on the line, so there are all kinds of factors to it," Walden said of the situation.

WinStar and China Horse Club also co-own graded stakes winner Quip, whom they did start in the Preakness against Justify and watched finish last in the field of eight.

"It's different when you've won two out of three than when you've won one out of three," Walden said. "But at the same time, I do feel like you can't manufacture a Triple Crown. It's either going to happen or it's not. We'll see."

That expression, “manufacture a Triple Crown”, captures my concerns exactly.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Okay, just to be sure I understand your position… Once a horse has beaten a lot of horses in the Derby and Preakness, then it’s fine for the ownership to increase the horse’s chances of winning the TC by not entering a strong competitor they also own, whose trainer is lobbying for entry, and which would otherwise almost surely have been entered. In fact, not only is it “fine”, but for anyone to suggest otherwise is downright contemptible, drawing enough ire that many of us had to run to the Urban Dictionary to understand the insult. I hope I haven't misstated your position.

There’s some irony here. When California Chrome’s owner bitterly complained about how unfair it was that there were no rules restricting which horses could enter the Belmont, he was roundly laughed at. This year we have an ownership that’s actually in a position to exert some control over which other horses will show up to attempt to deny the TC bid. But no one else at Derby Trail seems to find that the least bit troublesome.

WinStar’s president, Elliot Walden, is at least wrestling with the decision, according to this article at Bloodhorse.com: https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...n-to-the-track

Audible, who finished a fast-closing third to Justify in the Kentucky Derby, is slated to work at Belmont Park May 25 for trainer Todd Pletcher. After that, Walden said they would have a conversation about the son of Into Mischief 's Belmont status.

"Obviously, you have a Triple Crown on the line, so there are all kinds of factors to it," Walden said of the situation.

WinStar and China Horse Club also co-own graded stakes winner Quip, whom they did start in the Preakness against Justify and watched finish last in the field of eight.

"It's different when you've won two out of three than when you've won one out of three," Walden said. "But at the same time, I do feel like you can't manufacture a Triple Crown. It's either going to happen or it's not. We'll see."

That expression, “manufacture a Triple Crown”, captures my concerns exactly.

With all due respect, you make some pretty questionable points. Where did Steve come even close to saying the number of horses a horse faced in earlier races makes it OK for it to face less horses in later races? He simply stated some facts from prior TC winners, ones that weren't overly scrutinized by the masses due to the lack of an internet prior to 1950. Then you conclude your post with a total skewing of what Walden said....he said you CAN'T manufacture a TC, yet you left CAN'T out of your quote. Sort of interesting....no?

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

With all due respect, you make some pretty questionable points. Where did Steve come even close to saying the number of horses a horse faced in earlier races makes it OK for it to face less horses in later races?

IMO, he appeared to make that connection when he concluded his post with:

"Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua in the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

"So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense."

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Then you conclude your post with a total skewing of what Walden said....he said you CAN'T manufacture a TC, yet you left CAN'T out of your quote. Sort of interesting....no?

BTWind, I had already quoted Walden in full, and I had no intention of "skewing" the meaning when I wrote that final sentence.

How did you interpret what Walden wrote? Given the way it followed, "It's different when you've won two out of three than when you've won one out of three,", which seemed to be explaining why they're tempted to NOT run Audible, I interpreted "can't manufacture a TC" to mean 'you shouldn't try to manufacture a TC'. But I could certainly understand you're hearing it differently.

I'm also interested in how you feel about the central question. Do you have any misgivings at all about ownership conglomerates holding out horses merely to make the the TC more likely for the Derby/Preakness winner?

[Kasept]

Sorry if my message was snidely delivered, or perceived, but the thought that Audible (Into Mischief/Blue Devil Bel-Gilded Time) would have been the pre-eminent threat to Justify ~ he's not running ~ was preposterous.

[knickslions2]

Audible is out but now Noble Indy may be back in. To me that's a bigger plus than Audible getting in based on style. There are many Audibles in the race already.

[tywizard]

Lost in all of these accusations is the fact that Audible had distance questions coming into the Derby...He got the setup of a lifetime and a brilliant ride and still came up short.

The Belmont is obviously further and he's unlikely to get another setup based on the probables...

Instead of assuming Audible wins the Belmont, maybe consider that it's more likely he finishes out of the Super and diminishes his current Stud value...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

IMO, he appeared to make that connection when he concluded his post with:

"Justify has already beaten 23 different horses in 2 legs and if he were to best probable newcomers Blended Citizen, Gronkowski, Restoring Hope and Bandua in the Belmont, the number swells to 27.

"So GTFO with the 'reduced competition' nonsense."



BTWind, I had already quoted Walden in full, and I had no intention of "skewing" the meaning when I wrote that final sentence.

How did you interpret what Walden wrote? Given the way it followed, "It's different when you've won two out of three than when you've won one out of three,", which seemed to be explaining why they're tempted to NOT run Audible, I interpreted "can't manufacture a TC" to mean 'you shouldn't try to manufacture a TC'. But I could certainly understand you're hearing it differently.

I'm also interested in how you feel about the central question. Do you have any misgivings at all about ownership conglomerates holding out horses merely to make the the TC more likely for the Derby/Preakness winner?

I interpret Steve's comments as saying that in an historical context, should he win the TC, Justify would stand up just fine compared to some supposed greats of the past from a competition standpoint. Sure seems fair to me.

I take great exception to how you have chosen to interpret what Elliot said. In fact, I think it's VERY clear that he was saying you can't manufacture a TC win....you know, exactly what he actually DID say. In other words, a horse that wins those three races, 3 an 15/16ths of a mile over five weeks, achieved something that stands up to whatever scrutiny one chooses to throw at it, including the absurd notion that it was somehow manipulated ( specifically by an owner choosing to not run ONE horse in ONE of the races ).

To me, you are looking through comments made by others for meanings that simply aren't there. I find it particularly surprising in this case considering you have always, at least in the past, seemed pretty reasonable.

As far as where owners choose to run, in this case I would encourage them to make the same move, as it makes perfect sense. It also makes sense for Audible, as I doubt he could get 1.5 miles on a flat bed. I think it's extremely important for owners and trainers to try to make the most financially responsible decisions with their horses. That's why I think it's idiotic that City of Light is staying in CA to run in a relatively meaningless race at 10 furlongs as supposed to the Met Mile at eight furlongs. So much more upside for one over the other....just as the upside to NOT running Audible in the Belmont far exceeds the upside of running him. It's a business, and even wealthy people ( at least sometimes ) have to run it as such.

[cal828]

Daily Racing Form post seems to make the whole thing moot.

http://live.drf.com//nuggets/42686-a...s-now-possible

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

That's why I think it's idiotic that City of Light is staying in CA to run in a relatively meaningless race at 10 furlongs as supposed to the Met Mile at eight furlongs.

Nowadays a Grade 1 at 10 furlongs on the main is very rare, down to just 5 races in North America. The Gold Cup is probably the easiest to win (though the Big Cap is making great strides in that direction). City of Light already owns a Grade 1 win at 7 furlongs this year. If he pulls it off tomorrow, knowing the internet, there will be comparisons to Dr. Fager or...dare I say...Forego.

As icing on the cake, such a win would also potentially exempt him from having to run in the BC Classic if he doesn't overwhelm at the distance, since the BC has made it easier to duck with the advent of the BC Dirt Mile. In addition, I think this race will determine whether he targets the Pacific Classic next or ships for the Whitney and/or the Woodward.

A Grade 1 winner (in a single season) between 7 and 10 furlongs is a good qualification for HOY and for a stallion prospect. This would be moot if Justify wins the Triple Crown, but City of Light would still have a shot at 2 Eclipse awards.