Registered: 12/31/06 Posts: 12536 Loc: NW NV & Far NW MT The Belmont will be his undoing, I'm afraid. He was being closed on at the last in the Derby, and it was a slow early pace. A distance horse wins Belmont.
Commanding Curve looks like a Belmont horse to me.
Edited by luv2safari (05/04/14 09:53 AM)
I was half right. _________________________ Hunt with Class and Classics
Hunt with Class and Classics
Religion: A founder of The Church of Spray and Pray
Acquit v. t. To render a judgment in a murder case in San Francisco... EQUAL, adj. As bad as something else. Ambrose Bierce “The Devil's Dictionary”
Perhaps we should also look at the number of entries. This years Belmont had 11 starters so CC had to compete against 10 other horses. The last 3 Triple Crown winners faced an average of 5 competitors.
I have no problem with changing the rules, but doing so would make it easier to win the Triple Crown, which means that doing so would not be as grand a feat as the 11 previous winners accomplished.
But did the previous 11 race against horses that were held out of the Derby or the Preakness?
Yes they did. A difference is that when Secretariat won in 1973 the Belmont Stakes had only 5 horses in the field. Seattle Slew won in 78 with a 8 horses field. The other difference is today's thoroughbred are faster and less durable and cannot run races as close together.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
I wonder if we will see anything factual in regards to past Triple Crown winners racing against fresh horses? Is skipping races a new phenomenon to Triple Crown horse racing?
It does seem sort of chickenschitt to accumulate enough points to enter your horse into the Kentucky Derby, but then hold him out becasue you don't feel you can win, in the hopes of finding a tired horse to beat in subsequent races.
I put together some information from the last three Triple Crown winners; 1978 (Affirmed), 1977 (Seattle Slew), and 1973 (Secretariat). I doubt many here know much of the previous winners such as Citation (perhaps the greatest of them all), Whirlaway, or Sir Barton.
For purposes of this description I am only calling a horse fresh if they did not run in a race between the Kentucky Derby and the Belmont, which would be the Preakness or another race at roughly the same time. There are some horses that ran in the Preakness but did not run the Kentucky Derby or a different race at about the same time as the Derby so they would still be fresher than the Triple Crown winners, but they are not included here. So in all actuality there were really more horses that were fresh than listed here.
1978
Affirmed won in a field of 5.
2 horses ran fresh.
1977
Seattle Slew won in a field of 8.
4 horses ran fresh
1973
Secretariat won in a field of 5.
3 ran fresh.
So the last 3 Triple Crown winners raced against 15 competitors in the Belmont, of which 9, or 60% ran fresh.
I could spend years compiling data and stats, but I think I�ve made the point that previous Triple Crown winners ran against fresh horses in the Belmont just like Triple Crown contenders of the recent years have. I believe the information also shows that while a fresh horse can prevent a good, or even great, horse from winning the Belmont and therefore the Triple Crown, a superstar horse will still prevail.
So the question becomes should the rules be changed to allow for more Triple Crown winners, or leave it as the hardest accomplishment in all of sports, where only the best of the best of the best can achieve this rare accomplishment�where only an absolute phenome wins this elusive title? Is this what we want the Triple Crown to stand for, or do we want to lower the standards some to be more �fair� in order to allow more, and most likely lesser, horses to win this grand title?
California Chrome co-owner Steve Coburn looks like Wilford Brimley. Turns out, acts like him, too.
California Chrome co-owner Steve Coburn, center, reaches for posters to before the Belmont Stakes horse race, Saturday, June 7, 2014, in Elmont, New York. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)
Wilford Brimley
Most any bio of Brimley describes the actor as often portraying a �gruff or stodgy old man.� Yep, that's Coburn, who has moved to the top of America's sour grapes list.
After California Chrome failed Saturday to win the Belmont Stakes, and thus the Triple Crown, Coburn went Sore Loser Supreme, ranting about the unfairness of it all, how horses could run the Belmont without also running the Kentucky Derby or the Preakness.
Even a night's sleep didn't change Coburn's tune; he babbled on Sunday morning, even suggesting that Cali Chrome running against fresher horses was no more just than Coburn playing basketball against a kid in a wheelchair.
And thus a sport that could have used a much-needed boost from Triple Crown headlines instead made news of a different sort. Boorish behavior isn't limited to the sports that use a ball.
Coburn, who has been in the racing business going all the way back to 2008, somehow feels a sense of entitlement. He seems to think that the Triple Crown is won in the Preakness and that the Belmont should be mere coronation.
�It says Triple Crown,� Coburn said. �You nominate your horse for the Triple Crown. That means three. Even the Triple Crown trophy has three points on it. So when you earn enough points to run in the Kentucky Derby, those 20 horses that start in the Kentucky Derby should be the only 20 allowed to run in the Preakness and the Belmont for the Triple Crown.�
Coburn appears to be a conspiracy theorist. He called the owners of the Belmont horses who didn't run in the Derby �cheaters� and �cowards.� Tonalist, who didn't run in the Derby or the Preakness, won the Belmont; California Chrome tied for fourth.
�These people nominate their horses for the Triple Crown and then they hold out two (races) and then come back and run one,� Coburn told ESPN. �That would be like me at 6-2 playing basketball with a kid in a wheelchair.�
At least Donald Sterling had an excuse. He's old and his mind's gone. Coburn is 61 and appears to be in charge of his faculties, if not his logic.
Yes, it's hard to win the Belmont, after winning the Derby and the Preakness. Three distinct races, in a relatively short (five weeks) span. But that's sort of the point.
Remember the old adage from the U.S. Golf Association, when players would gripe about the toughness of U.S. Open courses? The Open layout is not designed to penalize great golfers. It's designed to identify them.
So yeah, while it's cool beans if a horse can join the ranks of Secretariat and Whirlaway, of Gallant Fox and Omaha, of Seattle Slew and Citation, they don't pass around the status like a blue ribbon at a county fair.
Winning a Triple Crown is supposed to be hard. Sir Barton and Count Fleet and War Admiral and all 11 Triple Crown winners overcame the cheaters and the cowards to win the Belmont.
In the 36 years since Affirmed swept thoroughbred racing's three biggest races, more horses (13) have lost the Belmont with the Triple Crown at stake than have won it since 1875.
The owners of Triple Crown hopefuls Big Brown and Smarty Jones and Funny Cide and Charismatic and Sunday Silence and Alysheba and Spectacular Bid all lost with dignity. Why is California Chrome somehow mistreated?
Heck, if Wilford Brimley is so hip on fairness, why limit the three races to 3-year-olds? Why not let Orb or I'll Have Another come back and race? They won the previous two Kentucky Derbys. Let them race again.
You want to change racing culture, let's change it.
By the way, Coburn and his partner, Perry Martin, named themselves DAP Racing. Short for Dumb-Ass Partners, a light-hearted response to a passer-by who questioned their wisdom in buying Love the Chase, California Chrome's mother.
Sometimes passers-by know what they're talking about.
Berry Tramel: Berry can be reached at (405) 760-8080 or at btramelopubco.com. He can be heard Monday through Friday from 4:40-5:20 p.m. on The Sports Animal radio network, including FM-98.1. You can also view his personality page at newsok.com/berrytramel.
"All that the South has ever desired was that the Union, as established by our forefathers, should be preserved, and that the government, as originally organized, should be administered in purity and truth." – Robert E. Lee
"The bottom line is, horse racing may never have another Triple Crown if it continues to allow horses and their ownership to cherry pick races, and rest, and then come back loaded for bear as these horses did today in the Belmont Stakes."
This reporter is wrong. If cherry picking prevents a horse from winning the Triple Crown, then how have there been 11 Triple Crown winners who had to compete against cherry pickers?
The real question is has something happened to these horses that prevent them from winning the Triple Crown? Has there been some fundamental change to these horses? The answer is a resounding YES! These are not the same horses that raced in the past.
If I understood CC's owner correctly, he said all of these horses should have accrued the points to enter the Kentucky Derby, not that they actually ran in it. The Belmont Stakes are for three year olds, and maybe there should be a point level for the number of races in 2014, to keep paddock queens from running against horses which have campaigned all Spring. I think there were six or seven other races on Sat. at the Belmont Park, for these queens to run in.
An immature horse has been the bane of thoroughbred racing, but Sat. another horse ran over CC's fetlock. You have to wonder, if they all had campaigned together, throughout the Spring, would this have even happened? If CC is rested up and comes back to tromp this winning horse, and its stuffed shirt owner, I guess then we will know who's correct, and who's just full of it.
Below are the 11 Triple Crown winners and the number of race starts each had during their racing career. The average is 30 starts per horse, with only 2 having less that 20 starts, and 4 having more than 30. Whirlaway raced 22 times in one year as a 4 year old. How does this compare to modern thoroughbreds? If anyone doubts these horses have changed just google the picture of these Triple Crown winners and compare them to the top level horses running today. The differences are striking.
Another problem with the Triple Crown is too many amateur owners who don't understand what it takes to be a Triple Crown winner and how deep one's pockets have to be to produce a Triple Crown winner.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
That apology seems very sincere and heartfelt. He is an emotional guy. One who cannot control it granted, but I think he means it. Five weeks of anticipation by the whole world got the best of him.
Moral of the story: You never can tell what an old geezer might say.
Gun Shows are almost as comical as boat ramps in the Spring.
Derby dude there has always been rich owners that did not know what it takes.
That maybe true but today's owners are not that rich. This is a very, very, very rich man's or woman's game. I doubt DAP are that rich.
There's no money in race horses it's strictly a rich hobby.
You spout off about things that you know nothing about. The owner of Brodiemiester paid about 400,000 dollars for him as a prospect and he sent 10 like him to his trainer to have one that might win 1 or all of the triple crown races. The stud fees for horses like that can be in the 100,000 thousand dollar range. That is why people are willing to 30 or more million for a horse like that because of the amount of money that can be made with the stud fees. Lucky Pulpit's stud fee has gone from 2500 dollars to 10,000 dollars since he produced California Chrome. A top stud may cover 100 mares a season and can for maybe 20 years. There is most definitely money to be made. California Chrome has won 3.5 million so far.
Last edited by jwp475; 06/09/14.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
![[Linked Image]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t1.0-9/10377087_10152451830740170_2265879236843351252_n.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/oklahoman_gallery-f63690868a05ca1897fde71404da38d4.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://dewpac.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Wilford-Brimley-1-1024x685.jpg)
opubco.com. He can be heard Monday through Friday from 4:40-5:20 p.m. on The Sports Animal radio network, including FM-98.1. You can also view his personality page at newsok.com/berrytramel.
