A theory on the Belmont

[SWC75]

...that I've heard over the years is that it's easy for the Kentucky derby winner to win the Preakness but hard to win the Belmont because there is so much emphasis on winning the Triple Crown, as opposed to winning a Triple Crown race, that owners of Derby contenders who didn't win don't run their horses in the Preakness and instead rest them for the Belmont as they have no shot at the TC anyway. The Derby winner thus wins over a weakened Preakness field and everybody gets excited about whether that horse will be the next TC winner. But he gets beat by the rested horses who are good enough to contend against him what haven't raced since the Derby.

I decided to check the fields in the Derby, Preakness and Belmont in the 11 years since the last TC in which a horse won the first two and lost the Belmont to see if such a pattern emerged.

In the early going, there was no sign of it:

1979: Spectacular Bid was beaten Coastal, who wasn't in either the Derby or the Preakness and Golden Act, who was in both.

1981: Pleasant Colony finished behind Summing, who wasn't in the Derby or the Preakness and Highland Blade who wasn't in the Derby but ran 6th in the Preakness.

1987: Alysheba finished behind Bet Twice who had been 2nd in both the Derby and Preakness, Cryptoclearnace, who had been 4th in the Derby and third in the Preakness, and Gulch who had been 6th and 4th in the Derby and Preakness.

1989 Sunday Silence lost to Easy Goer who had been second in the first two races

1997 Silver Charm lost to Touch God, who hadn't been in either of the earlier races.

1998 Real Quiet lost to Victory Gallop, who had been second in the prior two races.

But then:

1999 Charismatic lost to Lemondrop Kid, who had been 9th in the derby and skipped the Preakness.

2002 War Emblem finished 8th in the Belmont. Of the seven horses ahead of him, one, Essence of Dubai, ran int eh derby but not the Preakness. But he finished 6th and another horse who ahd done the same thing. Perfect Drift, finished 10th. Medaglia D’Orio, who ran in all three races, was 2nd. Savara, who ran only in the Belmont, won it.

2003 Funny Cide finished 3rd to Empire Makers, who had been 2nd in the Derby and skipped the Preakness and Ten Most Wanted, who had been 9th in the Derby and skipped the Preakness.

2004 Smarty Jones finished 2nd to Birdstone, who had been 8th in the Derby and skipped the Preakness.

This was about the time I started hearing this theory. In 2008 Big Brown won the first two but pulled up in the Belmont for reasons that are still controversial. He had had a split hoof before the race. In 2012 I'll Have Another won the Derby and Preakness but was scratched and then retired before the Belmont. obviously, neither of those two instances prove or disprove any theory.

Perhaps the important stat is that 8 of the 11 would-be TC winners lost to horses that had not run in the Preakness, five of whom hadn't run in the Derby, either. Actually, not that many horses run in all three races, (34 in the 11 years I looked at).

Looking at the field for tomorrow's race, California Chrome, (odds: 3-5), Ride on Curlin, (12-1) and General A-Rod (20-1) will have been in all three races. Commanding Curve (15-1), Wicked Strong (6-1), Samratt (20-1) and Medal Count (20-1) rode the Derby but not the Preakness. Matterhorn, (30-1), Matuszak (30-1), Commisioner (20-1) and Tonalist (8-1) were in neither the Derby or the Preakness.

if the theory holds up, look out for Wicked Strong, a horse with some Syracuse connections.

 

[storange]

my theory Its long...triple crown candidates tire, I think CC does it though

 

[SWC75]

Well, California Chrome finished 5th in a Belmont that looked an awful lot like some of the other Belmonts I've posted

From the ESPN article:
http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/tri...-stakes-denies-california-chrome-triple-crown

"Tonalist was a fresh and rested horse making his debut on the Triple Crown trail. He last ran and won the Peter Pan Stakes on the same Belmont dirt on May 10.

That irked California Chrome co-owner Steve Coburn, who had said after the Preakness that horses should be required to run in all three Triple Crown races.

"It's all or nothing," he said. "This is not fair to these horses and to the people that believe in them. This is the coward's way out."

The Derby was May 3rd and the Preakness May 17th. In the Belmont, California Chrome faced 10 horses, 8 of which did not run in the Preakness and four of those didn't run in the Derby, either. The implication is that it's a disadvantage to face horses that didn't have to run both of the previous races in the Belmont.

I decided to look at the last three Triple Crown winners, Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed, and try to determine how different the Belmont fields they faced were in this regard. Firstly, those fields were smaller. Secretariat and Affirmed faced only four other horses each in the Belmont. Seattle Slew faced 7 other horses. Three of Secretariat's foes had been in the derby and only one in the Preskness- Sham, who faded to last in the Belmont. Seattle Slew faced two other horses who had been with him in the Derby and the Preakness. Antoher ahd been only in the Derby, another only in the Preakness and another horse had been in neither. Alydar was, of course, in all three races wiht Affirms. One other horse was in the derby, one in the Preakness and the fourth horse had been in neither. All together there were 15 other horses in the three races, four of whom were in all three races. So the opposition doesn't seem to have been different, just less numerous.

No owner or trainer is obligated to enter his horse in all three races. The best way to get them to do so might be to have combined standings and rich rewards for them. Visa tried something like that a few years ago:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/05/sports/a-bonus-california-chrome-cant-win.html?_r=0
The article mentions only a prize of $5 million for winning the Triple Crown but other articles I';ve read said that whoever won the points system got $1 million if there was no TC winner. This was in effect from 1997-2005. Looking at the field faced by Silver Charm, (1997), Real Quiet (1998), Charismatic, (1999), War Emblem (2002), Funny Cide (2003) and Smarty Jones (2004), I find they faced 9 opponents who were in all three races, 10 who'd been in the derby, 4 in the Preakness and 27 who had run in neither, so the VISA prize had no impact. Maybe if they'd given out prizes to more horses, including something to horses that competed in all three races. Give them points for win, place and show in each race and so much money per point.

"Triple Crown Productions" is mentioned in the article, an "entity formed by the race’s three tracks to negotiate marketing and television deals". Maybe they could be given the power to force owners and trained to enter their horses as a package deal to be in all three races. Or maybe the racing schedule could be changed to allow more time between the three big races.

But then future Triple Crown winners would have won their crowns under different circumstance than the previous ones.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

i think the horse racing experts will tell u that is the very fact that these horses are often running against rested competition that makes the triple crown special. the greatest horses of all time hold up against all competitors.

 

[CousCuse]

That diatribe from Coburn seemed like misdirection to me , as this has been the format to the Triple Crown forever. Why did the trifecta pay so little ? Would anyone before the race really wager that CC wouldn't hit the board ? Wall St is out and out manipulated , why not horse racing ?

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I think it was wise to take chrome out of trifecta wagering, one would figure that he was either going to win or was going to struggle like he did and not hit the board. Using him in trifecta wagering would greatly reduce your return as well.

I didn't see medal count running that well, but dale Romans horses can come from anywhere. I did hit the exacta though as I thought the Peter Pan was an excellent race for both tonalist/commissioner.

Coburn showed zero class yesterday and even more so this morning. Screw him.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Just got it from the horse's mouth: California Chrome had leg cramps. Go figure.

 

[CousCuse]

Just got it from the horse's mouth: California Chrome had leg cramps. Go figure.

So did Shoelsss Joe Jackson.

 

[BillJay]

Just got it from the horse's mouth: California Chrome had leg cramps. Go figure.

True, the AC was out at the Belmont. But it was out for all the horses & you don't hear the others making excuses...

 

[Guinness]

i think the horse racing experts will tell u that is the very fact that these horses are often running against rested competition that makes the triple crown special. the greatest horses of all time hold up against all competitors.

Totally agree. It is what separates the great from the good. CC was a good maybe even very good horse. He was not a great horse. There is no shame in that.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Totally agree. It is what separates the great from the good. CC was a good maybe even very good horse. He was not a great horse. There is no shame in that.

CC is a great horse.. Not a good horse. He's not a triple crown winner but he's a great horse. He won Santa anita derby, kentucky derby, and preakness. That puts you in the company of great horses, plain and simple.

Who is a great horse in your opinion? To me Palace malice is a great horse. Probably the best horse in the us right now. I'm just curious what you are using for criteria.

Triple crown winners are just so few over the years. Call me crazy but I put Wise Dan up there as one if the best of all time. There have been a ton and I mean a ton of great horses that haven't won't even a leg of the trip crown.

 

[br801]

CC is a great horse.. Not a good horse. He's not a triple crown winner but he's a great horse. He won Santa anita derby, kentucky derby, and preakness. That puts you in the company of great horses, plain and simple.

Who is a great horse in your opinion? To me Palace malice is a great horse. Probably the best horse in the us right now. I'm just curious what you are using for criteria.

Triple crown winners are just so few over the years. Call me crazy but I put Wise Dan up there as one if the best of all time. There have been a ton and I mean a ton of great horses that haven't won't even a leg of the trip crown.

I think the term "great" is thrown around too easily. As Guinness wrote above, there is nothing wrong with being called "good," which is what I'd call California Chrome right now. What CC accomplishes from here on out, against his peers and against older horses in the fall, will determine his legacy, IMO.

Winning the Belmont and Met puts Palace Malice in rarefied air, and if he continues on to have a big 4YO campaign against what appears to be a very strong group of older horses, he has a chance to be considered great, IMO. I wouldn't bet against him doing it.

Wise Dan is great and is one of the best all time, and he's certainly one of the best and most durable middle distance grass horses ever.

 

[SWC75]

I think golf, tennis, auto racing and horse racing should all have a "major" event once a month from April to October. It would keep those sports on the front of the sports page and combined standings could be sued to determine a champion for the year. There would also be adequate rest and preparation for the participants.

 

[djcon57]

CC is a great horse.. Not a good horse. He's not a triple crown winner but he's a great horse. He won Santa anita derby, kentucky derby, and preakness. That puts you in the company of great horses, plain and simple.

Who is a great horse in your opinion? To me Palace malice is a great horse. Probably the best horse in the us right now. I'm just curious what you are using for criteria.

Triple crown winners are just so few over the years. Call me crazy but I put Wise Dan up there as one if the best of all time. There have been a ton and I mean a ton of great horses that haven't won't even a leg of the trip crown.

Wise Dan is the best horse in the last 20 years

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Wise Dan is the best horse in the last 20 years

Absolute Rock Star- Wise Dan is. Guy was just a little bit of a late bloomer. Such a great horse and like I said really came on towards the end of his 3 year old season into his 4th. If you have a horse that is a late foal they most likely just need more time. Game on Dude as well. I have a feeling Palace Malice heading that direction too. Many 3 year olds just take more time and that is my biggest issue with Coburn's comments, the best 3 year old in March isn't the best first week in June and therefore have no issue with horses like Tonalist running. To be the best ( triple crown winner) you have to beat all comers, plain and simple in my book

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I think the term "great" is thrown around too easily. As Guinness wrote above, there is nothing wrong with being called "good," which is what I'd call California Chrome right now. What CC accomplishes from here on out, against his peers and against older horses in the fall, will determine his legacy, IMO.

Winning the Belmont and Met puts Palace Malice in rarefied air, and if he continues on to have a big 4YO campaign against what appears to be a very strong group of older horses, he has a chance to be considered great, IMO. I wouldn't bet against him doing it.

Wise Dan is great and is one of the best all time, and he's certainly one of the best and most durable middle distance grass horses ever.

Well said, I can live with that. I just think winning Derby/ Preakness is pretty special more than just good but we are on the same page, I just know that owner's put tremendous pressure on trainers to get any promising colt ready for the spring of their 3 year old year.. some just aren't ready for the point races that get you in the derby and it takes the right trainer to tell an owner, SLOW THE F DOWN.

Bayern was really the highlight of the day personally, fantastic race. Pointing towards the Haskell, where we can see if he can get the distance or if he is a 7 f to one turn mile horse. Makes a HUGE difference for stallion purposes. Winning at classic distances is HUGE

 

[br801]

Well said, I can live with that. I just think winning Derby/ Preakness is pretty special more than just good but we are on the same page, I just know that owner's put tremendous pressure on trainers to get any promising colt ready for the spring of their 3 year old year.. some just aren't ready for the point races that get you in the derby and it takes the right trainer to tell an owner, SLOW THE F DOWN.

Bayern was really the highlight of the day personally, fantastic race. Pointing towards the Haskell, where we can see if he can get the distance or if he is a 7 f to one turn mile horse. Makes a HUGE difference for stallion purposes. Winning at classic distances is HUGE

I think the current point system for Derby eligibility is flawed and encourages a lot of people to rush horses into races they are not ready for. But the old system of using stakes earnings wasn't so great either because of the inflated purses at the "slots" tracks. If saner heads prevailed, only horses truly ready for the Derby would show up and you'd get a manageable size field of 12 to 15 horses, but too many clowns with a promising 3YO want to go for the glory. Unfortunately, many horses unwisely pushed into the Derby never fulfill their potential after that race.

As for Bayern, his was probably the best performance on Belmont day. I hope he runs well in Haskell so I can bet against him in the Travers.

 

[br801]

I think golf, tennis, auto racing and horse racing should all have a "major" event once a month from April to October. It would keep those sports on the front of the sports page and combined standings could be sued to determine a champion for the year. There would also be adequate rest and preparation for the participants.

Horse racing does have major events every month across numerous divisions, but the races that capture the attention of the general public are generally limited to the Triple Crown races (exclusively for 3YOs) and a few of the Breeders Cup races in late October/early November.

 

[SWC75]

Horse racing does have major events every month across numerous divisions, but the races that capture the attention of the general public are generally limited to the Triple Crown races (exclusively for 3YOs) and a few of the Breeders Cup races in late October/early November.

Something is a major event if the general public recognizes it as such and makes it part of the annual sports calendar. If there are events that should be considered major events, the sport needs to promote them better.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Triple Crown, Breeders Cup and Travers Stakes is all the public will have any interest in. Breeder's Cup is the best two days of racing without a doubt.

The sport has some things to clean up and I agree attracting more people on a daily basis is one of them on, outside of Saratoga that is

 

[br801]

Something is a major event if the general public recognizes it as such and makes it part of the annual sports calendar. If there are events that should be considered major events, the sport needs to promote them better.

I'm talking about major events within the world of horse racing, of which there are plenty throughout the calendar year. In a perfect world, tracks would work together to schedule and promote their major events in an optimum manner.

Unfortunately, the racing industry in the United States is highly provincial, with individual jurisdictions (i.e. tracks or racing circuits) looking out mainly for their own interests. Further, the sport is regulated at the state level, with rules and regulations often differing greatly across racing states. Good luck getting consensus on anything, and don't hold your breath waiting to see jurisdictions working together. Hell, in some states like Florida, tracks openly work to undermine each other, to the benefit of no one.

Triple Crown, Breeders Cup and Travers Stakes is all the public will have any interest in. Breeder's Cup is the best two days of racing without a doubt.

The sport has some things to clean up and I agree attracting more people on a daily basis is one of them on, outside of Saratoga that is

For the most part, I think only New Yorkers like us care about the Travers. For most racing fans in California and Kentucky, it's just another stakes race, and I don't think it connects with the general public at all unless there's a Triple Crown winner in the field.

 

[SWC75]

I'm talking about major events within the world of horse racing, of which there are plenty throughout the calendar year. In a perfect world, tracks would work together to schedule and promote their major events in an optimum manner.

Unfortunately, the racing industry in the United States is highly provincial, with individual jurisdictions (i.e. tracks or racing circuits) looking out mainly for their own interests. Further, the sport is regulated at the state level, with rules and regulations often differing greatly across racing states. Good luck getting consensus on anything, and don't hold your breath waiting to see jurisdictions working together. Hell, in some states like Florida, tracks openly work to undermine each other, to the benefit of no one.

For the most part, I think only New Yorkers like us care about the Travers. For most racing fans in California and Kentucky, it's just another stakes race, and I don't think it connects with the general public at all unless there's a Triple Crown winner in the field.

The key is to get together with the networks to try to make a series of races into a"season", the average sports fan can realte to.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I'm talking about major events within the world of horse racing, of which there are plenty throughout the calendar year. In a perfect world, tracks would work together to schedule and promote their major events in an optimum manner.

Unfortunately, the racing industry in the United States is highly provincial, with individual jurisdictions (i.e. tracks or racing circuits) looking out mainly for their own interests. Further, the sport is regulated at the state level, with rules and regulations often differing greatly across racing states. Good luck getting consensus on anything, and don't hold your breath waiting to see jurisdictions working together. Hell, in some states like Florida, tracks openly work to undermine each other, to the benefit of no one.

For the most part, I think only New Yorkers like us care about the Travers. For most racing fans in California and Kentucky, it's just another stakes race, and I don't think it connects with the general public at all unless there's a Triple Crown winner in the field.

You think the travers is that localized? I think racing fans look at the travers as the 4th biggest race for 3 year olds which is pretty big. I don't think non racing fans get into like they do the triple crown but to me still a big race.

For me nothing beats the two days of the breeders cup, love that time of year...

 

[br801]

You think the travers is that localized? I think racing fans look at the travers as the 4th biggest race for 3 year olds which is pretty big. I don't think non racing fans get into like they do the triple crown but to me still a big race.

For me nothing beats the two days of the breeders cup, love that time of year...

I do think there is usually limited interest in the Travers outside the Northeast, unless someone is a big fan of the sport. Don't get me wrong - it's my absolute favorite race of the year, and I put it on par with the Derby and Belmont as the most important 3YO races, but it just doesn't generate the same buzz nationally.

The Breeders Cup as a showcase for the sport's stars and from a betting standpoint is unbeatable. But they've run it far too many times in California, and absolutely killed it for me when they ran it on synthetic tracks. Thankfully the synthetic era is over. Now they need to return the BC regularly to Belmont Park.

 

[br801]

The key is to get together with the networks to try to make a series of races into a"season", the average sports fan can realte to.

I'm not sure the sport's many divisions lend themselves to a series of races the casual racing follower can relate to.

By mid-September, for instance, there are no more major races restricted to 3YOs; the horses that made a name for themselves in the Triple Crown races have to race against their elders at that point if they are still in training.

Plus, the sport's stars don't always neatly emerge from the same division. One year the best and most competitive racing might be among the 3YO colts or 3YO fillies, other years it might be the 2YO colts or older grass horses or older handicap horses. It's horse racing, so it's inherently hard to predict.