Street Sense- should he or shouldn't he?

[Cannon Shell]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ory?id=2884765

[Danzig]

i read that this morning, when i was at 'work'. i think he should run, but i've said that all along....it'll be june, and only his fifth race--why not run? only one derby winner, was he supposed to have a walkover in the preakness? i mean, what was the point behind anyone else running, they couldn't win the tc--going by nafzgers logic that is.

[disappearingdan_akaplaya]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i read that this morning, when i was at 'work'. i think he should run, but i've said that all along....it'll be june, and only his fifth race--why not run? only one derby winner, was he supposed to have a walkover in the preakness? i mean, what was the point behind anyone else running, they couldn't win the tc--going by nafzgers logic that is.

well if i were lucky nuff 2 have him i wouldnt run him. it doesnt matter how many races 2 date hes had this year, to run all 3 in the TC is extremely taxing and he was basically all out last time as was beaten by the better horse. i see no reason to burn him out when theres plenty of other potential pay days down the road. of course i could be wrong and eatin some crow but if they decide to run him right now in elmont against curlin i think hell get dusted

[SuffolkGirl]

I think it is up to the trainer. He knows this horse and has the horse's best interest in mind. He is not trying to burnish his own image for anyone.

While I agree that the sport could use a great rivalry and I would love to see one, I think one should think of the horse first, not the sport.

I believe it was Steve Byk who brought this up on ATRAB, but SS is approaching the "too valuable to run" point. Who knows what the conditions of his insurance policy are.....

[Rupert Pupkin]

I disagree with everything that Finley said. I even strongly disagree with his assumption that it would be better for the sport if Street Sense runs. If they skip this race, SS will probably be around for the rest of the year. We will probably get to see him in the Travers, maybe the JCGC, and the BC Classic. If they run SS in the Belmont, we may never see him again. I think they are much better off skipping the Belmont and having a healthy horse for the rest of the year.
I think that Darley did the smart thing by skipping the Belmont with Bernardini. I think it was the best thing for the both the sport and the horse. I would say the same for SS.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I disagree with everything that Finley said. I even strongly disagree with his assumption that it would be better for the sport if Street Sense runs. If they skip this race, SS will probably be around for the rest of the year. We will probably get to see him in the Travers, maybe the JCGC, and the BC Classic. If they run SS in the Belmont, we may never see him again. I think they are much better off skipping the Belmont and having a healthy horse for the rest of the year.
I think that Darley did the smart thing by skipping the Belmont with Bernardini. I think it was the best thing for the both the sport and the horse. I would say the same for SS.

That's not a great example. I don't see Bernardini's situation as comparable with SS. They're just not the same type of horse nor do they have the same seasoning. Bernardini was fairly new to this level of competition and 2 TC races would've been a bit much potentially. SS has been handling the tough contests for awhile. The Belmont isn't s'much a 'stallion maker' as it was back in the day and Bernardini'd already won a Classic to go with his pedigree. The work was done. I don't subscribe to the idea that a well-seasoned, healthy/happy horse would face harm going for it in the name of sportsmanship. Now if he's not as bright and shiny as he has been and isn't training as Nafzger would like, totally fine to say they'll go for the big prizes later. If Curlin wins it, their backs will be up against it for the Eclipse is all I'm saying. Of course Nafzger knows how to do a Derby/Classic double.

[hockey2315]

The funny thing is, that if SS wins the photo in the Preakness he's going- it's a no-brainer. . . I know the obvious argument is "well, if the horse has a shot at the triple crown then he HAS to run in the Belmont" - but if it's so taxing, then to run SS in the Belmont wouldn't be putting his best interests first if Nafzger thought it might compromise his health. . . They should just run the damn horse now if he's training well. . . He's probably just as likely to get hurt while training or walking around as he as running in a race so why not run him now if he's healthy. . .

[Danzig]

there is no guarantee of anything. street sense could lay out, and still be out later this year. he could run, win, and be out later...or he could run, lose, be out...or he could run, and run later, win some and lose some.

who knows??? that's why it's under the umbrella known as gambling! if the horse can run, run him. if he can't or shouldn't, don't. but don't keep him in the barn now, if he's ready, as tho that is some guarantee that he'll remain ready down the road! just ask nick zito!


and i agree with the poster who said had he won by a head, rather than lost, we wouldn't even be having this discussion! shame that a few inches means the difference between 'what's best' and running....

[Danzig]

one other question--just how many restricted million dollar races are there for 3 yo's??
and didn't unbridled run in the belmont, en route to the bcc win?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

there is no guarantee of anything. street sense could lay out, and still be out later this year. he could run, win, and be out later...or he could run, lose, be out...or he could run, and run later, win some and lose some.

who knows??? that's why it's under the umbrella known as gambling! if the horse can run, run him. if he can't or shouldn't, don't. but don't keep him in the barn now, if he's ready, as tho that is some guarantee that he'll remain ready down the road! just ask nick zito!


and i agree with the poster who said had he won by a head, rather than lost, we wouldn't even be having this discussion! shame that a few inches means the difference between 'what's best' and running....

There is a much better chance of the horse lasting if they skip the Belmont. That's what it comes down to. There are never any guarantees. If I eat really healthy, there is no guarantee that I won't get cancer. Does that mean that I shouldn't eat healthy? All you can do is do the smart thing and put the odds on your side. But even then, there are still no gurantees.

I don't think the fact that SS lost the Preakness is the reason they're not running. If anything, I think the fact that they lost would make them more likely to run because they would want to come back and reverse the tables on Curlin.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

That's not a great example. I don't see Bernardini's situation as comparable with SS. They're just not the same type of horse nor do they have the same seasoning. Bernardini was fairly new to this level of competition and 2 TC races would've been a bit much potentially. SS has been handling the tough contests for awhile. The Belmont isn't s'much a 'stallion maker' as it was back in the day and Bernardini'd already won a Classic to go with his pedigree. The work was done. I don't subscribe to the idea that a well-seasoned, healthy/happy horse would face harm going for it in the name of sportsmanship. Now if he's not as bright and shiny as he has been and isn't training as Nafzger would like, totally fine to say they'll go for the big prizes later. If Curlin wins it, their backs will be up against it for the Eclipse is all I'm saying. Of course Nafzger knows how to do a Derby/Classic double.

Of course it's a different situation. Bernardini had only had a few races at the time. Running him in the belmontt looked like it might be too much, too soon. SS, on the other hand, would be running in his 4th race in 8 weeks. So for him, running in the Belmont looks like it could be one race too many in a short period.

What's next?

Asmussen/Lake 2008?

[King Glorious]

This last paragraph is what was the most ridiculous of the whole article:

They say the horse must come first. Fine. But what do they have to lose by running Street Sense in the Belmont? Nothing. Let him run in the Belmont and then give him his two months off before he returns in the Haskell. This one time, they can put the sport first and the horse a very close second. For Street Sense and the game, do the right thing.

Put the sport first? Over the horse's best interests? Shouldn't the horse ALWAYS come first?

[Danzig]

yeah, king, i don't agree with the last bit...but then, i don't think running him would be bad for street sense--unless of course he's regressed since his most recent starts. but nafzger said 'what's the point?', not the horse needs a break.

you should always do right by the horse--as for cannons list, i don't think they did empire maker any favors running him in the derby, i doubt it helped his foot much. and then the belmont a few weeks later-i don't think that was what was best for him.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Put the sport first? Over the horse's best interests? Shouldn't the horse ALWAYS come first?

Absolutely. But, if the horse is doing just dandy...

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I'm not so sure that I agree that the Belmont Stakes is becoming a race that sets horses back either.

4 of the 7 2nd place finishers in the Belmont Stakes this decade---went on to later capture a Grade 1 race.

In an 11 year span from '89-to-'99---9 of the 11 Belmont Stakes winners would return to later capture a Grade 1 race. The only two who didn't would be Tabasco Cat (2nd in the Breeders Cup Classic) and Go And Go.

If the horse is doing real well---he probably ought to run in the Belmont, as the 2nd choice in the betting (possibly even a razor thin favorite) against a small field---if not, I expect he will take the Haskell-to-Travers-to-Classic route.....with a possible stop in a stake at the Meadowlands or the Jockey Club Gold Cup in between the Travers and Classic.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Absolutely. But, if the horse is doing just dandy...

But even if the horse is doing just fine, I think that Nafzger has earned the right to know better for the horse than any of us. A lot of people criticized his plan to use only two preps. But he knew his horse. If he thinks the horse would be better served with a break now to point for the fall races, again, I think Nafzger has earned that right. There are plenty of other guys that have come along recently and been flashes in the pan and haven't earned that right to be unquestioned. I believe Nafzger has though.

The thing is that the Belmont is a mighty demanding race. In addition to the recent winners that Cannon listed, we could go even deeper. Look at horses that have run in all three TC races over the past 10 years. The list of horses that have won at least one TC race while running in all three over the past 10 years is:

Silver Charm
Real Quiet
Victory Gallop
Charismatic
Monarchos
Point Given
War Emblem
Funny Cide
Smarty Jones
Giacomo
Afleet Alex

That's 11 horses. Eight of the 11 didn't finish the year. This is a fact. Seven of those eight didn't run past the Belmont. This is a fact. As a group, the 11 horses went on to win a total of three races as 3yo's post TC. I've acknowledged in past posts that I understand that some of it was due to factors besides injury. And I do recognize that five of those horses did come back in later years and win some really good races. But recent history is not on the side of seeing either Curlin or Street Sense or Hard Spun do anything more this year should they run back in the Belmont. Only three of those on the list made it to the BC (Victory Gallop, War Emblem and Funny Cide).

[The Indomitable DrugS]

KG,

I remember you taking a stand saying they shouldn't run Curlin in the Preakness and should have instead pointed for a Haskell/Travers campaign.

I think you are really underestimating how hard it is to pass on running in a triple crown series race---when you have a colt who actually has a shot of winning---and said horse is sound and training ok.

[Danzig]

[quote=King Glorious]

Silver Charm
Real Quiet
Victory Gallop
Charismatic
Monarchos
Point Given
War Emblem
Funny Cide
Smarty Jones
Giacomo
Afleet Alex

QUOTE]

i don't think the top three fit, they all went on to do more after the tc.
charismatic broke down, monarchos is one you could say failed to withstand the rigors. point given was a victim of $$ more than anything, had he not suffered an injury (which baffert blamed on the saratoga surface, not the tc) which would keep him from the bc--well, obviously he'd have been there--and obviously he was never going to run at four. war emblem imo didn't have the demand here from breeders, and only an offer from japan kept him from a four year old campaign. funny cide wasn't much pre-derby, i'm not surprised he hasn't done much since. smarty and alex are like point givens to me--the threat of a possible loss if they were brought back is what led to them not running again post-belmont. and giacomo--well, see funny cide above.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

But even if the horse is doing just fine, I think that Nafzger has earned the right to know better for the horse than any of us. A lot of people criticized his plan to use only two preps. But he knew his horse. If he thinks the horse would be better served with a break now to point for the fall races, again, I think Nafzger has earned that right. There are plenty of other guys that have come along recently and been flashes in the pan and haven't earned that right to be unquestioned. I believe Nafzger has though.

The thing is that the Belmont is a mighty demanding race. In addition to the recent winners that Cannon listed, we could go even deeper. Look at horses that have run in all three TC races over the past 10 years. The list of horses that have won at least one TC race while running in all three over the past 10 years is:

Silver Charm
Real Quiet
Victory Gallop
Charismatic
Monarchos
Point Given
War Emblem
Funny Cide
Smarty Jones
Giacomo
Afleet Alex

That's 11 horses. Eight of the 11 didn't finish the year. This is a fact. Seven of those eight didn't run past the Belmont. This is a fact. As a group, the 11 horses went on to win a total of three races as 3yo's post TC. I've acknowledged in past posts that I understand that some of it was due to factors besides injury. And I do recognize that five of those horses did come back in later years and win some really good races. But recent history is not on the side of seeing either Curlin or Street Sense or Hard Spun do anything more this year should they run back in the Belmont. Only three of those on the list made it to the BC (Victory Gallop, War Emblem and Funny Cide).

This is the same argument that you made when you were arguing that Curlin should skip the Preakness. How did that one turn out?
Let's say Street Sense skipped the Belmont....took another week off....and ran in the Stephen Foster. Would that magically help his chances of winning the Jim Dandy months from now?
Look at the horses that HAVE skipped one of the TC races (Empire Maker, Jazil etc.). Have they done a lot better?