Curlin's Legacy

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

ok by the time he had the arlington cigar challenge he could have been beat by any number of horses......i was there he was not at all impressive

But then he came back and ran Skip Away to a neck in the JCGC while giving him five pounds and running faster than he had the year before. And we know what kind of horse Skip Away was. Skip Away, Louis Quatorze, and Alphabet Soup were light years better than what he was facing in 1995. If he would have had a chance to face his 1995 competition again in the fall of 1996, he would have had repeat wins in those races. Who knows how 1995 would have played out had Holy Bull not been injured?

[KirisClown]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

If he would have had a chance to face his 1995 competition again in the fall of 1996, he would have had repeat wins in those races.

That's what I was getting at by mentioning the 96 Woodward... sandwiched between his losses he looks like the Cigar of old beating up on his friends L'Carriere and Golden Larch...

This is not the race of a horse tailing off.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raK2IZE4Bik

[Danzig]

by the same token, his win over hard spun in the bcc was about the same as street sense in the derby. they all traded wins over each other. hard to say really who would have been best this year, since only one of the top five from last year is around. i think it may well have been more of the same.
certainly would have been more interesting than what we've had.

[Linny]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

We're going to have to agree to disagree about this. I saw nothing in any of Street Sense's efforts after the Preakness that make me think he would have been trading decisions with Curlin. Looking back, I think that Preakness effort was the beginning of the end for him. He ran okay in the Jim Dandy and Travers. He also ran okay in that race at Turfway. But in my opinion, he was a different animal. While Curlin was getting better, he was declining. I know Curlin's Haskell was so-so. But nothing after that was.

I agree. SS was not very sound at 3 and Carl did a great job with him. Let's face it, while his Travers looked impressive, the horse he barely beat has not covered himself in glory since. In fact, I don't think Grasshopper has won a race since that allowance at the Spa. Hard Spun was never in danger from Street Sense at Turfway and while mud was not he's best surface, he was very dull at Monmouth.
Overall I'd say SS was never has good as he looked at Churchill and never as bad as he looked at Monmouth.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

We're going to have to agree to disagree about this. I saw nothing in any of Street Sense's efforts after the Preakness that make me think he would have been trading decisions with Curlin. Looking back, I think that Preakness effort was the beginning of the end for him. He ran okay in the Jim Dandy and Travers. He also ran okay in that race at Turfway. But in my opinion, he was a different animal. While Curlin was getting better, he was declining. I know Curlin's Haskell was so-so. But nothing after that was.

You're right as far as his Saratoga performances leaving a bit to be desired, but at Turfway, he was likely "prepping" (as he did at Keeneland), typical of Carl Nafzger leading up to big races (see Unbridled and Banshee Breeze also).

Even still, the Saratoga races can be forgiven in that the Jim Dandy was a comeback race and, though you can certainly disagree, the Travers was too far. In the BC Classic, he made his move alongside Curlin but the distance and likely the "tired horse" factor came into play (not to mention the surface).

Anyways, what was being assumed with Street Sense at 4 was that he would obviously get a break after the BC and would be 100% at the start of his campaign. I'd imagine he'd uncork efforts similar to the ones Victory Gallop displayed in 1999 (all 2 or 3 of them).

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Linny

he was very dull at Monmouth.
Overall I'd say SS was never has good as he looked at Churchill and never as bad as he looked at Monmouth.

Yeah. He wasn't himself at Monmouth.

Probably cuz he never ran there...

[3kings]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Yeah. He wasn't himself at Monmouth.

Probably cuz he never ran there...

Didn't he run in the classic there last year?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Wasn't the BC Classic there last year?

Brutal. I had it in my head that Linny was talking about Hard Spun in the Haskell. Talk about eating sh!t...

Calgon...take my post away!

[Smooth Operator]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

1. Who said Curlin was an all time great?

2. Didn't Curlin at least prove he was better than Street Sense and Hard Spun last year?

3. How could Hard Spun be thought of as better?

4. If Curlin was by Giant's Causeway, would he be thought of higher?

5. How can someone even begin to form an opinion on someone's place in history, when they don't have any clue about racing before 2003? And have no desire to either?

6. Is Mambo In Seattle an all time great?

1. Quiet Chris ... lol

2. Can't say for sure since Curlie was pharmacologically-altered by virtue of his abusive 'roid regimen last season. Haven't found any evidence that either SS or HS received injections of an anabolic steroid on a regular basis.

By the way, could Curlie's acceleration issues this season have anything to do with his being off the 'program'?

3. HS threw some nice performances at various distances and held up well all season long ... likely without the help of anabolic steroids. Not saying he was superior to Curlie ... just that it's difficult to compare a chemically-altered athlete to one that probably wasn't enhanced by steroids.

4. No opinion

5. Good question

If someone is pressed for time, though, I would suggest just watching all of Ghostzapper's races beginning with the '03 King's Bishop. He/she will learn a lot about the following thoroughbred traits: speed, class, brilliance, determination, versatility, stamina.

Would've made Curlie look like a Chuck Town claimer.

6. Don't know much about this Mambo beast, but if he runs in the BCC and finishes ahead of Curlie (and Big Brownroid for that matter) he'll be okay in my book.

Yeah, seeing those two 'roid freaks go down at the BC ... wouldn't that be a great way to usher out the despicable steroid abuse era in thoroughbred racing...

[Bobby Fischer]

Greeley's Legacy

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

3. HS threw some nice performances at various distances and held up well all season long ... likely without the help of anabolic steroids.

trust that hard spun recieved some steroids.

steroids aren't even considered cheating to most of these trainers. Most of the big money operations give regular steroids after races and some after works as well.
It is true that some trainers give steroids more often, but it seems to hurt longevity of the horse. I would guess that most of the more frequent doses are with fillies and claimers.

Hard Spun was a great animal. He got some bad rides in some of his biggest races (preakness, belmont, breeders cup).
Pino and Gomez had one of the triple crown colts with the most stamina at a classic distance looking like a miler to many observers.

He was never developed as a turf division older horse. If you think about the way Sunriver was used, you could have thrown Dominguez on Hard Spun's back in 2008 and you might have been headed for the BC Turf as the favorite.

However, Larry Jones did his job and HS got his stud deal. It's hard to really complain when they accomplished their business objective. They danced a lot of dances, it was a respectable 3yo season.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Wow. He could have been on his way as the favorite in the BC Turf?

Another "Worst BC Favorites" thread stowaway?

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Wow. Hard Spun had the most stamina at a classic distance? That's going to be a pretty hard point to convince anyone of. Even Larry Jones. He could have been on his way as the favorite in the BC Turf?

what can i say, i'm ahead of my time lolz

say i'm wrong about Hard Spun being one of the best triple crown colts in terms of stamina...
What races did he run where he displayed a lack of stamina, that weren't accompanied by poor rides ?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

what can i say, i'm ahead of my time lolz

say i'm wrong about Hard Spun being one of the best triple crown colts in terms of stamina...
What races did he run where he displayed a lack of stamina, that weren't accompanied by poor rides ?

Did the poor rides account for the total number of lengths he was beaten in the Preakness, Belmont, Haskell, and BC Classic?

If anything, the reverse is true. If Hard Spun ever saw out a classic distance, it would have been because of a very clever ride.

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Did the poor rides account for the total number of lengths he was beaten in the Preakness, Belmont, Haskell, and BC Classic?

If anything, the reverse is true. If Hard Spun ever saw out a classic distance, it would have been because of a very clever ride.

I think Curlin was flat out better, and would have won his races if HS had hall of fame rides.

The BC ride is a fine line and I think clever is really the difference there, being a little more patient with a long rein, and making Curlin win by a shorter margin...

The Preakness and Belmont were simply terrible rides to the extent you can't really separate the ride from the performance.

In The Haskell, Hard Spun beat Curlin(in race Curlin did not appear primed for), and they were defeated by a move-up animal.

[RolloTomasi]

This thread prompted me to watch a replay of last year's Preakness.

All I have to say is, "Thanks a lot."

That had to be the worst melodramatic call I've ever heard, next to the '87 BC Classic by Tom Durkin. The announcer calls races with too many exclaimation points. Who the hell is that guy?

[Smooth Operator]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I don't expect an answer. You never answered the first time I asked. But, since you've mentioned it again, where is your evidence that Curlin was on a "abusive 'roid regimen" last year? You mention you haven't found any evidence SS or HS were, which would mean you do have evidence Curlin was. Is there a link to your findings or something I could see?

As you know, DaHoss, there are published reports which state the fact that Curlie was treated with "Winny" last year. Now, given his trainer's long rap sheet of medication violations, do you actually believe that he just got an isolated injection or two of that anabolic steroid during the campaign ... or a number of injections on a more systematic basis (ala Big Brownroid on the "15th of every month") for the purpose of enhancing race performance, among other things?

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Wow. Hard Spun had the most stamina at a classic distance? That's going to be a pretty hard point to convince anyone of. Even Larry Jones. He could have been on his way as the favorite in the BC Turf?

If you look at his dosage profile, he had a decent ped for distance.

http://www.pedigreequery.com/hard+spun

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I can't tell if you are serious or not.

Getting a bit slow in our old age, eh Hossy?

[Danzig]

his pedigree may have said 12f, but his running style did not imo. he did very well considering that he probably would have been better up to 1 1/8, but they kept going longer with him.