Curlin's Legacy

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

No, just not a big dosage person. I prefer to look at how a horse peforms on the track and then form an opinion in cases like this. You watched Hard Spun run. Did you think he was a mile and a half on the turf kind of horse? As most would agree he probably would have been a very good turf miler. I just never saw him as a 12 furlong horse and nothing he did on the track would prove otherwise.

people keep saying turf miler, why ? ? because everyone thinks it, he was a world class horse on the dirt, and never went on turf, he won the Kings Bishop and was super competitive in the biggest races of the year.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hrfan

people keep saying turf miler, why ? ? because everyone thinks it, he was a world class horse on the dirt, and never went on turf, he won the Kings Bishop and was super competitive in the biggest races of the year.

no doubt due to his breeding.

[Smooth Operator]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Where are these reports? I honestly don't remember the steroid talk last year, so is there a link or something to these reports? The fact they are legal is beside the point. If he was indeed on steroids, he was one of thousands of horses that are.

I understand the trainer has a long rap sheet. But I also know Curlin ran a hole in the wind when breaking his maiden for Helen Pitts. So are we to assume he was "juiced up" then also? It just seems like a lot of guessing and assuming on your part, without any kind of evidence. It's just funny to me that if Curlin was trained by someone like Bill Mott, he'd be looked at in a different light. It's too bad.

A simple Google search will turn up many articles about Curlie's 'roid use last year, DaHoss.

Sure, 'roids were legal just about everywhere, but somehow I doubt the intention was to make them available so that they could be administered to perfectly healthy, robust horses on a regular, systematic basis. There's obviously no question at this point that they have been abused by many trainers for many years for the sole purpose of performance enhancement on the racetrack.

Like I said before, we know that Curlie received an anabolic steroid last season (likely on a regular basis, in my opinion, because of the way he held up during a very long campaign, his very muscular physique - particularly at the BC, and his trainer's rep regarding drugs), but I have yet to see any kind of evidence that either of his two main rivals were treated with 'roids. In fact, I'd be quite surprised if Nafzger used them on SS, especially on any kind of regular basis. So, in my opinion, you simply can't say with certainty that Curlie was the best of his generation because his performances were pharmacologically-enhanced last year and SS's and HS's may not have been.

As far as Curlie running "a hole in the wind" in some maiden contest, please, there have been countless good runners which have scored big in their maiden race.

Also, you never answered the question I posed in the other post ... do you think Curlie's acceleration issues this season have anything to do with his being off the 'program'? Would he have beaten the G3-caliber Wanderin Boy by six or eight lengths instead of less than one length if he was back on a 'roid regimen?

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

do you think Curlie's acceleration issues this season have anything to do with his being off the 'program'?

are steroids tested for in NYRA tracks yet?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Fine we'll agree to disagree then and you can maintain your hard on for Curlin. I have no idea if his accelaration issues have anything to do with being off a steroid thousands of other horses use. I suppose it's possible. Although, he had no problem accelerating in Dubai and in the Stephan Foster. What was the case there? Did Asmussen sneak some in to Dubai? I brought up Curlin's debut race to show that the horse ran huge before Asmussen had him. Am I incorrect there? I don't care when the race was.

And, since we're going to speculate a lot, like if Hard Spun was or wasn't, or Street Sense for that matter. What's your opinion of a lot of the stars of the 80's and 90's trained by trainers known for using steroids? They were considered ahead of the game then. Are we going to ignore all of their accomplishments? It just seems like a case of a giant hard on for the trainer and a lot of speculation, because really, you or I have no idea about most horses being on steroids. We know about Curlin and Big brown because their connections admitted it. I heard Contessa admit it on Steve's show a year or so ago. So how many other barns are doing this? Probably a lot. It sucks and until the different states crack down, it's reality. But there are a lot of other guilty parties than just the one you are blaming.

now, how can we take your post seriously when you don't call the horse curlie?

[Smooth Operator]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

It sucks...

Yes it does, DaHoss ... especially for a guy like Nafzger who may've been playing by an unwritten rule and not regularly pumping an anabolic steroid into his animal solely to gain an edge on the racetrack ... only to get nosed in the Preakness (and lose a shot at immortality) by a guy who probably was treating his animal with one on a regular basis.


By the way, Frankel is no angel, but he is on record as saying that he has never used anabolic steroids on any of his horses ... which, of course, includes arguably the best racehorse since 1980, Ghostzapper.

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

By the way, Frankel is no angel, but he is on record as saying that he has never used anabolic steroids on any of his horses ... which, of course, includes arguably the best racehorse since 1980, Ghostzapper.

Hard to believe with the way he has his fillies. You could almost make a case that he specializes in big muscular fillies.

[Linny]

Originally Posted by hrfan

people keep saying turf miler, why ? ? because everyone thinks it, he was a world class horse on the dirt, and never went on turf, he won the Kings Bishop and was super competitive in the biggest races of the year.

In part because his sire Danzig was a great sire of turf milers.

I spoke for 20 minutes with Larry Jones while standing in the Saratoga stakes barn with Hard Spun. Larry felt he would have been a monster on grass and mentioned conformation points plus temperament/manageability reasons why he felt this was. Larry knew more about this colt than the colt did and I tend to believe his assessment of his horse.
Larry indicated that after his maiden, Larry hoped to talk Porter into agreeing to try grass. After the stud deal was announced, one of Jone's biggest disappointments was that he was never going to get to go on grass.

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

No, just not a big dosage person. I prefer to look at how a horse peforms on the track and then form an opinion in cases like this. You watched Hard Spun run. Did you think he was a mile and a half on the turf kind of horse? As most would agree he probably would have been a very good turf miler. I just never saw him as a 12 furlong horse and nothing he did on the track would prove otherwise.

He would've been a strong contender for the Melbourne Cup.



















































J/K.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

No, just not a big dosage person. I prefer to look at how a horse peforms on the track and then form an opinion in cases like this. You watched Hard Spun run. Did you think he was a mile and a half on the turf kind of horse? As most would agree he probably would have been a very good turf miler. I just never saw him as a 12 furlong horse and nothing he did on the track would prove otherwise.

The dosage bit was supposed to be a joke ...

To answer your question, NO, I didn't see him as a mile and a half on the turf sort of horse. He was certainly capable of the classic distance of 10 furlongs, but he was probably better suited at 9 furlongs.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Linny

Larry felt he would have been a monster on grass and mentioned conformation points plus temperament/manageability reasons why he felt this was. Larry knew more about this colt than the colt did and I tend to believe his assessment of his horse.
Larry indicated that after his maiden, Larry hoped to talk Porter into agreeing to try grass. After the stud deal was announced, one of Jone's biggest disappointments was that he was never going to get to go on grass.

Yeah

Another PERFECT TRIP needing MONSTER. When did this horse ever RUN when he didn't have it all his own way? So, yeah, put him on a real firm turf, with tight turns, get him on the hedge or in a race with no other speed AND he's a MONSTER.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Linny

In part because his sire Danzig was a great sire of turf milers.

Coincidentally, this was on display this afternoon.

The winner of the First Lady (Forever something) is by Belong To Me, who as a racehorse was a sprinter and I don't believe ever tried the turf. However, he is a son of Danzig, and sure enough this horse improved significantly with a switch in her last 5 starts to turf.

Also, the multiple grass stakes winning 3yo contesting the Canadian International tomorrow (forgot the name) is by Langfuhr, another non-turf starting son of Danzig.

Other sons of Danzig that never started on turf but got their share of grass runners were Honor Grades, regional sire Game Plan (CA), Polish Numbers, Polish Navy, and Pine Bluff.

Shug McGaughey practically made a career out of resurrecting highly-touted sons of Danzig by putting them on turf, namely Lure, Furiously, and Strolling Along. War Chant is another good example from Neil Drysdale's barn.

It wouldn't have been hard to imagine Hard Spun following in those footsteps (up to a mile anyways).

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Coincidentally, this was on display this afternoon.

The winner of the First Lady (Forever something) is by Belong To Me, who as a racehorse was a sprinter and I don't believe ever tried the turf. However, he is a son of Danzig, and sure enough this horse improved significantly with a switch in her last 5 starts to turf.

Also, the multiple grass stakes winning 3yo contesting the Canadian International tomorrow (forgot the name) is by Langfuhr, another non-turf starting son of Danzig.

Other sons of Danzig that never started on turf but got their share of grass runners were Honor Grades, regional sire Game Plan (CA), Polish Numbers, Polish Navy, and Pine Bluff.

Shug McGaughey practically made a career out of resurrecting highly-touted sons of Danzig by putting them on turf, namely Lure, Furiously, and Strolling Along. War Chant is another good example from Neil Drysdale's barn.

It wouldn't have been hard to imagine Hard Spun following in those footsteps (up to a mile anyways).

was it forever together? danzig got it all, he could sire just about anything. turfers, dirt, long, short. shame he was born too soon, he probably would have ruled the synthetic roost as well.
and got 200 stakes winners on about 40 mare books.

[Smooth Operator]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

The frankel stuff is funny though. Really funny.

Hall of Fame trainer Bobby Frankel sat on a bench outside his Saratoga barn this summer and sounded a refreshing note. Frankel said he had never used steroids on his racehorses. He said his primary owner, Juddmonte Farm’s Prince Khalid Abdullah, forbids steroids to be used on horses he owns. And Frankel added that he didn’t use steroids on his other runners, either.

“Most trainers use them, and they’ll admit it,” Frankel said. “Maybe I’d win more races if I did, but I’ve done all right without them. I don’t think steroids are good for horses, I don’t think they’re good for racing, and I’m a big believer in getting rid of them completely.”


http://www.ntra.com/blog.aspx?blogid...onth=12&day=19


Was Frankel lying to Moss, DaHoss?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Yeah

Another PERFECT TRIP needing MONSTER. When did this horse ever RUN when he didn't have it all his own way? So, yeah, put him on a real firm turf, with tight turns, get him on the hedge or in a race with no other speed AND he's a MONSTER.

Seriously, this is a ridiculous statement. When did he NOT run? How about never, besides the Belmont Stakes which we all know is an auto-toss for most horses?

The horse won a G1, 2 G2's, a G3, and ran 2nd in the country's two biggest races. What else do you want?

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by philcski

Seriously, this is a ridiculous statement. When did he NOT run? How about never, besides the Belmont Stakes which we all know is an auto-toss for most horses?

The horse won a G1, 2 G2's, a G3, and ran 2nd in the country's two biggest races. What else do you want?

Thank you, Phil ... I would honestly say the only time I didn't see the horse try 100% was in the Southwest.