Starters in Belmont Stakes

stancaris · Allowance Winner Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 434

The following is an interesting trend regarding horses that start in the Belmont Stakes who also started in the Derby and Preakness:

From 2003-2012 (the last ten years) there were only 15 Belmont stake starters who also ran in the Derby and Preakness.

Whereas from 1993-2002 (the previous ten years) there were a total of 28 starters in the Belmont stakes that also raced in the Derby and Preakness.

There seems to be a trend to avoid running in all three events. This year only one entry in the Belmont stakes ran in both the Derby and Preakness and that was Optimizer. Belmont winners over the last 10 years for the most part did not race in all three legs of the crown. In fact, only one Belmont winner since 1993 raced in both the Derby and Preakness and that was Afleet Alex. From a handicappers standpoint one shouid go with horses that skipped the Preakness. 9 of the last 10 Belmont winners did not run in the Preakness.

In my opinion its just asking too much of the modern horse (with speed breeding ) to run in all three legs of the crown. It was a different type of thoroughbred in the 70s when Seattle Slew, Secretariat, and Affirmed and Spectacular Bid raced. These horses had stamina breeding and all of the above had the Phalaris/Nonphalaris pattern. They just don't build them like they used to. Nowadays owners want a yearling that can breeze one furlong in 10 seconds flat. In general they are not looking for stamina in the horses they buy.

Big Brown couldn't finish the Belmont stakes after winning the first two legs of the crown. I'll Have Another could not even start in the Belmont after winning the first two legs of the crown. The first two legs no doubt were responsible for flaring up that injury since they were hard fought wins. Some day we may get another Triple Crown winner but my guess is that it will be a horse that carries the Phalaris/Nonphalaris pedigree pattern. The horses that came closest to pulling off the TC were Silver Charm, Real Quiet and Smarty Jones and all three of these were Phalaris/Nonphlaris types.

Laurierace · Grade II Winner Joined: 07 Dec 2004 Posts: 1276

Unless you are eligible to win the triple crown ie won the derby and the preakness there is no reason not to pick and choose races that suit your horse the best. This is a business to make money not a fan club.
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/pages/McDowell-Racing-Stables/189840138971

stancaris · Allowance Winner Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 434

My point was that it is a trend to skip the Preakness and that trend over the last 10 years has gotten 9 Belmont winners. The 10 years previous to the last 10 shows us that almost double the amount of Belmont runners raced in both the Derby and Preakness.

Could it be that our modern horses are no longer as durable as their ancestors of 20 or 30 years ago?

Laurierace · Grade II Winner Joined: 07 Dec 2004 Posts: 1276

OR could it be that it is a rare horse that is equally as successful at a mile and 3/16ths as a mile and a half? Why get your hat handed to you in the Preakness if you have a legit shot in the Belmont?
_________________
http://www.facebook.com/pages/McDowell-Racing-Stables/189840138971

stancaris · Allowance Winner Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 434

Or could it be that today's runners are not capable of running well in three major routes over three different tracks within a period of 5 weeks?

zinn21 · 3rd Year Sire Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 3306

I think if we looked at the attrition rate of Triple Crown Trail horses in general it would be very significant.

DDT · Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:13 am Post subject:

stan

Touch Gold, Victory Gallop, Empire Maker and Birdstone are all P/P mating schemes, and are all spoilers in Triple Crown attempts. With only 11 Triple Crown winners since the first in 1919 it has never been easy to win it, even with smaller fields in the past. A P/NP mating scheme has its advantages, but it is not the end all be all that some try to make it out to be. The Belmont is not dubbed the Test of Champions for nothing, you of all people should know that.

DDT

stancaris · Allowance Winner Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 434

I agree with you that it is not the only road to breeding a successful racehorse. Since around 90% of all horses running today are P/P it is even more difficult today to find a great champion with P/NP breeding.

However, I do not think it is far fetched to believe that if we ever get another Triple Crown winner it will probably be a P/NP type since the horses that came closest to ever winning the crown were of that pattern: Real Quiet, Silver Charm and Smarty Jones. And the last three to capture the crown: Sec, Slew and Affirmed were also P/NP.

diomed · Grade III Winner Joined: 04 Oct 2004 Posts: 1107

P/NonP genetically makes no sense. Phalaris is 10 generations back in modern pedigrees.
It just amazes me how far behind TB breeding is compared to other species of livestock.
I hope this myth will get dispelled after more research is done on the TB genome.
(shaking my head).

DDT · Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:50 am Post subject:

diomed

I agree 100% with you, I only offered the P/P victories because they go against the theory of P/NP being necessary for a Belmont or Triple Crown winner. In my opinion, anything after the 3rd generation contributes very little genetic material to the mix. For all we know, it could be mtDNA that is the main influence we are looking for because it is passed along the female line as a unit with very little change or mutation.

DDT

TJ · Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:59 pm Post subject:

When considering a TC crown winner and what it takes for one to make the grade....besides just the breeding, it is a perfect storm of many factors coming together perfectly during that 5 week period to see such a special horse. Aside from inherent capability...which many said didn't belong to Secretariat, it is the trainer's ability to know his horse and understand how best to get him through the Triple Crown unscathed. Then the jockey has to make all the right moves during the running to get him home on time....case in point Affirmed and Alydar...they were fairly equal, yet the human equation must have been the difference in Affirmed winning all those nearly equally matched contests. Finally just out and out luck...without it we're all in trouble. TJ

DDT · Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:42 pm Post subject:

TJ

I agree with you, luck plays a big part in winning a Triple Crown, especially the first leg, with a full field of 20 anything can and usually does happen in the race and consequently the fastest or the best horse does not always get the win. If it is true that 25% of the horse is genetic and the remaining 75% is environment, and I believe it is true, then how a horse is raised, trained and ridden trumps the breeding. Not many people would deny that Native Dancer, Risen Star, Little Current, Point Given, Afleet Alex and many more were the fastest and best horses in their respective Derbies, but all of them were probably victims of bad racing luck.

DDT

stancaris · Allowance Winner Joined: 16 Sep 2004 Posts: 434

Diomed: You said that P/NP makes no sense, but I think carrying at least one Nonphalaris side is an advantage and I have some data to support this idea. In the last 25 Horses of the Year in the United States there were 11 who carried at least one Nonphalaris side. The percentage of HOY carrying a nonphalaris side over the last 25 years is 44%. I am not sure of the percentage of horses from the general population that carry a Nonphalaris side but my guess is that it would be less than 44% in the above time frame. Similar data is obtained in the BC Classic since its beginning in 1984. I did a study of this angle and found that in the Classic from 1984-2004 there were 16 Classic winners that carried a Nonphalaris side. These types made up 50% of the starters and comprised 76% of the winners in that time frame. The impact value is 1.52 (76% winners divided by 50% starters. This means that horses with a Nonphalaris side are winning the Classic 52% more often than statistical expectation. On the other hand, horses who do not carry a Nonphalaris side in the above time frame comprised 50% of the starters and ONLY 24% of the winners. These horses who were P/P types won the classic 52% less often than expected and their impact value is .48 (24% winners divided by 50% of the starters). There is a big spread between the Nonphalaris group with an impact value of 1.52 and the P/P group with an impact value of .48.

Having a Nonphalaris side is an advantage in the BC Classic based on the data above and it probably is an advantage in getting HOY winners as well.

TJ · Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:00 pm Post subject:

diomed · Grade III Winner Joined: 04 Oct 2004 Posts: 1107

Stancaris, I was referring the the P/NP cross, which I assume is Sireline/Dam Sire line. I said it made no GENETIC SENSE. This alone.
Now, if one wants to talk about the entire pedigree(including the females) then it does make more sense. Also, I am just amazed at how behind the genetic studies for the TB and all horses are.
The genetics for other livestock breeds is way, way, ahead. Hopefully the horse will catch up some day.