140th Running of The Kentucky Derby (Grade I) UPDATE

[hpkingjr]

Poor Derby poor time poor winner - geld them all.

Perhaps a little early for the knife for all but this was not a historically impressive bunch. The Oaks winner would have smoked this field. She would have been 15 lengths ahead at the eight pole.

[Cree]

I just read the Beyer is 97. That seems pretty......bad. The race was ugly. I have to say that was one of the least impressive Derby's I've seen. The winner dominated what seems like a fairly mediocre group. Will be curious to see how they race the rest of the season. Danza ran well (reminds me of Lawyer Ron), I didn't even really notice Commanding Curve's race. Ride On Curlin had a round-the-world trip, and I thought he ran well to get up for 7th. Vicars In Trouble and Wildcat Red were in over their heads- no lead, no thank you. Poor Candy Boy had a terrible first turn, I am throwing this race out. Chitu was gutsy in defeat, that was a bit too far for him. Samraat is a tough cookie, I thought he ran well for 5th.

I think we really missed seeing some good horses in Shared Belief, Cairo Prince, Honor Code, Top Billing, and Constitution.

I won't be surprised if Chrome wins the Preakness, but it feels like a HUGE longshot will win the Belmont. 2014 goes down as a rather ho-hum year for me. California Chrome is a beautiful horse, and Espinoza did a good job of keeping him out of trouble.

[jagger]

Oh....thank God, I don't have to lead the way in recognizing the obvious, that despite all the wonderful media hype, this group of thoroughbreds certainly didn't distinguish themselves yesterday. And cudos to whoever, Pat I think, made mention that if the Oaks winner had run yesterday, she surely would have won. She would have won with a 15 second last furlong

This begs the question.......WHY? ALL forms of human athletic endeavor have improved significantly in the last 50 years and yet 2:03+ is all the most heralded thoroughbreds can muster? It's hard to know what the MAJOR reason for the dismal performance of Thoroughbreds can be attributed. Nutrition? Surely, no one thinks that the "wonderful" Kentucky bluegrass contains the same nutrients that it did just a half a century ago. Only a few feed companies have recognized this though and the cost of their products seems prohibitive for even the wealthy owners. Training? I think this is the biggest reason for lackluster performances, particularly past a mile. The interest in races much longer than 1 1/4 dwindled over a century ago. The likes of Ten Broeck and his peers, dueling it out over a 3-4 mile course are long since past and the training methods along with them. On just about any race card in America, on any given day, well over half of the races will be less than a mile and 10f and longer races are only seen for the very special occasions. I think it's unlikely that the trainers of today have the foggiest idea how to A, recognize early on that a horse is more genetically inclined for sprinting or routing and B, train a rout horse accordingly. Does anyone think that the training regimens are all that different for a 6f horse vs a 10f horse? I KNOW the training regimens for human sprinters is drastically different than marathoners. Have to end my rant.

Thoughts, anyone, on the desultory results from yesterday and for the past half century and longer?

[DDT]

Well, the broadcast is always bad, need not address that. How can you take the final time as the measure used to define the class of the winner, much less the other runners. The winner had an eventful moment early but then cruised along and moved to the lead when asked and won without much effort. What is wrong with that? There might have been 8 horses that belonged in the race, the rest were there for the show for their connections, pretty average for the size of the field. The time was slow and the pace was not very fast, the final time was a reflection of the dynamics of the race. I would not be so quick to degrade a deserving winning favorite. All of the people that watched it with me agreed that it ended on a good note.

DDT

[Cree]

I take nothing away from the winner, he was outstanding going into the race, and was phenomenal on the day. He won easily, no contest. He proved he could go the distance and could win with authority, but watching the rest of them swerving and staggering home...I thought it was ugly. When you have Pletcher disregarding two of his entrants, you have to wonder, no?

I simply found this year's Derby field missing something. I think California Chrome will win the Preakness, simply because he is better than all these and the distance is probably more ideal for him. I like seeing the "little guy" win as well.

[erhrdt3]

This begs the question.......WHY? ALL forms of human athletic endeavor have improved significantly in the last 50 years and yet 2:03+ is all the most heralded thoroughbreds can muster? It's hard to know what the MAJOR reason for the dismal performance of Thoroughbreds can be attributed. Nutrition? Surely, no one thinks that the "wonderful" Kentucky bluegrass contains the same nutrients that it did just a half a century ago. Only a few feed companies have recognized this though and the cost of their products seems prohibitive for even the wealthy owners. Training? I think this is the biggest reason for lackluster performances, particularly past a mile. The interest in races much longer than 1 1/4 dwindled over a century ago. The likes of Ten Broeck and his peers, dueling it out over a 3-4 mile course are long since past and the training methods along with them. On just about any race card in America, on any given day, well over half of the races will be less than a mile and 10f and longer races are only seen for the very special occasions. I think it's unlikely that the trainers of today have the foggiest idea how to A, recognize early on that a horse is more genetically inclined for sprinting or routing and B, train a rout horse accordingly. Does anyone think that the training regimens are all that different for a 6f horse vs a 10f horse? I KNOW the training regimens for human sprinters is drastically different than marathoners. Have to end my rant.

Thoughts, anyone, on the desultory results from yesterday and for the past half century and longer?

Jagger that is the best post I've read. Kudos.

[TJ]

I take nothing away from the winner, he was outstanding going into the race, and was phenomenal on the day. He won easily, no contest. He proved he could go the distance and could win with authority, but watching the rest of them swerving and staggering home...I thought it was ugly. When you have Pletcher disregarding two of his entrants, you have to wonder, no?

I simply found this year's Derby field missing something. I think California Chrome will win the Preakness, simply because he is better than all these and the distance is probably more ideal for him. I like seeing the "little guy" win as well.

Hi Cree,
The Preakness will be a great race....a bunch of fresh new faces will be going against him. Social Inclusion is a serious race horse and certainly will keep California Chrome honest:>)
I agree, the horses did look to be staggering coming home and the time of the race proved that out. It kind of took the luster off the "Chrome Dome" so to speak:>) Yet I think there were some behind the scenes reasons for the slow time. So don't be surprised if you see an update of his 97 beyer figure. There was an hour and 45 minutes between the 10th race and the 11th race. CD did not water the track as they should have and I believe this is an underlying reason for the poor time. It was windy and the track dried out quickly and from what I saw, was breaking out from under some of the horses....just look at the dust ball when the field came out of the gate. The track certainly wasn't as tight as it was earlier in the day. Race 12 went off about 45 minutes after the Derby and race 13 was off about 35 minutes after that....a horse broke down in the 13th race and I wouldn't be surprised if it was due to that slow, dried out, loose track. TJ

[Cree]

I did notice the wind gusting during warm up in their tails. It was going against them in the stretch.
Can't wait for the Preakness.

[TJ]

I did notice the wind gusting during warm up in their tails. It was going against them in the stretch.
Can't wait for the Preakness.

Hi Cree,
I'm certainly looking forward to the Preakness...looks like Bayern will also be in there after working 5/8ths today in 58,20 at CD with Rosie Napravnik up. Bayern and Social Inclusion will make for a serious Preakness pace.
That CD track was very loose and I'm surprised no one brought this up? It certainly had to contribute to the slow time....but nothing like that will happen in MD. That is a fast race track and the Preakness all ready has a bunch of serious speed looking to run in it:>) TJ

[jagger]

Bayern, Social Inclusion and Dynamic Impact will surely give CC an even more difficult test, I feel. Social Inclusion leads Steve Roman's list of pace parameters, heading at least 4 of the categories.

[geowarrior]

It seems as though every year we hear how bad the three year old crop is. Yes, it was a slow race, but let's give them a chance and see how they progress.

[TJ]

It seems as though every year we hear how bad the three year old crop is. Yes, it was a slow race, but let's give them a chance and see how they progress.

Hi Geo,
Isn't that the truth:>) There was a legitimate reason for that slow race between the wind and the dried out track. The wind was dead in their faces through the stretch both times they negotiated it. Costas almost lost his toupee:>) I doubt we will see a slow pace in the Preakness. TJ