Belmont angles
Posted: Tue May 26, 2015 8:55 pm
Here's something interesting: four times in the past nine years, the Belmont winner was an entry showing only a Maiden win on his resume (Palace Malice, Summer Bird, Da' Tara, Jazil).
In comparison, there's been only one such winner of the Derby in the past 39 years (that was Giacomo).
I can't tell you how long it's been since a Maiden winner won the Preakness (I went back to 1979 and failed to find a single one.)
Clearly, based on this data, "Back Class" is not as important in the Belmont as some other handicapping factors (perhaps pedigree?), while Class appears to play a larger role in the other Triple Crown races.
Here's the basic data, again for horses with only a Maiden win to their credit entering the triple crown race being analyzed, going back to 1979:
Derby = 48 starters and 1 Winner (2.1%)
Preakness = 26 starters and 0 Winners (0.0%)
Belmont = 43 starters and 5 Winners (11.6%)
Grade 1 Winners still perform better, as should be expected:
Derby = 184 starters and 20 Winners (10.9%)
Preakness = 94 starters and 23 Winners (24.5%)
Belmont = 94 starters and 17 Winners (18.1%)
Just for sake of comparison, here's how the Grade 2 Winners looked:
Derby = 153 starters and 11 Winners (7.2%)
Preakness = 63 starters and 7 Winners (11.1%)
Belmont = 68 starters and 5 Winners (7.4%)
So, percentage-wise, Maiden Winners (11.6%) have outperformed Grade 2 Winners (7.4%) in terms of actually winning the Belmont.
This, of course, just don't "make sense", using a normal handicapping approach.
Breaking down the Maiden Winners to those who've had prior Grade 1 experience is also eye-opening: For the Belmont, 27 of the 43 runners had prior Grade 1 experience, and all 5 Winners came from that group. In contrast, 16 of the 43 had never raced in a Grade 1 before the Belmont, and none of them even hit the board ...
What's this mean for 2015? I really don't know.
But, if you fancy Tale of Verve, I wouldn't let his lack of a Graded stakes win scare you off.
If you have any similar "off-the-wall" handicapping angles you'd like to share for the Belmont, please do so
In comparison, there's been only one such winner of the Derby in the past 39 years (that was Giacomo).
I can't tell you how long it's been since a Maiden winner won the Preakness (I went back to 1979 and failed to find a single one.)
Clearly, based on this data, "Back Class" is not as important in the Belmont as some other handicapping factors (perhaps pedigree?), while Class appears to play a larger role in the other Triple Crown races.
Here's the basic data, again for horses with only a Maiden win to their credit entering the triple crown race being analyzed, going back to 1979:
Derby = 48 starters and 1 Winner (2.1%)
Preakness = 26 starters and 0 Winners (0.0%)
Belmont = 43 starters and 5 Winners (11.6%)
Grade 1 Winners still perform better, as should be expected:
Derby = 184 starters and 20 Winners (10.9%)
Preakness = 94 starters and 23 Winners (24.5%)
Belmont = 94 starters and 17 Winners (18.1%)
Just for sake of comparison, here's how the Grade 2 Winners looked:
Derby = 153 starters and 11 Winners (7.2%)
Preakness = 63 starters and 7 Winners (11.1%)
Belmont = 68 starters and 5 Winners (7.4%)
So, percentage-wise, Maiden Winners (11.6%) have outperformed Grade 2 Winners (7.4%) in terms of actually winning the Belmont.
This, of course, just don't "make sense", using a normal handicapping approach.
Breaking down the Maiden Winners to those who've had prior Grade 1 experience is also eye-opening: For the Belmont, 27 of the 43 runners had prior Grade 1 experience, and all 5 Winners came from that group. In contrast, 16 of the 43 had never raced in a Grade 1 before the Belmont, and none of them even hit the board ...
What's this mean for 2015? I really don't know.
But, if you fancy Tale of Verve, I wouldn't let his lack of a Graded stakes win scare you off.
If you have any similar "off-the-wall" handicapping angles you'd like to share for the Belmont, please do so