Replies

He didn’t get ganged up on, he didn’t bother to properly prepare his horse. No horse has won the TC without winning at Belmont BEFORE running the Derby. CC had never run at Belmont before, therefore had never won at Belmont before, and didn’t win when it count the most. And nobody was resting horses lying in wait, the 1 & 2 horses for the Stakes also finished 1 & 2 in the Peter Pan which happens at Belmont the week before the Preakness, so they had 1 week more rest, but had run a longer race. The important part is they knew how to win (or come in second) at Belmont, which CC did not.

That’s one of the big reasons for this TC drought. Owners aren’t preparing horses to win the Crown, they’re preparing them to win the Derby and hoping to get the other 2 on momentum or luck. Doesn’t work that way, the TC ends with the longest hardest race of the 3, and by not preparing their horses for that they are guaranteeing they can’t win the Crown.

Coburn isn’t crazy, but he is misguided. He didn’t bother to prep his horse for Belmont, instead prepping him for the Derby, and lost to Belmont ready horses. The only targeting involved was his LACK of targeting his horse to the right race.

He didn’t get ganged up on, he didn’t bother to properly prepare his horse. No horse has won the TC without winning at Belmont BEFORE running the Derby.

Prior to the Kentucky Derby, there were many reports that California Chrome was not training well over the track, that he was moving stiffly and not stretching out and replicating the long strides he is known for. The reports improved as race day approached, and the horse had no trouble racing on the surface.

Before the Belmont, California Chrome was present for the longest period of time before any of these races. He had a good fast work over the surface, and every report I came across indicated that he was relishing the Belmont surface. I don't think a race over the surface of a track is required.