I have a question for the trainers here
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
- bdw0617
- Darley line
- Posts: 9206
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:19 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
I have a question for the trainers here
As I sit here and think about the things I think about. A random quote from sean mccarny popped in my head.
he said that it's actually easier on horses to go really long then really short becuase they are in a gallop the whole race. it's easier on their bodies. I have neard this from someone else too
my question is, if this is in fact true, than why do we start 2YO's off with 2-3-4F race that are nothing but all out sprints, the most taxing races? wouldn't it make sense to start them off in longer distances then as they go on work backwards?
he said that it's actually easier on horses to go really long then really short becuase they are in a gallop the whole race. it's easier on their bodies. I have neard this from someone else too
my question is, if this is in fact true, than why do we start 2YO's off with 2-3-4F race that are nothing but all out sprints, the most taxing races? wouldn't it make sense to start them off in longer distances then as they go on work backwards?
"When the solution is simple, God is answering.”
- Einstein
- Einstein
-
Entry Blank
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:05 am
- Location: Ca.
Re: I have a question for the trainers here
bdw0617 wrote:As I sit here and think about the things I think about. A random quote from sean mccarny popped in my head.
he said that it's actually easier on horses to go really long then really short becuase they are in a gallop the whole race. it's easier on their bodies. I have neard this from someone else too
my question is, if this is in fact true, than why do we start 2YO's off with 2-3-4F race that are nothing but all out sprints, the most taxing races? wouldn't it make sense to start them off in longer distances then as they go on work backwards?
I would say they start at those distances because there is no way to have them ready to run long distances by say May or even June. That is why you dont see 2 yr old route races until late summer and early fall.
-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
-
Sylvie Hebert
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 778
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:19 pm
- Location: canada
-
Entry Blank
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:05 am
- Location: Ca.
There are some horses that perhaps their only chance at making a good career as a racehorse maybe running early and for others its later on going long distances. When you have a horse with good to outstanding pedigree your aim would be to have them race the classic distances but you do have to start somewhere and sometimes trainers use 5 furlong races as a tool for education with no intent to be winning and sometimes they are suprised and get a winner going short.
When we have a promising two year old, we always start it long. Once you get them running in insane fractions from the gate, you can't get that out of their head. I also don't get why someone wants a baby running an opening fraction in a time that no good horse has ever earned a cheque with in a "real" race. Unless the horse is cheap speed it is shortsighted and career shortening or ending. Oddly, whenever we run a first timer a mile and a sixteenth, people gasp and sputter. If they are decent, they win. 
-
Entry Blank
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:05 am
- Location: Ca.
Fair Play wrote:When we have a promising two year old, we always start it long. Once you get them running in insane fractions from the gate, you can't get that out of their head. I also don't get why someone wants a baby running an opening fraction in a time that no good horse has ever earned a cheque with in a "real" race. Unless the horse is cheap speed it is shortsighted and career shortening or ending. Oddly, whenever we run a first timer a mile and a sixteenth, people gasp and sputter. If they are decent, they win.
I didnt know there were "always" when it comes to horses and racing. Just because you run a baby 5/8 ths doesnt mean its going to be speed crazy or anywhere near the lead , in fact alot of very good horses that went onto be champions made their first starts in very short races , first one of the top of my head is John Henry , he won going 4 1/2.
Tejano Run was another that physically does not fit the sprinter mold, he was too slow to enter into the OBS sale, but went on to win 1st time out going 4-1/2, he just happened to make a million going long. He was not pushed to sprint, just out classed them and moved on in distance. The horses will let you know you just have to listen
too weird to live...too rare to die
www.ascotstudfarm.com
www.ascotstudfarm.com
-
Laurierace
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1277
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:14 am
I've never seen a study (likely there is one) showing shorter distances are physically more damaging than going long. If a horse cannot route, no distance longer than a sprint will make him/her feel any better.
Regarding why they start 2yolds at shorter distances? It takes a heck of a lot more training to get a first time starter to ready to go a mile than it does to run 6 furlongs. It takes a lot more training to get 6 furlongs than it does to get 5 furlongs. I would much rather run short a few times before I sent one a route of ground. Be it a 2yold or an older horse.
Someone said a race is worth three works. I think it is worth much more in terms of experience running with others.
Regarding why they start 2yolds at shorter distances? It takes a heck of a lot more training to get a first time starter to ready to go a mile than it does to run 6 furlongs. It takes a lot more training to get 6 furlongs than it does to get 5 furlongs. I would much rather run short a few times before I sent one a route of ground. Be it a 2yold or an older horse.
Someone said a race is worth three works. I think it is worth much more in terms of experience running with others.
- bdw0617
- Darley line
- Posts: 9206
- Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:19 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
I do think there is a direct correlation with the amount of starts per horse and the avg distance our races are nowadays going down.
I don't dispute it, even if there is not empirical evidence to support the fact that, it is easier on horses.
I don't dispute it, even if there is not empirical evidence to support the fact that, it is easier on horses.
"When the solution is simple, God is answering.”
- Einstein
- Einstein
-
Entry Blank
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:05 am
- Location: Ca.
bdw0617 wrote:I do think there is a direct correlation with the amount of starts per horse and the avg distance our races are nowadays going down.
I don't dispute it, even if there is not empirical evidence to support the fact that, it is easier on horses.
I dont get where you are coming from , you look at the charts for alot of very good horses from the past and they made alot of starts going less than one mile , they ran more often and usually built and ran their way up to longer distances.......anyway every horse is an individual and some will be ready to run earlier than others , some are late bloomers and if they are a good horse they will be able to get the route of ground when they are ready.
Entry Blank wrote:I didnt know there were "always" when it comes to horses and racing. Just because you run a baby 5/8 ths doesnt mean its going to be speed crazy or anywhere near the lead , in fact alot of very good horses that went onto be champions made their first starts in very short races , first one of the top of my head is John Henry , he won going 4 1/2.
You are right. I should not have said always. If the horse is not one we are worried will get speed crazy, it might start shorter with no problems. I will reread my posts in the future.
-
RandomThoughts
- 2yo Maiden
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:01 pm
- Location: Mid-Atlantic
A couple of examples
I bred, raised and raced two fillies a few years ago:
Filly #1 looked like she was 3 months old when she was born. After breaking her, I only let her two minute clip for a few months before taking her to the races. In her first 1/2 mile work she went in 48 2/5. Her second 1/2 mile was out of the gate in 48 flat. In her first 5/8 mile she went in 34 2/5 and finished in 1.00 1/5th-a bullet by 2 seconds. A couple of weeks later in July, we ran her 5/8 mile and she finished second in 57 2/5. She finished second again in her second start and won her third. I then ran her in a Grade I at a mile and she finished second beaten a length and a half. She was assigned a weight in the teens on the EFH.
During this time she was about 14 hands.
Filly #2 was a very slow starter, a skinny gangly filly. During her early training, she exhibited a noticeable wing in her left front, I think due to an early accidental paddock collision with her pal, but I was very careful with her. In her two starts as a two year old, she ran a 10 and an 11 Beyer. As a three year old she completely lost the wing and she improved to running Beyers in the 30's until her first start on the grass when she ran a 74 and finished second. She suffered a suspensory injury shortly thereafter and was out for a year. She ran two good seconds in MSW races the next year and finally as a five year old she won a MSW and two allowance races in a row and finished the year with earnings of $75K.
So in a long winded way, I'm trying to describe that they all develop and mature in different ways. The important principal is to ensure that they have the opportunity to develop without prematurely rushing them and hurting them.
Filly #1 looked like she was 3 months old when she was born. After breaking her, I only let her two minute clip for a few months before taking her to the races. In her first 1/2 mile work she went in 48 2/5. Her second 1/2 mile was out of the gate in 48 flat. In her first 5/8 mile she went in 34 2/5 and finished in 1.00 1/5th-a bullet by 2 seconds. A couple of weeks later in July, we ran her 5/8 mile and she finished second in 57 2/5. She finished second again in her second start and won her third. I then ran her in a Grade I at a mile and she finished second beaten a length and a half. She was assigned a weight in the teens on the EFH.
During this time she was about 14 hands.
Filly #2 was a very slow starter, a skinny gangly filly. During her early training, she exhibited a noticeable wing in her left front, I think due to an early accidental paddock collision with her pal, but I was very careful with her. In her two starts as a two year old, she ran a 10 and an 11 Beyer. As a three year old she completely lost the wing and she improved to running Beyers in the 30's until her first start on the grass when she ran a 74 and finished second. She suffered a suspensory injury shortly thereafter and was out for a year. She ran two good seconds in MSW races the next year and finally as a five year old she won a MSW and two allowance races in a row and finished the year with earnings of $75K.
So in a long winded way, I'm trying to describe that they all develop and mature in different ways. The important principal is to ensure that they have the opportunity to develop without prematurely rushing them and hurting them.
The talented ones will give you an early hint.