2 yr olds

[grant miller]

why is keenland racing 2 year olds? as a harness man, fan, i.m.o. they are cripples in oct.-this is worse than the 7500 claimers-(soon to be F-L superstars) cripples that nyra put forth last winter:mad: WHY KILL A BABY:confused:

[cj]

Haven't they been doing this for a long, long time? I don't recall very many incidents with new 2yos.

[Mr Saratoga]

They like to showcase their babies, and then sell them for more.

[Al Gobbi]

Well, it fills a race (or in some track's cases a card).

[grant miller]

what bothers me is there asked for speed when there still deveping the leg, shoulder strenth we dont run our 2 yr olds on our farm till july at the earlest-but we are harness people . sorry bouy my spelling!

[horses4courses]

The first two 2yo races at KEE this year have been won by Wesley Ward horses.
He is likely to send out the winners of several more before meet's end.
Year after year, he arrives there with Florida-seasoned babies that are cranked up beyond belief.

Usually heavily favored, it's hard to bet them for any value.
His strike rate is awesome in these races in April, though.

Trouble is, these horses are seldom worth a damn after 2 or 3 races.... :ThmbDown:

[Robert Goren]

I don't have the numbers to prove my point but I am pretty sure that there are fewer 2 yo races earlier in the year now than there was when I first started betting horses in the 1960s. I know some people are always making claims about early racing of 2 yos hurts the horse. I am "from Missouri" on this issue. I want to see the numbers to back up their claims.

[horses4courses]

I recall in the past SA having 2F baby races by mid-March.
Nothing, so far, in 2012 but they must be starting soon.

[stu]

I recall in the past SA having 2F baby races by mid-March.
Nothing, so far, in 2012 but they must be starting soon.

The first one is in the condition book for Thursday, April 12th (with entries taken today)

[cj]

I remember seeing a study that showed horses with a solid 2yo foundation were a lot more likely to have longer careers.

[Tom]

Yes, Byk has brought that up several times.
Everything seems to point to having a good foundation translates into a better race horse, as all ages.
That is why we now see 5,6,7 week layoffs all the time.

Might be part of the reason why we seldom see really good horses anymore, too.

[FenceBored]

I remember seeing a study that showed horses with a solid 2yo foundation were a lot more likely to have longer careers.

Maybe, but then there's this from a 1906 DRF article (http://kdl.kyvl.org/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=drf1900s;cc=drf1900s;rgn=full%20text;idno=dr f1906021301;didno=drf1906021301;view=pdf;seq=2_4;n ode=drf1906021301%3A2.4) with the stats on starters by age in 1905.

More 2yo raced than any other age, and the total number of all 6& ups was less than the number of 4yos. Doesn't seem like that had longer careers.

[Tom]

The full moon was Friday, not Saturday, wasn't it? :rolleyes:
I bet the Beyers were higher then, too.

[cj]

Maybe, but then there's this from a 1906 DRF article (http://kdl.kyvl.org/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=drf1900s;cc=drf1900s;rgn=full%20text;idno=dr f1906021301;didno=drf1906021301;view=pdf;seq=2_4;n ode=drf1906021301%3A2.4) with the stats on starters by age in 1905.

More 2yo raced than any other age, and the total number of all 6& ups was less than the number of 4yos. Doesn't seem like that had longer careers.

I can only assume there is supposed to be humor here, but I can't figure it out.

[FenceBored]

I can only assume there is supposed to be humor here, but I can't figure it out.

What humor? They raced two year olds more early and often in those days, and it looks as though (in that one year's sample) that it didn't produce long racing careers. Maybe they overdid it, that'd be my guess, but that just begs the question of where the line is for when to start them and how much to race them.

[FenceBored]

The full moon was Friday, not Saturday, wasn't it? :rolleyes:
I bet the Beyers were higher then, too.

Have you looked at the raw times from that era? Take one heck of a variant to get a big Beyer out of those things.

[Tom]

but that just begs the question of where the line is for when to start them and how much to race them.

Yeah, probably around 1970.

[PaceAdvantage]

I remember seeing a study that showed horses with a solid 2yo foundation were a lot more likely to have longer careers.Maybe that's because those starting later in life have already shown to be problematic in terms of injury.

[Robert Fischer]

Most of the 2yo in-training market is not geared to build a foundation.

The majority is horses that are bred to hopefully develop early and are trained to run full speed at short distances.

A lot of them are actually run at the sales and the fastest ones tend to do well (at the sales).

[cj]

What humor? They raced two year olds more early and often in those days, and it looks as though (in that one year's sample) that it didn't produce long racing careers. Maybe they overdid it, that'd be my guess, but that just begs the question of where the line is for when to start them and how much to race them.

How could you possibly deduce that from what you posted? It makes no sense, at least to me.

[forced89]

FWIW this is what I am trying this year with one of my 2 yo's (an April 2010 foal)

Oct, Nov, Dec 2011 Break and Train
Jan, Feb, Mar 2012 Turn Out
Apr, May, Jun 2012 Back in Training
Jul, Aug 2012 Turn Out
September 2012 Train then on to the races (the Good Lord willing)

This will be the first time I tried this but I believe my colt will be a late developer

[wisconsin]

Very rarely are any of the early 2 yo starters meant for any sort of greatness. They are simply early developed horses. Nobody is rushing any Triple Crown prospects this early. Many times, a maiden win is all they'll ever get.

On the flip side, I think that a great deal of 4 yo and older first-time starters are already screwed-up.

We all know that Seabiscuit ran 35 times at 2.

[FenceBored]

How could you possibly deduce that from what you posted? It makes no sense, at least to me.

Sorry, it made sense to me at the time. :blush:

(Course, if you look at the botch job I did of congratulating Mike Smith it's clear that it wasn't a good morning of posting.)