The belmont stakes!!

I dont think so. He was beat regardless.

there is no way Chrome was going to beat those 3 in the Belmont even if they had run in the Preakness and Derby.  those 3 were simply so well bred for the distance.

perhaps had Espinoza rode the rails all the way behind Commissioner he would have saved ground and energy, got an opening when Commissioner, created some distance between himself and the field something in the stretch to finish closer...prolly second or third

going 4-wide is not good strategy in long races at Belmont

People need to do some research before responding... especially ChickyGirl and that co-owner who sounded like a baby.
Since the very first race it has always been that way. Below you'll see that
there were 3 new horses on the 73 Belmont that didn't race the 73
Preakness.
If you watch both races you'll see that Sham was more of a threat.
You don't change something that has been set for almost 150 years...Hey how
about making a home run gives the team 5 points instead of 1 because I
want to see a game where they score over 25.. and my team might finally win the series.
By the way...Twice a Prince and My Gallant both ran the 73 Kentucky, then sat out the 73 Preakness, then ran in the 73 Belmont... because Belmont is a 1 1/2 mile track and they thought they could beat him in the longer race.

espinosa took his horse inside and got blocked in. he spent the horse

this is not an issue I will get hung up on.  let them do whatever they wish.

however it turns out or goes, there is one decisive factor as far as I am concerned.. the fact that I can work it out.  however it turns I will work it out and win money....1965.25 yesterday

as it is it makes it easier for me.  as I said of 2 Saturday morning that freshness was one of 2 decisive factors.  I knew that  Tonalist and Commissioner would be ready and would not stop running.  that was key..that they would not stop running..that they were in dynamite form.

they also had pace and were rateable..what they call tactical speed..so they would never be too far off the pace or set the pace, or be right on top of it.  that is what Castellano did with Commissioner did.  Rosario took back a bit.  and with those 2 jockeys put up on those 2 horses, key signs it was a go.

that is important for when Chrome decided to run there would be no let up from such as the winners.  he would have to work like the devil to get hold of Comissioner, Tonalist and Medal Count.  they are not Ride on Curling, Commanding Curve, General A Rod and so on

I have to agree with the owners, and the rules should change that if you don't race in the derby, you don't get the race in the Preakness or Belmont.  Most high paying sports require you to qualify in certain tournaments before you can go for the big money. Some examples; golf, boxing, bowling, etc.  I didn't know you could "come off the streets" and race in a high stakes.

It did not matter where Espinoza took Chrome although he made it harder for the horse by the way he rode. 

Chrome could not beat those hoses at any time, all things being equal.... at a mile and half.

and later on in the year he wont be able to beat Tonalist at all at any distance.

these 2 should meet in the Breeders cup Classic in November at Santa Anita....Chromes hom place.  Chrome should loose that too.

Slew and Secretariat had their fair share of fresh horses and still won. Horses back then were raced a lot more often and had greater stamina. That is no longer the case. Should we start "No Horse Left Behind"?, or should we require owners to do what they did in the 1970s and train horses the way they were trained back then? Let's not dumb down the sport.

{ I am discussing with myself }

they are going to have  to start breed better again in the USA >

when US horse and British/European horse match up, I bet the British horses regardless in the longer races..especially on grass!

I did that last here and won every time

{  I am discussing with myself of course..not advising anyone }

It is not shady horse racing..just an unfair development that can be changed, even if what obtains has been going on for 150 years.

Tonalist, Commissioner and Medal Count are high quality, expensive horses.  they would win the Belmont whether they had run in the Derby and Preakness or not.  Had tonalist prepared for the derby he likely would have won that too.

but its way too unfair to allow them to run in the Belmont fresh. 

Chrome.. which horse does have a pedigree that would allow him to win the Belmont...had no chance against those fresher but also high quality horses.  and I find that quite ufair and should be changed.

but from the point of view of the bettor I dont care.  it is an opportunity for me to clean up.

look here!  I have been pointing this out on these boards since Barbaro won the derby what was it 2006?

I told so..Sparky, aka Rummy, Rev etc.  I predicted it openly on the board, left and went to the track and bet 50 dollars on Barbarao and came back with the cash.

why I was so confident.... for the same reason..the bad breeding for  distance that goes on in a speed obsessed america. 

Barbaro was the only horse in that race with superior route breeding.  Blue Grass Cat was ok.,  but he was a 'seconditis' horse and predictably he ran a plodding third

I dont like these Horses running in the Belmont ONLY :

its just not fair !  :-[