I find it very interesting the last 5 Preakness winners had NO negative numbers in their career prior to winning the Preakness. All these last 5 winners ran a winning Preakness number of 0 or higher, but none ran a negative number in winning the Preakness. For the last 5 years, the Kentucky Derby/Preakness winner(s) have had ZERO negative career numbers.
I also find it interesting that in the 5 year period prior, ALL Preakness winners had ONE or MORE negative numbers in their career prior to winning the Preakness. With the exception of Rachel all these winners won with a negative number in the Preakness. Rachel ran a 0 in winning the Preakness.
2014 CALIFORNIA CHROME NO negative numbers in career;
2013 Oxbow NO negative numbers in career;
2012 ILL HAVE ANOTHER NO negative numbers in career;
2011 Shackleford NO negative numbers in career;
2010 Lookin at Lucky NO negative numbers in career.
2009 Rachel WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness;
2008 BIG BROWN WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness;
2007 Curlin WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness;
2006 Bernadini WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness;
2005 Alex WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness.
(California Chrome, I\'ll Have Another, Big Brown won Derby and Preakness).
What has caused this change? If I missed a number somewhere, I\'m sure someone will point it out.
Sorry to add an addendum to my own post.
The number of horses entering the Derby and the Preakness with previous negative numbers have shrunk substantially over the last 5 years compared to the previous 5 year period.
From 2010 to 2014 there were a total of 9 Derby entrants and only 6 Preakness entrants with a previous negative number.
From 2005 to 2009 there were a total of 18 Derby entrants and 19 Preakness entrants with a previous negative number.
The generic numbers show twice as many horses with previous negative numbers were entered in the Derby in the 2005-2009 years versus the last 5 years.
The generic numbers show three times as many horses with previous negative numbers were entered in the Preakness in the 2005-2009 years versus the last 5 years.
So, in the last 5 years, only 15 horses entered the Derby and Preakness with a previous negative number.
The previous 5 year period, 2005-2009 there were 37 horses entered in the Derby and Preakness with a previous negative number.
Sorry to get so convoluted.
Some of this coincides with Steroids becoming illegal. Can\'t prove it but have to think that\'s a very big part of this
Probably. Far fewer big negs in general recently.
> 2014 CALIFORNIA CHROME NO negative numbers in career; SoCal
> 2013 Oxbow NO negative numbers in career; MidAm
> 2012 ILL HAVE ANOTHER NO negative numbers in career; SoCal
> 2011 Shackleford NO negative numbers in career; EC-FL
> 2010 Lookin at Lucky NO negative numbers in career. SoCal
>
> 2009 Rachel WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness; MidAm
> 2008 BIG BROWN WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness; EC
> 2007 Curlin WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness; MidAm
> 2006 Bernadini WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness; EC
> 2005 Alex WITH previous negative numbers prior to winning Preakness. MidAM EC
The reason I started up this path was due to the high number (5) horses that entered the Derby with negative numbers. No big negative numbers, but -2,-0,-2,-1,-2. That\'s the most horses with negative pre-Derby numbers over the last 10 years.
From 2005-2009 the numbers of negative horses entered in Derby were, 4,4,3,4,3.
From the 2010-2014 drop-off in negative horses entered was 1,1,1,3,3. And now this year there are 5.
Presuming AP ran a negative number, and there are as many, and more, horses with negatives, regarding the Derby, is the cycle reverting backwards, or might this be a one year anomaly? I know one year indicates nothing, but the upward trend is mimicking the pre-2010 years.
As my Uncle Albert said, \"not all that can be counted counts, not all that counts can be counted.\"