Top News | Horse Racing Free Tips

Golden Pal Leads Ward Ascot Workers

Wesley Ward worked five of his Royal Ascot contenders over the Keeneland turf Friday led by GI Breeders' Cup Turf Sprint winner Golden Pal (Uncle Mo). He covered five panels in a bullet 1:02.80 (1/8) (video). Winner of the GII Shakertown S. last out Apr. 9, the bay is being pointed at the G1 King's Stand S. at the Royal meeting June 14.

“I thought he had an unbelievable breeze today,” Ward said. “The turf was soggy, and I love to breeze on a deep, soft turf. They come in and out of the works so good. He broke off 10 lengths in front of a 2-year-old filly, ['TDN Rising Star'] Love Reigns (Ire) (U S Navy Flag)–she's no match for a horse like him at this stage of her career–but she had a target. She had a great work (1:03.60) following the fastest horse in the world. He skipped over it–it was unbelievable. That's what you want to see.”

Love Reigns, owned by Stonestreet Stables, scored a 9 3/4-length victory at Keeneland in her Apr. 29 career debut sprinting on turf. She is scheduled to race in the G2 Queen Mary S. June 15.

Stonestreet also owns G1 Platinum Jubilee S.-bound Campanelle (Ire) (Kodiac {GB}) (1:04) and Palace of Holyroodhouse S. contender Ruthin (GB) (Ribchester {Ire}) (1:04.80) (video). Campanelle is bidding for her third win at Royal Ascot, following triumphs in the Queen Mary in 2020 and G1 Commonwealth Cup in 2021.

Ward's other Royal Ascot worker was Andrew Farm and For the People Racing Stable's No Nay Hudson (Ire) (No Nay Never) (1:06.40), who is headed to the Windsor Castle June 15. No Nay Hudson won his career debut at Keeneland Apr. 28 on the dirt.

On June 8, they have a direct flight from Indianapolis to London Stansted Airport, “and they land and have a 10-minute ride to Chelmsford Racecourse, where they'll stay for three days until they go to Ascot,” Ward said.

The post Golden Pal Leads Ward Ascot Workers appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

New TV Ad Launched by We Are NY Horse Racing

The launch of a new television advertisement was announced by officials at We Are NY Horse Racing Friday, titled 'Community.' It seeks to further educate and inform New Yorkers about the importance of horse racing to the New York State economy.

The ad will air on broadcast and cable networks across the state beginning Friday, with additional ads to be unveiled in the coming months.

The ad also appears on YouTube, below.

The post New TV Ad Launched by We Are NY Horse Racing appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Should the Triple Crown Be Changed? Veteran Industry Participants Weigh In

After the connections of GI Kentucky Derby winner Rich Strike (Keen Ice) opted to skip the GI Preakness S. and instead prepare for the GI Belmont S., the structure of the Triple Crown races has been a subject of debate leading up to the second leg of the historic series. Should the timing between the races be adjusted? We asked a few veteran industry participants here.

Steve Asmussen:

I think it's what makes it the Triple Crown. There are other lucrative races on the calendar, but these are the American Classics. I think that it all depends on who has what horse in what year.

[Asked about timing between races with Preakness contender Epicenter] I'm far more concerned about the weather, which you would have no control on that if you ran it later. If anything, there's a good probability of it being that much hotter.

The difference of two weeks from the Kentucky Derby to the Preakness and three weeks from the Preakness to the Belmont is negligible. I think a similar argument that would come into that is, would you have more entries if the Belmont wasn't a mile and a half? But the Belmont is a mile and a half. That's what makes it the Belmont. Having the Preakness two weeks after the Derby is what makes it the Preakness.

I've had several runners in the Preakness and our two winners were Rachel Alexandra, who won running back 15 days after the Kentucky Oaks, and then Curlin running back 14 days after the Derby. I've had fresh horses coming into the Preakness who ran well, but none that were winners.

Kenny McPeek:

I don't think there's anything wrong with the timing of the Triple Crown. I think it's fine. It's the ultimate challenge and I think especially without Lasix nowadays, it's even better. Horses can come back quicker. It's tradition and it's hard to do. It takes a really special horse.

Chris McCarron:

I don't think it should be changed. I know that it has changed a number of times over the last 150 years, or whatever it is.

Even if we adjusted things by one week and had three weeks between the Preakness and the Derby and then three to the Belmont, it would certainly make things a little bit easier because a horse is going to have another seven days to rebound and to avoid any kind of a bounce. But if that happened, you'd have to put an asterisk next to any future Triple Crown winners. It would diminish the accomplishment.

With Alysheba, he won the Preakness easily but he was a little bit tired, a little bit knocked out coming into the Belmont. The timing of the races probably did catch up to him. That being said, I don't believe it's in the industry's best interest to fool around with the timing of the races.

Check in tomorrow for more responses from industry participants and see our responses from yesterday here.

The post Should the Triple Crown Be Changed? Veteran Industry Participants Weigh In appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Should the Triple Crown Be Changed? We Ask Trainers to Weigh In

Mark Casse:

I think it has to stay the same. I think it's nonsense to talk any different. This is history, this is what our game has been about for over a hundred years. The Triple Crown is not supposed to be easy. A horse can handle the racing, especially now where we aren't doing as much prior to the Kentucky Derby.

In the Kentucky Derby, we run at a neutral surface. There has been no racing there all spring. Some horses may have ran there in the fall, but the Churchill Downs racetrack is very different in the fall compared to the spring so I don't feel like there's any home field advantage there. Then we go to Pimlico, where it is definitely a neutral playing field. We see a lot of horses run well in the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness. War of Will (War Front) is a perfect example of that. He was very much hindered in the Derby and he came back and won the Preakness, but he didn't show up in the Belmont. A lot of people would say he was tired, but I would say it had more to do with the fact that they call it Big Sandy for a reason. The surface is very loose and a lot of horses won't handle it.

It's my feeling that anyone stabled at Belmont has a big advantage. The Kentucky Derby and Preakness are run on a neutral battlefield, but the Belmont is not. I think if you look over the last 20 years, a lot of it has to do with there being a home field advantage rather than horses being tired.

That was my reasoning in doing what I did with [2019 Belmont S. winner] Sir Winston (Awesome Again). I ran him in the GIII Peter Pan S., where he ran second, and I thought going into the Belmont that he had a big chance because he was running over a racetrack he had already ran on. There's no question that Belmont is entirely a different world. A lot of times these horses are doing well in the Derby and the Preakness and then are getting beat in the Belmont. They'll say it's because the horse is tired, but I don't think it's that.

I'm always looking for new ideas and new reasons to make things better, but I don't think the Triple Crown should be changed.

Doug O'Neill:

I think it is time for a change. Everything evolves. We have made a lot of other positive changes in the best interests of the horse. I like the concept of putting four weeks between each of the races and having it be the first Saturday in May, the first Saturday in June and the first Saturday in July. It would work well, too, from a marketing standpoint. My gut says that's the way to go.

I completely disagree with the idea that it would diminish the accomplishment. Sometimes, coming out of the Derby and going into the Preakness, you really don't have to do a lot. As long as there are no injuries, you can kind of coast in between. If you put a month in between, that would require some good horsemanship. Man and horse will have to work together to maintain that level of brilliance in between the races. It could even make it a tad more challenging. I hate being a contrarian, but I think changing it would be a good thing.

Shug McGaughey:

I don't think it should be changed. It's very traditional and one of the reasons why it is so difficult to win is the way the races are spaced.

If they went to three weeks, I wouldn't complain about that. But I think the way it is structured right now adds to the mystique of the Triple Crown. You have to run and you have to have the horse and the knowledge to be able to get the horse from the Derby to the Preakness and then from the Preakness to the Belmont. If I had a horse that ran second or third in the Derby, would I come back in the two weeks? I would think about it.

The Preakness is a race that stands on its own and I would love to win it. If I had a horse that was capable of coming back in two weeks, I would run. If I didn't think the horse was capable of coming back in two weeks, I wouldn't run.

Check in tomorrow for more responses from industry participants.

The post Should the Triple Crown Be Changed? We Ask Trainers to Weigh In appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post