skitimber Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I could not let this one pass and setting aside
> Oscar Barrera for a moment:
>
> The $2 parlay on WS 5 consecutive Belmont Stakes
> would have gotten you $2891.70. Baffert's 3
> BC's: $65 and change.
>
> Look at it another way: Set the odds at either
> winning their respective race before the start of
> the year at 20-1. Then the odds of what Baffert
> has done is 8000-1 while Stephens is at 3.2
> million to 1.
>
> Even lower the odds of Stephens winning each to
> 10-1 instead of 20-1 puts him at 100,000-1 - still
> dwarfing what Baffert did in 3 years.
>
> Use the number of horses in the field as the
> probability that each horse wins the respective
> race: Baffert:1 in 1134, Stephens 1 in 199,650, a
> leap of 176 to 1 to get from Baffert to Stephens!
> This doesn't even take into account Baffert's
> multiple entries (don't recall if Stephens had
> any!) which would reduce his odds considerably.
> Obviously it is an achievement in most cases to
> get a horse to this race (which is why you can use
> any of the other metrics above!)
>
> Baffert pointed to the BC's. Stephen's first
> winner, Conquistador Cielo, won the Met mile just
> 5 days earlier and under Baffert would likely not
> even been entered in the Belmont.
>
> If Arrogate (or West Coast or Collected or
> Mubtaahij) had won last year, Baffert would now be
> in a position to simply try for five. But he
> failed with the favorite and two others at odds
> less than 6-1.
>
> Compare them as winning trainers and Baffert comes
> out on top. Great for the sport, tough call for
> me.
>
> But comparing only the streaks, I rest my case.

Additional factors to consider that make Woody's feat more impressive are:

(a) the Belmont is only open to 3yos....if you get injured or miss it, no trying a second time....there is a much smaller pool of horses that could be Belmont winners (factoring in 3yo only, time of year, uncommon distance)

(b) the BC Classic is open to all ages and comes at a time of year that is much easier to make and is at a distance that is not nearly as unusual as the Belmont distance....much larger pool of horses to draw from

(c) how many years in a row would Kelso, Forego, John Henry* have won the BC Classic if it existed at the time? How does that impact the feat? In theory, with two great geldings of the right vintages, you could win 6 BC Classics in a row with only 2 horses -- seems one feat is more reliant on the trainer and less on the horses than the other feat.

Maybe I am missing something else?

*John Henry was entered in the first Breeders Cup, but scratched due to career ending injury