Do you think Barbaro could've won the Triple Crown if he didn't break down?

Question

I think he could've. I just want to know what you think.

Answer 1

i think he totally could've!!!!

Answer 2

I agree with the first answer that Bernardini would have been the real test for Barbaro.  Running back from the Derby in 2 weeks against a talented fresh horse would have been tough.  I don't know though who would have won.  There's a lot of people who swear up and down that Bernardini was exponentially more talented than Barbaro and would have easily defeated him.  I don't know though.  Barbaro certainly hadn't been tested like that before.  But in the races he did run, he was undefeated, and he usually won by a lot.  It's hard to see Barbaro run that monster race in the Derby against the top 19 3yearolds in the country with one of the fastest times in history and the winning by the largest margin in 60 years, and then say that someone else would have beaten him.  But then Bernardini ran a really good race against Invasor in the Breeders and Invasor is really amazingly talented and I don't know if Barbaro could have done as well against him.  But when it comes down to a decision, I think Barbaro could have withstood Bernardini in the Preakness...  Barbaro had the talent to accelerate in the stretch for big victories and also had the spirit to will himself to a win in a stretch duel.  Bernardini was certainly fresher, but being lightly raced, Barbaro wasn't that much more tired than Bernardini.

I disagree with writing Jazil off so quickly.  I thought he was pretty second rate last year when he won, but watching his sister win this year, I realized that there's something special for that pedigree going over a mile and a half.  And the mile and a half was something new for Barbaro, something that I don't know whether he could have done.  But I think Barbaro could have beaten Jazil.

The Triple Crown is really rare nowadays.  The odds are, Barbaro wouldn't have won.  But he certainly COULD have.  I like to believe he would have.  It's hard to be so close so many times...  Silver Charm, Real Quiet, Smarty Jones, even Charismatic and Afleet Alex...  It's hard to say that Barbaro would have been better than that list and we'll never know.  Unfortunately, Barbaro will always be remembered not for his racing talents, but for his fight for life.

edit: I do agree about Jazil...  he's certainly not as talented as the other Belmont winners of the era...  and he's certainly not as talented as his sister.  But he did manage a Belmont win...  that counts for something.  And a lot of weird things happen in the Belmont, both good (a 31 length win) and bad (Victory Gallop overtakes Real Quiet for a single stride, but it's the one that counts).  So who knows.  A tired Barbaro (tired from a difficult battle against Bernardini in the Preakness) might have been upset by a less talented horse.

Answer 3

Lost in the tragedy is that Bernardini ran a tremendous race in the Preakness.  There's no way of knowing what Barbaro would've done in that race had he not taken that bad step, but he would have to have caught one heck of a good race horse.  Other than that, the only other horse of that crop of three year olds to achieve much of anything since then is Lawyer Ron.  I think Barbaro might have lost in Maryland anyway, but no question in my mind that he could've beaten a mediocre champion in Jazil in the Belmont.

Answer 4

Unfortunately racing is full of "what ifs", and we will never know the outcome if things had been different.

As other answerers have said, to win any Triple Crown takes a special horse.

I've looked at Dynaformer's progeny record in GB over 12f and it's not great: since he went to stud he has had 104 runners in GB attempt to run over 12f, and only 9 have won.  Of course, I don't have access to his US runners by distance, but to win a race like the Belmont, you have to get the trip with ease.

That's my opinion anyway.