Good Lord another pletcher freak

Originally Posted by Gander

Nothing wrong with oooing and awwing Oracle, I applaud your enthusiasm. I know your eye is good. You always had an eye on Bubbles and Piggy. LOL!

LOL!!! Guy offered me 100 bucks to pick up bubbles aka "the wrecking ball" and I declined. Ah good ole piggy Peggy!! Is she still married? That was one crazy chick.

[Gander]

Bubbles! I remember going to your frat party my first week on campus and seeing her hanging around waiting for her next Mr. Right to sweep her off her feet! Gosh I miss those days, life was so easy. Had absolutely no worries in the world.

Originally Posted by oracle80

Tim hes never had two year old stars like these. Name the best two yeard old he ever had? Hes never won a two year old championship and hes never won the BC juvenile in either division. He always has runners yes, but its more like a lot of very good ones, not horses like these who look downright scary. I don't ooh and ahh over much Tim. I'm ususally real conservative about who I ooh and ahh over. But my eye is pretty good. Maybe you don't remember last year but I know several others here do(over on the old site we used to post on) that i was the first guy to start raving about Barbaro after his debut at Delaware because I bet him and saw the race. I'd say that was a pretty good ooh and ahh. It takes a lot to make me ooh and ahhh, and that horse is something really special.

Oracle, I remember you dismissing Barbaro because he ran on turf and his dirt race was on a muddy surface. I dont remember you ever oohhhing and awwing this horse in the spring. But I do remember you mentioning him when he broke his maiden.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

mike and i were the first on the barbero train on the other board...ive liked him and played him in every future pool and basicly said he was the derby winner after the fla derby..

[Betsy]

I don't think anyone is meaning to throw cold water on your enthusiasm, Oracle, but there are plenty of well-bred (better bred than this one, though he's well-bred himself, obviously) babies that haven't even begun serious training yet. As for Todd's other 2 year olds, again - they look like the typical, precocious colts that we all get excited about (and understandably so - I love 2 year olds; they're so promising and it's fun when you latch onto one) early on. So far, Out of Gwedda and Scat Daddy are fast, but we've seen these types before - they end up fading once the distances lengthen and the blue-bloods start showing up. Take my comments with a grain of salt, though - I just have a problem, period, giving any horse any race (this is nothing personal against Circular Quay) or over-hyping them off of a few starts.

Todd actually also has a very nice 2 year old filly named Rags To Riches; she's a 1/2 to Jazil and ran a sneaky good fourth on Belmont Day at Churchill Downs (after a slow start and wide trip). She's one who will certainly love longer distances..........It does seem like every spring we say that Pletcher will dominate the baby races and he does......the early ones. Come the longer, bigger Fall races, others have passed his babies by.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by Betsy

I don't think anyone is meaning to throw cold water on your enthusiasm, Oracle, but there are plenty of well-bred (better bred than this one, though he's well-bred himself, obviously) babies that haven't even begun serious training yet. As for Todd's other 2 year olds, again - they look like the typical, precocious colts that we all get excited about (and understandably so - I love 2 year olds; they're so promising and it's fun when you latch onto one) early on. So far, Out of Gwedda and Scat Daddy are fast, but we've seen these types before - they end up fading once the distances lengthen and the blue-bloods start showing up. Take my comments with a grain of salt, though - I just have a problem, period, giving any horse any race (this is nothing personal against Circular Quay) or over-hyping them off of a few starts.

Todd actually also has a very nice 2 year old filly named Rags To Riches; she's a 1/2 to Jazil and ran a sneaky good fourth on Belmont Day at Churchill Downs (after a slow start and wide trip). She's one who will certainly love longer distances..........It does seem like every spring we say that Pletcher will dominate the baby races and he does......the early ones. Come the longer, bigger Fall races, others have passed his babies by.

Why is everyone so hung up on breeding?

Once they hit the track it means very little. Was everyone drueling over Afleet Alex's breeding in his 2yo year, no, but he worked out pretty well. I guess what I am trying to say is this whole breeding thing, makes me a little crazy, because it's not like at the 1/8th pole they stop the race and say "well I am by so and so, so I should win." I don't get why about this time of year, everyone checks the breeding of what some of these trainers are holding and deems them Triple Crown Prospects, that may be, but let's get them on the track. That is 10 times more insane than what Oracle is saying, at least this horse showed he could win. I don't care if CQ was by a $5k Claimer, when I finally got home and watched the race last night, I thought it was impressive, I liked the way he was going at the end.

[Exceller]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

Why is everyone so hung up on breeding?

Once they hit the track it means very little. Was everyone drueling over Afleet Alex's breeding in his 2yo year, no, but he worked out pretty well. I guess what I am trying to say is this whole breeding thing, makes me a little crazy, because it's not like at the 1/8th pole they stop the race and say "well I am by so and so, so I should win." I don't get why about this time of year, everyone checks the breeding of what some of these trainers are holding and deems them Triple Crown Prospects, that may be, but let's get them on the track. That is 10 times more insane than what Oracle is saying, at least this horse showed he could win. I don't care if CQ was by a $5k Claimer, when I finally got home and watched the race last night, I thought it was impressive, I liked the way he was going at the end.

Breeding is everything if you are talking KY Derby prospect. So many of these 2yr olds are bred for speed that won't make it past 8F but can win in these shorter races.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by Exceller

Breeding is everything if you are talking KY Derby prospect. So many of these 2yr olds are bred for speed that won't make it past 8F but can win in these shorter races.

Smarty could carry his speed short and long, I don't care who a horse is by, once they prove it on the track. People that sit around and study pedigrees and carry on and on with the better bred nonsense, usually no very little else except pedigrees and who's better bred. These are the same people that said Barbaro couldn't win the Derby, because of RAN in the Dam sire line, that didn't work out so good for them....

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

Smarty could carry his speed short and long, I don't care who a horse is by, once they prove it on the track. People that sit around and study pedigrees and carry on and on with the better bred nonsense, usually no very little else except pedigrees and who's better bred. These are the same people that said Barbaro couldn't win the Derby, because of RAN in the Dam sire line, that didn't work out so good for them....

Pedigree does matter! There are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but if a horse like this 2yo breaks his maiden impressively (I just watched it, and damn it WAS impressive) the fact that he is by a horse that won the Derby, Belmont, and Travers makes it MORE LIKELY that he will like the added distance of races like the Champaign or the BC Juvenile. Are there horses that run differently on the track then their pedigree indicates? OF COURSE! But in general there IS a reason that a horse like Thunder Gulch had a higher stud fee than some other - less accomplished - stallions. In addition to being by Thunder Gulch, this 2yo's dam (Circle of Life) was also a G1 winner. This pedigree + an impressive debut = a horse to watch for the major 2 yo stakes this summer and fall.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Pedigree does matter! There are always going to be exceptions to the rule, but if a horse like this 2yo breaks his maiden impressively (I just watched it, and damn it WAS impressive) the fact that he is by a horse that won the Derby, Belmont, and Travers makes it MORE LIKELY that he will like the added distance of races like the Champaign or the BC Juvenile. Are there horses that run differently on the track then their pedigree indicates? OF COURSE! But in general there IS a reason that a horse like Thunder Gulch had a higher stud fee than some other - less accomplished - stallions. In addition to being by Thunder Gulch, this 2yo's dam (Circle of Life) was also a G1 winner. This pedigree + an impressive debut = a horse to watch for the major 2 yo stakes this summer and fall.

You make a valid arguement, but to say that there's "better bred" horses that are waiting to run and will be better horses, because of their pedigree, that's nonsense. There's also reasons why high priced horses are busts as well, remember Checkov, we had people annointing him as a great horse, because he cost $4 million, where's he today, has he cleared NW1X?

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

[Exceller]

Originally Posted by oracle80

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by Exceller

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

The Pedigree Experts are in full effect today, why don't you ask the people who bought Checkov(ofcourse they have more money than they know what to do with, but they aren't stupid), if they thought they bought a good pedigree?

Originally Posted by Exceller

Pedigrees mean everything. Why do you think people pay more for good pedigrees. 99% percent of the time the horses that are the best have the best pedigree. Case closed.

Yeah only idiots accept that at face value though. Ability kicks the **** out of pedigree everytime. Oh, and you mark up pedigree and resell it easily to suckers.

[Pointg5]

I can't wait to the Green Monkey runs, you guys will have a National Holiday....

[Exceller]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I can't wait to the Green Monkey runs, you guys will have a National Holiday....

I think the peformance people like him better than the pedigree people. His pedigree is nice but not that nice. He was bought off his performance in some work. Still don't get the price on that horse.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

Why is everyone so hung up on breeding?

Once they hit the track it means very little. Was everyone drueling over Afleet Alex's breeding in his 2yo year, no, but he worked out pretty well. I guess what I am trying to say is this whole breeding thing, makes me a little crazy, because it's not like at the 1/8th pole they stop the race and say "well I am by so and so, so I should win." I don't get why about this time of year, everyone checks the breeding of what some of these trainers are holding and deems them Triple Crown Prospects, that may be, but let's get them on the track. That is 10 times more insane than what Oracle is saying, at least this horse showed he could win. I don't care if CQ was by a $5k Claimer, when I finally got home and watched the race last night, I thought it was impressive, I liked the way he was going at the end.

It's the truth, though. I'm sure CQ was very impressive, but there ARE plenty of well-bred and/or talented horses out there that haven't set foot on a track yet. There may yet be some babies that are better than CQ or there may not be - I don't like to make premature proclamations, that's all. If other's don't believe it's premature, that's fine too. We'll know in a few months, anyway.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Exceller

I think the peformance people like him better than the pedigree people. His pedigree is nice but not that nice. He was bought off his performance in some work. Still don't get the price on that horse.

Now, this I don't begin to follow. Are there really "pedigree people" and "performance people?" Do people really pay big $$ for a yearling that ran one of those 10 second eights with a lousy pedigree or, conversely, pay high paper for a well bred yearling that looks poor on the track and visually? If so, I gotta get me in the yearling business.

To me, pedigree is like the rich father who gets you a high paying sales gig. After you're hired, if you don't hit your numbers, you're still gone. Same goes for the well bred colt or filly. I cannot imagine a fancy pedigree for horse that runs lousy once it hits the track is any greater consolation than still having the rich father the day security walks you out the door when you've been canned.

Sell or starve. Perform or perish. That's how the big kids play.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

You make a valid arguement, but to say that there's "better bred" horses that are waiting to run and will be better horses, because of their pedigree, that's nonsense. There's also reasons why high priced horses are busts as well, remember Checkov, we had people annointing him as a great horse, because he cost $4 million, where's he today, has he cleared NW1X?

Really? Do you know for certain that there aren't any better bred horses waiting to run? They've all run already? How do you know there aren't ten two year olds better than CQ (no matter their pedigrees)? Are we all supposed to agree with you that this is the greatest two year old of the year? If so, I beg to differ. He may end up proving to be that or he may end up a dud- he may end up being somewhere in between. All I am saying is that it is VERY early in the baby season for me to be declaring this colt a champion. By the way, there have been plenty of good horses with great pedigrees, too.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by oracle80

lol pedigrees are not the answer, lol. ability is

The point I was trying to make is that, IMO, it's too early to make judgments like this - babies have just started to run and no matter how talented CQ is, there could be more talented babies (or not) waiting in the wings. I have zero problem with anyone who wants to declare CQ the best, but by the same token, I would hope that people who disagree are accorded the same consideration.