BC: Familiar Storylines Highlight, Mar Cup

[randallscott35]

Saylor discusses the track bias which you must have missed Canon while you were on the toilet.

http://bc.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=36248

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The first winner was the favorite who got an easy lead. The second winner came from 13th saved ground and was clearly best regardless of bias or not, the third winner spent 4 of 6 furlongs at least 3 wide and the fourth winner had a perfect trip behind a speed duel while her 2 chief challengers broke down and the horses who were 2nd, 3rd and 4th were banging into each other while 6 to 8 wide. The 5th winner was 5 wide for the last 5 furlongs, the 2nd place horse never saw the rail.

You would try to make a nuclear bomb out of Chinese food and an extension cord.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Saylor discusses the track bias which you must have missed Canon while you were on the toilet.

http://bc.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=36248

Sour grapes

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

You would try to make a nuclear bomb out of Chinese food and an extension cord.

The inside was good but the was no overwhelming bias.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Cannon,you gunna tell us how the Holocaust is fiction ?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Saylor discusses the track bias which you must have missed Canon while you were on the toilet.

http://bc.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=36248

but in my mind the more important issue in that article is the slow response for fleet indian. all that $$ they put into the renovations, they can't handle more than one injured horse at a time???

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The inside was good but the was no overwhelming bias.

you are kidding, aren't you?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

but in my mind the more important issue in that article is the slow response for fleet indian. all that $$ they put into the renovations, they can't handle more than one injured horse at a time???

AGreed Danzig. I thought Churchill blew it yesterday. From that(imagine a race with multiple injuries--3 or 4---and what would they have done), to the bias on the most important day of the year, a pitiful job by them.

[Danzig]

very unprofessional...i remember them showing saylor standing there looking at his mare, and you could tell he was pissed, righteous anger! i would have been too.

[Danzig]

seems track maintenance at churchill is a worldwide subject:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...7-2722,00.html

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Cannon,you gunna tell us how the Holocaust is fiction ?

Explain the classic. Did "they" change the track for that???? A series of 1's winning does not signify a track bias. And since when is saving ground on the turn bad at Churchill Downs? IMO Dreaming of Anna was the best horse and Street sense was easily the best horse. If you eliminate Fleet Indian and Pine Island you can make a case that Round Pond was the best horse that got a perfect trip. We have already established that Thor's Echo did not get an inside trip. Invasor and Beradini were at least 3 wide the entire trip in in Invasors case 7 wide turning for home. So where is the overwhelming bias? The track played the same for the entire weekend. Track maintenance has been the same the last 3 days. I will repeat, the inside was good but "they" did not create any golden rail.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

"..the inside was good but "they" did not create any golden rail."


Idiot.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"..the inside was good but "they" did not create any golden rail."


Idiot.

Well if the bias was so pronounced then surely a genius such as yourself made tons of money by capitalizing on it

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

"..the inside was good but "they" did not create any golden rail."


Idiot.

you read the aussie article i put up?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

you read the aussie article i put up?

Those aussies can spot a dirt bias when they see it!!!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

you read the aussie article i put up?

Yeah,I read it.Never happened though..huh Cannon? Nobody really scraped the inside of the track.I guess people must be telling lies(because you say there was no golden rail.)

"...someone decided to send out a tractor to scrape away excess dirt from along the running rail and spread it in the centre of the track. The result was a fast lane on the inside that dictated the pattern of racing for most of the day."

[philcski]

This all sounds like sour grapes to me. Stop the nonsense.

It was a statistical oddity that the #1 saddlecloth won the first 4 dirt races in the BC as they all took different paths to earn that victory. And you fail to mention the fact that neither of the pre-BC races were supposedly aided by a bias.

The breakdowns are a different story... where's all the polytrack bashers now? And I'm broken hearted about Pine Island, of course, but her action always was a liability on dirt- she and Barbaro (both by turf sires) had similar high knee, pounding the ground hard...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Yeah,I read it.Never happened though..huh Cannon? Nobody really scraped the inside of the track.I guess people must be telling lies(because you say there was no golden rail.)

"...someone decided to send out a tractor to scrape away excess dirt from along the running rail and spread it in the centre of the track. The result was a fast lane on the inside that dictated the pattern of racing for most of the day."

Dude they do that EVERY DAY at Churchill Downs. Let me explain what I am saying because you seem to have a problem with comprehension. The inside was good yesterday but it was not any different than the way the track has been playing. Therefore you can not say that CD created any bias for the BC because the track has been that way for days. Derby day in the past has been totally different than the previous week with the track at least a second faster. But this week it has been the same. And I also have stated that the inside may have seemed better than it was because I believe that some of the horses were the best horses that just happened to be on the inside. Nowhere did I say that the inside was not good, but it was no different than it has been.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Look I have said I don't think that the inside bias, because there is, and has been one for over a week, mattered all that much. And I know you weren't talking directly at me, but honestly, if you have watched races from Churchill last weekend, all through the week, and yeserday, there was a definite inside bias.

I agree and I have no problem with it. If the track stays consistent all week then you just adjust until it changes. The idea that you can have a perfect, even racetrack on cue is just foolish. Weather conditions , wind, rain, cool or hot temps, can all effect the the way the track plays.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Look I have said I don't think that the inside bias, because there is, and has been one for over a week, mattered all that much. And I know you weren't talking directly at me, but honestly, if you have watched races from Churchill last weekend, all through the week, and yeserday, there was a definite inside bias.

I don't disagree that an inside path is preferable to an outside path, because ground loss ALWAYS plays a factor in racing, but review the charts. It's No Joke won on the square in the 3 path. Dreaming of Anna was clear early and was the best horse on a soft pace, she could have gone 14 wide and still won. Street Sense came wide into the turn then angled back in but still made up ground during his entire rally, Thor's Echo was 3 wide on the turn and down the stretch, Round Pond saved ground the whole way and got a perfect trip but the closers in the race were as much as 10 wide and still had a reasonable shot, and Invasor came 3 wide on the first turn and 7 wide to win plus Giacomo ran virtually the identical race he did in the Derby-(obviously this time it wasn't nearly good enough). Where's the bias?