Early Top Twenty Derby Hopefuls

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't take the position that she will be great at 10f. That's not how I evaluate things. I don't think Groovy would be a great 10f runner either. However, if his competition was Meafara, Safely Kept, Very Subtle, and Pine Tree Lane, I'd increase his chances of winning at 10f. For me, it's about the competition that they will face more than their ability to handle a certain distance or surface. If she were facing true 10f horses, I might look at things different. But I don't see any horses that I think are true 10f horses in the entire crop. Well, let me ammend that. I see some but I think they are too slow. I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her. I'm not sure what is the best way to try to handicap things. If she was trying to do something against horses that had already proven they could do it, that would be different. But at this point, she's gone as far as any of them have and looked better, at least to me, than most of them have. I have never fallen into the camp that says that the way a horse finishes a race at one distance is a sure sign as to how they'll finish at another. I've seen 100's of late running sprinters that people think will relish the stretchout to 7f or a mile and they fail. I've seen many that finish well at 9f and people think that they are crying out for the 10th furlong of the Derby and they fail. I think that what we've seen is a horse that was trained and raced at 8.5f and she ran that distance.

Well I guess we have reached the heart of the disagreement.
I simply have no idea how you could watch those two races and come to that conclusion.

[DelKev]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Indian Blessing is not getting 10 furlongs in a Grade 1 against colts. As great a talent as she is - if she wins the Derby - I will grow a beard, convert to Islam, and give up the game.

I agee -- Country Star has a more potential then Indian Blessing.

[DelKev]

[quote=
I'm serious - If Indian Blessing wins the Derby - I will become a muslim.[/QUOTE]

Has a man ever been converted to Islam by an Indian Blessing?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her.

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

I'm not trying to use that race as a blanket way to say that I think that 7 furlong races are the best indicator of 10 furlong races in the future.

It was just another race that shows me that the horse has no chance of lasting at ten furlongs given her style and her (lack of) stamina. That makes three in a row that lead to that conclusion for most people watching closely.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'm not trying to use that race as a blanket way to say that I think that 7 furlong races are the best indicator of 10 furlong races in the future.

It was just another race that shows me that the horse has no chance of lasting at ten furlongs given her style and her (lack of) stamina. That makes three in a row that lead to that conclusion for most people watching closely.

I don't know how that makes three in a row though. After the Frizette, people said she was walking home and would get caught the next time but the next time, with another turn and added distance, she won by more. People wanted to say it was because of the track and nobody else liking it but to me, that doesn't really make sense. How come only one horse liked it? Also, one of the horses that she had beaten in the Frizette, Backseat Rhythm, came back to hit the board in the BC too so it appeared she was ok with the track. This race yesterday has no bearing on what she'll do later. It was a sprint, she was trained for a sprint and she ran fast. If one was to look at yesterday's race, they would conclude that she couldn't last past 7f but we know that's not true because she's already won grade ones at 8f and 8.5f.

Who knows how far she will run? I don't know. I'm not saying she will run 10f. But I haven't seen any reason to believe yet that many others have a better chance of running it better than her. But then again, maybe I haven't been watching closely or just don't know what I'm looking at. We'll see.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't know how that makes three in a row though. After the Frizette, people said she was walking home and would get caught the next time but the next time, with another turn and added distance, she won by more. People wanted to say it was because of the track and nobody else liking it but to me, that doesn't really make sense. How come only one horse liked it? Also, one of the horses that she had beaten in the Frizette, Backseat Rhythm, came back to hit the board in the BC too so it appeared she was ok with the track. This race yesterday has no bearing on what she'll do later. It was a sprint, she was trained for a sprint and she ran fast. If one was to look at yesterday's race, they would conclude that she couldn't last past 7f but we know that's not true because she's already won grade ones at 8f and 8.5f.

Who knows how far she will run? I don't know. I'm not saying she will run 10f. But I haven't seen any reason to believe yet that many others have a better chance of running it better than her. But then again, maybe I haven't been watching closely or just don't know what I'm looking at. We'll see.

Not to belabor it -- but to me, it's the way she's coming home. Sure, nobody got close to her in the Frizette, and nobody got close to her in the BCJF. But she certainly appeared to get leg-weary far too early in the stretch of both races to be able to hang on at a distance like 10 furlongs.

The fact that Backseat Rhythm can't catch her at 1 1/16 when she's falling apart in the late stages isn't exactly a fiery endorsement of her potential to stretch out further, let alone against males.

There is nothing to suggest she can rate. There is nothing to suggest she can back a pace up. Factor those two negatives with her inability to stride out impressively going just 1 1/16, and throw 19 other horses behind her at the three-eighths -- someone catches her.

Not only someone, but likely about 15 someones.

[IrishofNDMan]

Golden Doc A had Indian Blessings on the ropes, and with another few feet would have won the race. If I was a big fan of Indian Blessings that would scare me a little bit.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Not to belabor it -- but to me, it's the way she's coming home. Sure, nobody got close to her in the Frizette, and nobody got close to her in the BCJF. But she certainly appeared to get leg-weary far too early in the stretch of both races to be able to hang on at a distance like 10 furlongs.

The fact that Backseat Rhythm can't catch her at 1 1/16 when she's falling apart in the late stages isn't exactly a fiery endorsement of her potential to stretch out further, let alone against males.

There is nothing to suggest she can rate. There is nothing to suggest she can back a pace up. Factor those two negatives with her inability to stride out impressively going just 1 1/16, and throw 19 other horses behind her at the three-eighths -- someone catches her.

Not only someone, but likely about 15 someones.

I thought she did a very good job of rating and relaxing behind a horse in the Frizette.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by IrishofNDMan

Golden Doc A had Indian Blessings on the ropes, and with another few feet would have won the race. If I was a big fan of Indian Blessings that would scare me a little bit.

No she didn't and no she wouldn't have. If the race had been a few more feet, Indian Blessing's rider would have waited a little longer to make his run and saved a little more for the stretch. It's like the 1989 BC Classic. Everyone wanted to say that Easy Goer was closing so strongly on Sunday Silence and in another jump or two, would have passed him. Wrong. If you notice, McCarron was hand riding Sunday Silence. He knew how much he had left under him and how much he needed to have under him. He timed his move to fit the distance of the race he was riding. If the race had been 10f plus 50 yards, both riders might have waited just a little bit longer to make their moves and the results still would have been the same. Riders time their moves and trainers, good ones at least, train their horses to the conditions of the specific race they are in.

[IrishofNDMan]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

No she didn't and no she wouldn't have. If the race had been a few more feet, Indian Blessing's rider would have waited a little longer to make his run and saved a little more for the stretch. It's like the 1989 BC Classic. Everyone wanted to say that Easy Goer was closing so strongly on Sunday Silence and in another jump or two, would have passed him. Wrong. If you notice, McCarron was hand riding Sunday Silence. He knew how much he had left under him and how much he needed to have under him. He timed his move to fit the distance of the race he was riding. If the race had been 10f plus 50 yards, both riders might have waited just a little bit longer to make their moves and the results still would have been the same. Riders time their moves and trainers, good ones at least, train their horses to the conditions of the specific race they are in.

you honestly think Gomez is that smart and knew he had just enough to win by a few inches????? You really think that he wanted it to be that close??? No way in hell.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I can't wait to come back to this thread and laugh. This reminds me of the Street Sense talk where the King was adament he had no shot in the Derby. I suppose if you throw enough s hit on the wall some will stick, but geez.

Isn't that what we all do on here? I also said that Curlin might lose the Derby but by the end of the year, there would be no doubt that he was the best 3yo. Sometimes we are right, sometimes we are wrong. No biggie.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

So now you're comparing Indian Blessing to Smarty Jones? WTF?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

So now you're comparing Indian Blessing to Smarty Jones? WTF?

Only you would take it that way. Only you.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Only you would take it that way. Only you.

LOL

[docicu3]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Only you would take it that way. Only you.

Actually no I read it that way as well it's just that Cajun has quicker typing fingers than I do....

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by docicu3

Actually no I read it that way as well it's just that Cajun has quicker typing fingers than I do....

I don't know what to tell you then. That was an example of how one race can lead to incorrect conclusions about a horse's ability to handle another. I just used Smarty because he was the first horse that came to mind. I could have used Aldebarran. He was a late running sprinter and everyone thought he'd stetch out because of the way he finished his sprints. But remember how he ran in the Foster? I think that was the race. You can make assumptions based on a race but not conclusions.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Isn't that what we all do on here? I also said that Curlin might lose the Derby but by the end of the year, there would be no doubt that he was the best 3yo. Sometimes we are right, sometimes we are wrong. No biggie.

Don't sell yourself short! You didn't just say that Curlin might lose the Derby, you said he had no chance to win. Remember? The only horses that had a chance to win were Circular Quay and Notional.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Don't sell yourself short! You didn't just say that Curlin might lose the Derby, you said he had no chance to win. Remember? The only horses that had a chance to win were Circular Quay and Notional.

Early, I did. I believe most people's lists changed as we got further along the trail. At the point that I said Circular Quay and Notional, I'm not even sure if Curlin had even made his debut.