Paddy O to Classic O

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Was this story posted in the Enquirer?

Talked about in 2004 but after Frankel died, more came out about it...whether it was Ramsey or Romans, the impact is the same. This is a Haskin article
http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/horse...r-frankel.aspx

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Hossy - I'm probably one of the people you had in mind w/ the SC thing. It's not that I think he's a good bet in the mile (he can't super high, right?), but the chance of him freaking or just being that good and beating the chalk if she's off her game seems more likely than Paco Boy beating her. Have to do more homework, though.

I actually didn't even know you liked him. I was thinking about another board. I just get skeptical with run off performances like his, especially on turf.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

Disgraceful that this country can't consistently produce turfers which can compete with the Euros


We're hell at churning out distance-challenged dirt speedballs, tho.............

The 2 best euro sires of recent times, Sadlers Wells and Danehill are both American breds, born in KY.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

There are about 8-9 probables in the Breeders' Cup Turf. Does Paddy O' Prado have a very good chance against horses like Behkabad or Workforce? Not really, but to say that he has "no chance" or doesn't stack up even in a small way is foolish.

His Preakness is a much better indication of his dirt ability than his Derby in my opinion and this decision is foolish. I'll be absolutely stunned if he's in the superfecta.

Nick-
What race has he run that puts him within 5 lenghts of Workforce? I dont think its foolish at all to say he had 0 chance in the Turf. I honestly might be more stunned if he went top 4 in the turf then in the Classic, where IMO its the big 4 and EVERYONE ELSE, and what are the odds that everyone of the big 4 def. fire?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Nick-
What race has he run that puts him within 5 lenghts of Workforce? I dont think its foolish at all to say he had 0 chance in the Turf. I honestly might be more stunned if he went top 4 in the turf then in the Classic, where IMO its the big 4 and EVERYONE ELSE, and what are the odds that everyone of the big 4 def. fire?

Go watch the Preakness again. He's not a dirt horse, it's simple. Workforce won what was billed as one of the weakest Arcs in years. He's not some invincible force from Europe. Behkabad is a nice horse too but these horses are not nearly as highly regarded as the Euros we had in the 2005-2009 Turf editions.

He plugged along for third in a historically terrible Derby run over a quagmire where he got a spectacular pace setup. His dirt ability was exposed in Maryland and I can't see why that was a fluke.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Go watch the Preakness again. He's not a dirt horse, it's simple. Workforce won what was billed as one of the weakest Arcs in years. He's not some invincible force from Europe. Behkabad is a nice horse too but these horses are not nearly as highly regarded as the Euros we had in the 2005-2009 Turf editions.

He plugged along for third in a historically terrible Derby run over a quagmire where he got a spectacular pace setup. His dirt ability was exposed in Maryland and I can't see why that was a fluke.

So we agree that he is impossible on dirt, and you just give him more credit then I do on turf. Fair enough. Im wrong a lot with these types, like Gio Ponti I have lost a lot trying to beat POP. Last summer at Toga when someone on DT told me he was a lock, I lost a lot of $ chasing him. Maybe thats why I hate him and Im being stubburn.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Go watch the Preakness again.

Did anyone who ran well in the Derby run well in the Preakness though?

I understand their decision, however, with six horses in the Turf, I think you take your shot there.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Did anyone who ran well in the Derby run well in the Preakness though?

I understand their decision, however, with six horses in the Turf, I think you take your shot there.

The correlation between the horses that ran well in the Derby and their poor efforts in the Preakness is that basically they all stink, were beneficiaries of strong pace setups or positive trips, or loved slop.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Did anyone who ran well in the Derby run well in the Preakness though?

I understand their decision, however, with six horses in the Turf, I think you take your shot there.

Couldn't it be argued that even though he didn't hit the board, given what Lookin' at Lucky went through, he "ran well" as far as the Derby was concerned? A lot of horses in his situation would've either given up or tried and fallen completely apart because they didn't have the goods to overcome the obstacles. He kept trying and got a lot farther than you'd expect.