7/16 (DEL): Delaware H. (G2), Carpenter Jr. Mem. S., Sussex S.

[dino]

How about just enjoying it for what it was, a great horse race.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

This is the kind of talk I have referred to a few times in the last year, about the superlatives for Blind Luck being a bit far fetched.

I know the older males (or younger males!) aren't much this year and it would not be the most surprising thing ever if BL or HDG could beat them, but to say with certainty those are the two best dirt horses in the country is a big stretch.

I would be pretty surprised if either of them could beat TC or SC, on dirt, going 9.

How 'bout 10? I thought BL might be best at ten last year after Saratoga.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Bullsh!t.

Here she is winning a Grade 1 race by 7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMU4MgAUVnc


But yeah, when her main competition is evenly matched - or when the pace is snail enough - she lives to make races close and or she gets beat.

That's just it, she did nothing different in that race than she does every other time, most of the time it works out, sometimes it doesn't, sure fun to watch though.

[TouchOfGrey]

Now THAT was a horse race!

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Fulla Sheets

Although it probably happened, I don't recall Hollendorfer complaining after the Cotillion when Blind Luck lost by a neck when giving HDG 10 lbs.

Regardless, if Jones wanted to prove he had the better filly, he should have beaten her when giving up weight, like BL did in last year's Delaware Oaks, when giving 6 lbs.

Even if we say weight makes a significant difference (by the way---the Alabama was run at equal weights), was the 2 lb spread fair or unfair?

Didn't Havre De Grace pummel Blind Luck by 3 lengths only a couple of starts back?

Maybe if Jones found a tougher assignment than the Obeah, where she toyed with her rivals, and didn't spout his mouth off about facing males and winning Horse of the Year afterwards, the racing secretary wouldn't have been so willing to kowtow to Hollendorfer.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Bullsh!t.

Here she is winning a Grade 1 race by 7:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMU4MgAUVnc


But yeah, when her main competition is evenly matched - or when the pace is snail enough - she lives to make races close and or she gets beat.

First of all, she was a precocious two year old and badly overmatched most of that field.

More importantly, that was a fast pace in a 2yo race, where the speed all collapsed.

Did at any point in yesterdays race did you think HDG was going to win?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

How 'bout 10? I thought BL might be best at ten last year after Saratoga.

I don't have a lot of confidence in either of the Candys being highly effective going 10, but who knows what magic Pletcher might work on SC?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

That you are an ******* and that there are better ways to spend your Saturday night than trolling after every post I make.

Your posts for the last month have been magical theatre.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Regardless - 2lbs still means a little something - especially at 10fs.

In a race that came down to basically a head-bob - all things being the same otherwise - of course it was a deciding factor in the outcome.

It might make .0005% difference. There are always several things that can go differently when the finish is that close. To simply blame the 2 pounds makes you look like an idiot especially since after saddling thousands of horses I'm not convinced that the amounts carried are precise anyway.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Even if we say weight makes a significant difference (by the way---the Alabama was run at equal weights), was the 2 lb spread fair or unfair?

Didn't Havre De Grace pummel Blind Luck by 3 lengths only a couple of starts back?

Maybe if Jones found a tougher assignment than the Obeah, where she toyed with her rivals, and didn't spout his mouth off about facing males and winning Horse of the Year afterwards, the racing secretary wouldn't have been so willing to kowtow to Hollendorfer.

Looking at the form I probably would have made her give 1 pound not two. But like you I don't know how guys can say how great their horse is then cry when they have to give an extra pound. Maybe the Racing sec bought the hype you sold?

[Seattleallstar]

back to the Wild Spirit thing I believe it was an 8lb spread, but with Santos up the horse was overweight by a few lbs, but Jerkens went with Jose anyway. Wild Spirit has a perfect ground saving trip by Bailey but just lost at 10f to a filly who was better bred to go that far anyway

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

after saddling thousands of horses I'm not convinced that the amounts carried are precise anyway.

I'm not sure I follow.

Are you saying that you're not convinced a horse who is assigned say 121 is actually carrying 121lbs? He might be carrying 119lbs or 123lbs depending upon this or that?

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

First of all, she was a precocious two year old and badly overmatched most of that field.

More importantly, that was a fast pace in a 2yo race, where the speed all collapsed.

Did at any point in yesterdays race did you think HDG was going to win?

Are you still on a crusade to prove that Blind Luck really isn't that good and is no better than Octave?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Are you still on a crusade to prove that Blind Luck really isn't that good and is no better than Octave?

Crusade?

That's a bit of a stretch for you to say.

My point all along has been that people are now overrating her, nothing more, nothing less.

I still don't see that big a gap between her and Octave though. Sure, Blind Luck has won more G1s, but most likely against lesser competition.

I am 100% certain Blind Luck doesn't win the Kentucky Oaks the year Octave ran 2nd in it.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Crusade?

That's a bit of a stretch for you to say.

My point all along has been that people are now overrating her, nothing more, nothing less.

I still don't see that big a gap between her and Octave though. Sure, Blind Luck has won more G1s, but most likely against lesser competition.

I am 100% certain Blind Luck doesn't win the Kentucky Oaks the year Octave ran 2nd in it.

Seriously, stop with the Octave stuff. Blind Luck is considerably better than Octave, has stretched out her top performances for longer, has many, many more GI wins, has run against better competition on multiple occasions, has won on multiple surfaces all across America. There's really no comparison between the two of them.

Blind Luck has always been a product of the current era in thoroughbred racing. Tell me who the last horse was to be campaigned for two full years straight without a stop that routinely competed at the upper levels? That's what she's done and has run a number of very good races along the way. When it looked like she was tailing off her connections were undeterred and she's come back with two of the best races of her career. People like Blind Luck because her connections have never backed down from a challenge, they've danced every dance, and they've allowed her to be a racehorse.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Seriously, stop with the Octave stuff. Blind Luck is considerably better than Octave, has stretched out her top performances for longer, has many, many more GI wins, has run against better competition on multiple occasions, has won on multiple surfaces all across America. There's really no comparison between the two of them.

Blind Luck has always been a product of the current era in thoroughbred racing. Tell me who the last horse was to be campaigned for two full years straight without a stop that routinely competed at the upper levels? That's what she's done and has run a number of very good races along the way. When it looked like she was tailing off her connections were undeterred and she's come back with two of the best races of her career. People like Blind Luck because her connections have never backed down from a challenge, they've danced every dance, and they've allowed her to be a racehorse.

I've already conceded she's more accomplished than Octave. Part of that, however, is both level of competition, and that she has raced as a 4yo, which I don't think Octave did (I could be wrong).

And yeah, I commend the connections for not being pussies with her!!

I'm even a fan of the filly! I did say when she was a two year old that she was the most likely winner of the Ky Oaks the following year.

Again, my whole point is that people have gotten carried away with how good she really is. My little quip about Octave was meant as a yardstick for comparisons. She is/was a lot closer in ability to Octave than she is/was to Rags to Riches, for instance.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I've already conceded she's more accomplished than Octave. Part of that, however, is both level of competition, and that she has raced as a 4yo, which I don't think Octave did (I could be wrong).

And yeah, I commend the connections for not being pussies with her!!

I'm even a fan of the filly! I did say when she was a two year old that she was the most likely winner of the Ky Oaks the following year.

Again, my whole point is that people have gotten carried away with how good she really is. My little quip about Octave was meant as a yardstick for comparisons. She is/was a lot closer in ability to Octave than she is/was to Rags to Riches, for instance.

At 2, Octave lost the Astoria to Desire to Excel. It took Desire to Excel until July of the following year to win another race, which ended up being her only other win in a brief career. She lost the Matron to a superstar named Meadow Breeze. Four weeks later Meadow Breeze was beaten over 40 lengths by Sutra in the Frizette. Octave finished 2nd in the BCJF to Dreaming of Anna, who was 0-2 the rest of her career on dirt and never won better than a G3 race on turf.

At 3, Octave lost her seasonal debut to Mistical Plan in the FG Oaks. Mistical Plan never won another race at 2 turns in her career. She lost the Ashland to Christmas Kid, who was 0-5 in the rest of her career with nothing better than a 3rd place finish at any point. She traded decisions with Lady Joanne in the summer then lost the Cotillion to Bear Now, who was 0-6 on dirt through the rest of her career. Octave's competition was largely terrible.

Horses like Rags to Riches and Candy Ride often have very lofty reputations on message boards. Both were terrific horses but are difficult for comparison's sake because the amount of time where they were at their best was so limited. Was the Rags to Riches from February through June of 2007 a great horse? No doubt about it. Did she have individual efforts that were better than anything a horse like Blind Luck has ever run? Yeah, the Belmont was one for the ages. However, what about the half crippled Rags to Riches that showed up in the Gazelle the same year? How about that Blind Luck has been able to now run at a top level for better than two years?

The ability to have a strong campaign year after year is so severely lacking in the modern game. Like I've said before, that's why Blind Luck gets high praise and she deserves every bit of it. Her talent and ability is MUCH closer to Rags to Riches than Octave.

[Calzone Lord]

NTamm's not fucl<in' around.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

At 2, Octave lost the Astoria to Desire to Excel. It took Desire to Excel until July of the following year to win another race, which ended up being her only other win in a brief career. She lost the Matron to a superstar named Meadow Breeze. Four weeks later Meadow Breeze was beaten over 40 lengths by Sutra in the Frizette. Octave finished 2nd in the BCJF to Dreaming of Anna, who was 0-2 the rest of her career on dirt and never won better than a G3 race on turf.

At 3, Octave lost her seasonal debut to Mistical Plan in the FG Oaks. Mistical Plan never won another race at 2 turns in her career. She lost the Ashland to Christmas Kid, who was 0-5 in the rest of her career with nothing better than a 3rd place finish at any point. She traded decisions with Lady Joanne in the summer then lost the Cotillion to Bear Now, who was 0-6 on dirt through the rest of her career. Octave's competition was largely terrible.

Horses like Rags to Riches and Candy Ride often have very lofty reputations on message boards. Both were terrific horses but are difficult for comparison's sake because the amount of time where they were at their best was so limited. Was the Rags to Riches from February through June of 2007 a great horse? No doubt about it. Did she have individual efforts that were better than anything a horse like Blind Luck has ever run? Yeah, the Belmont was one for the ages. However, what about the half crippled Rags to Riches that showed up in the Gazelle the same year? How about that Blind Luck has been able to now run at a top level for better than two years?

The ability to have a strong campaign year after year is so severely lacking in the modern game. Like I've said before, that's why Blind Luck gets high praise and she deserves every bit of it. Her talent and ability is MUCH closer to Rags to Riches than Octave.

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

NTamm's not fucl<in' around.

I'm trying to figure out if he's a closet Zenyatta like Blind Luck fan or if Octave cost him some money.

Oh, and she's not even close to R2R.

Nick, I get what you are saying, truly, I do. That changes nothing though about whether or not she's the best dirt route horse in this country. Nor does it make her one of the best fillies of the last xxx years, which I have seen written about her.

Have you even seen what BL has faced? I could make a case for them being worse than what Octave faced.

[ShadowRoll]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I'm not sure I follow.

Are you saying that you're not convinced a horse who is assigned say 121 is actually carrying 121lbs? He might be carrying 119lbs or 123lbs depending upon this or that?

Part of the problem with the state's "evidence" against Braulio Baeza, which prompted the judge to dismiss the 291-count indictment without even letting the case go to verdict, was that the scales used to weigh the jocks were never calibrated for weights above 115 lbs., and were therefore potentially inaccurate for any weight above that number (all the weights involved in the case were above 115 lbs.).

Another problem was that the prosecutors didn't take into account the fact that the "official" weights did not include the overgirth, helmet and safety vest, which would add to the actual weight carried by any given horse.

So, aside from proving that Spitzer instigated a high profile prosecution without bothering to understand the rules of racing, this suggests that the actual weight carried by a horse in a race is not only a bit more than the "official" weight, but that even taking into account the extra weight of the excluded equipment, the "official" weight might still be inaccurate.

As far as the weight assignments in the Del Cap, doesn't the closeness of the finish prove that they got it right? In any event, I count myself lucky to have seen it.