I Really Wish I Could Have Seen......

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Not a chance? Have you watched Easy Goer's 8f effort in the Gotham recently? I would argue that was a better race than KG ever ran at any distance.
At 8f, KG would have a shot, but at 9f+ I'd give him little or no chance.

I watched it the day he ran it. Fast tracks and conditions lead to strange results. I know Aqueduct is often a very fast track during those big racing days in the early spring. I also saw him run a very good mile in the Champagne as a 2yo. I also saw him in the Met Mile as a 4yo. I think there are some horses that run extremely well when allowed to do just what they want to do. At 8f, I think EG's rider would be forced to make a decision to run with him early (and I don't think he could) or let him go and hope he came back to him (and I don't think he would). It's a huge difference between third rate speed and first rate speed. KG was first rate.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

At some point in the last five to ten years, some bright individual figured out that that makes them look kinda stupid.

You made a mistake ... and Rollo Tomasi stole your candy and went five hole on your goalie.

It happens. I've been dunked on by Rollo before.

But instead of just brushing it off and moving along... you pulled the goalie and came with the throw as much crap at the wall and hopefully something sticks offense.

It didn't work ... and now I have an empty net to shoot at.

Here's a recap of April 4th '92 at Santa Anita:

Race #1: Turf
Race #2: 32K older male claimers went 8.5fs in 1:42.76
Race #3: Turf
Race #4: N1X alw race for fillies went 6fs in 1:09.75
Race #5: Santa Anita Derby went 9fs in 1:49.25
Race #6: a MSW race at 6.5fs went in 1:16.01
Race #7: Turf
Race #8: San Bernardino went 9fs in 1:47.33
Race #9: a MSW race at 6.5fs went in 1:16.56


You're claiming that a variant should have been split. Well, at what point in the card exactly?

32K older male claimers ran a 95 Beyer in race 2 - A. P. Indy ran a 95 Beyer in race 5 - and Another Review ran a 114 in Race #8.

You're basically arguing that the track was very fast for the first two dirt races ... and someone slowed the speed of the track down markedly for the Santa Anita Derby ... but just minutes after the SA Derby... the track had magically returned to the same speed it was just minutes before the SA Derby.

The only rational thing you could have attempted to argue is that a timer malfunction occured.

I've already discussed how the winner was scratched from his next race - and the 2nd and 3rd place horses didn't win a single race the rest of the year ... but here's a recap of the rest of that field:

4th place finisher Hickman Creek - came out of the race with an injury and was sidelined the rest of the year. Failed in his next 5 starts - all at the N2X alw level.

5th place finisher Fax News - was soundly beaten in each of his next 7 starts

6th place finisher Solid Turth - made his next start in a 50K claimer and finished 7th

7th place finisher Proud Memories - Was beaten 16 lengths in a MSW race his start before the SA Derby - was beaten 15 lengths in the SA Derby - and was 9th beaten 10 lengths at the MSW race level his start after the SA Derby.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by CSC

Dance Smartly vs. Black Tie Affair in the 91 Classic.

BTW I thought her BC Distaff was her second worst race of the year to the Prince of Wales at Fort Erie.

She would have been thumped soundly by BTA.... but Inside Information probably would have beaten Cigar had she run in the '95 Classic.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

At 8f, I think EG's rider would be forced to make a decision to run with him early (and I don't think he could) or let him go and hope he came back to him (and I don't think he would). It's a huge difference between third rate speed and first rate speed. KG was first rate.

King Glorious was at his very limit going 8f. His stretch runs for the Hollywood Futurity, Ohio Derby, and Haskell were some of the ugliest this side of Medallist. In two of those races, he defeated Music Merci handily, despite the fact that the latter had dead aim on him at the top of the stretch. Coupled with the fact that KG either switched leads inappropriately or failed to switch altogether (not to mention drift out badly) in those races, you certainly couldn't be faulted for suggestioning KG had his fair share of "heart". However, it should be noted that Music Merci, like KG, was distance challenged, notoriously hanging down the lane after big turn moves (see the BC Juvenile for another example) in his route races. Sure enough, later in his career, Music Merci was a top class sprinter.

As for Easy Goer, he was a bit handier than you care to admit. Recall he blitzed them in the Swale going 7f in a quick time. As far as the cheap speed he was facing, certainly Is It True was a classy horse who defeated the same horses King Glorious made his name beating at both 2 and 3 (Music Merci, Roi Danzig). Though not top class, it should be noted that the speed horses EG chased in both the Gotham and Swale (Diamond Donnie and Trion) had run the rest of the field enough off their feet to hold the place spots.

Not sure what the implication was when alluding to the '90 Met Mile, but it being his penultimate start along with the reported ankle troubles throughout his career that were soon to end it, is enough to suggest that he was perhaps not at his best physically at that point. Its unfair to take that race at face value if at the same time we forgive King Glorious for failing to have constitution enough to race beyond July of his 3yo year.

[DogsUp]

I would have liked to have been at the 1958 Santa Anita Derby with $100 to win on Silky Sullivan. Could you imagine the feeling when SS dropped 28 lengths behind.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

King Glorious was at his very limit going 8f. His stretch runs for the Hollywood Futurity, Ohio Derby, and Haskell were some of the ugliest this side of Medallist. In two of those races, he defeated Music Merci handily, despite the fact that the latter had dead aim on him at the top of the stretch. Coupled with the fact that KG either switched leads inappropriately or failed to switch altogether (not to mention drift out badly) in those races, you certainly couldn't be faulted for suggestioning KG had his fair share of "heart". However, it should be noted that Music Merci, like KG, was distance challenged, notoriously hanging down the lane after big turn moves (see the BC Juvenile for another example) in his route races. Sure enough, later in his career, Music Merci was a top class sprinter.

As for Easy Goer, he was a bit handier than you care to admit. Recall he blitzed them in the Swale going 7f in a quick time. As far as the cheap speed he was facing, certainly Is It True was a classy horse who defeated the same horses King Glorious made his name beating at both 2 and 3 (Music Merci, Roi Danzig). Though not top class, it should be noted that the speed horses EG chased in both the Gotham and Swale (Diamond Donnie and Trion) had run the rest of the field enough off their feet to hold the place spots.

Not sure what the implication was when alluding to the '90 Met Mile, but it being his penultimate start along with the reported ankle troubles throughout his career that were soon to end it, is enough to suggest that he was perhaps not at his best physically at that point. Its unfair to take that race at face value if at the same time we forgive King Glorious for failing to have constitution enough to race beyond July of his 3yo year.

I don't count being sold and sent to another country not having constitution but everyone has differing opinions. I don't see a horse that has runaway wins at 9f, including one of the premier races in the country for 3yos as having been at their absolute limit at 8f. That doesn't make sense to me. I would agree if you said 9f wasn't his best distance though. I do recall Easy Goer winning the Swale in his 3yo debut. I was there. I know EG is one of the most talented horses of the past quarter century and I believe he probably had the ability to be a top sprinter if they had so chosen for him to be. But I was also there when King Glorious scorched Hollywood in 1:21 1/5 off a 3 1/2 month layoff, which DRF reported at the time equalled the second fastest time ever for a 2yo. I was also there when KG ran 1:08 4/5 in the Hollywood Juvenile. I don't think Easy Goer had the speed to run with KG up to 8f and would need KG to be softened up some to catch him at 9f. I agree with Gary Stevens, who said that had a healthy KG been there for the SA Derby, Sunday Silence wouldn't have been favored. I agree with Chris McCarron, who rode both KG and Sunday Silence, when he says that up to 8f, SS and EG wouldn't know what hit them. Maybe we are all wrong. We'll never know.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

You mean Travers winner Corporate Report? And again, let's ignore Best Pal and Olympio because they didn't actually hit the board so it was if they weren't even there.

Neither Olympio nor Best Pal had a viable excuse for getting lit up by Hansel in the Preakness. Both didn't miss anytime following their defeats and in fact finished the last half of the year strongly.

While one would have to concede off the winter Santa Anita races that Dinard held a slight edge over those two, it certainly wasn't anywhere near the tune of 10 lengths.



He also never ran anywhere outside of SA.

Yeah, that Corporate Report. He won the Travers, yes. Whooopdee freakin doo.

You keep bringing up Best Pal. How well, exactly, did he do outside of California? Wasn't he one of those California superstars that did even better outside of California, or am I confusing him with Lava Man?

Olympio was a solid race horse, and on his best day pretty damn good. I really don't know how to place him in the context of this thread.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by DogsUp

I would have liked to have been at the 1958 Santa Anita Derby with $100 to win on Silky Sullivan. Could you imagine the feeling when SS dropped 28 lengths behind.

Freefourtinternet's Hawthorne Gold Cup was pretty similarly legendary....though running down the heartless Perfect Drift hardly makes him a legend.

I gotta try to find video of that race sometime....

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't count being sold and sent to another country not having constitution but everyone has differing opinions.

King Glorious reportedly had physical issues throughout his career, specifically with his knees (the reason why he missed the Triple Crown). Given the way he tended to finish up his races, plus the fact that he was allegedly pointed for 4 big races, one after he defected from the other, namely the Travers, Iselin, Molson Million, and Super Derby, its not hard to presume that some sort of physical issue ended his career. His sale to the JRA was announced in October, after all four of those races had been run.

I don't see a horse that has runaway wins at 9f, including one of the premier races in the country for 3yos as having been at their absolute limit at 8f. That doesn't make sense to me.

I think we've all well established that the Haskell field year was anything but "premier".

I agree with Gary Stevens, who said that had a healthy KG been there for the SA Derby, Sunday Silence wouldn't have been favored.

Sunday Silence wasn't favored anyway. Another sprinter/miler type like KG, Houston , was.

I agree with Chris McCarron, who rode both KG and Sunday Silence, when he says that up to 8f, SS and EG wouldn't know what hit them

Well, while you put all your stock in what the jockey's say, I'll stick with the journalists, like Steven Crist, who wrote after the Haskell (echoed by several other turf writers):

King Glorious was good enough to hold on for a three-length victory in the $500,000 Haskell Handicap today at Monmouth Park, but left the impression that stronger opposition and longer distances may give him serious trouble.

The California-based front-runner ran his career record to 8 for 9 today and became the sport's newest millionaire. But his slow final furlong and final time, as he shortened stride badly through the stretch, suggested he would have difficulty handling Easy Goer and Sunday Silence, the nation's top 3-year-olds.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yeah, that Corporate Report. He won the Travers, yes. Whooopdee freakin doo.

Yeah. It was a pretty crappy Travers. In defeat was the Preakness/Belmont winner, Florida Derby/2yo champion, Kentucky Derby/Blue Grass winner, and the Haskell/Dwyer/Peter Pan winner.

To be fair, Corporate report was bested by Best Pal in the Swaps in CA, and Olympio beat him in the Arkansas Derby (though CR was making maybe his 3rd career start). So I guess that means Dinard was a lock for the Travers, too.

You keep bringing up Best Pal. How well, exactly, did he do outside of California? Wasn't he one of those California superstars that did even better outside of California, or am I confusing him with Lava Man?

You mean the Best Pal who won the Oaklawn Handicap and was runner-up in the Kentucky Derby? Please spare me the 6- and 7-year old out-of-state runs.

Olympio was a solid race horse, and on his best day pretty damn good. I really don't know how to place him in the context of this thread.

You could easily place him if you were to use a head to head matchup with Dinard as a measuring stick.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

You made a mistake ... and Rollo Tomasi stole your candy and went five hole on your goalie.

It happens. I've been dunked on by Rollo before.

But instead of just brushing it off and moving along... you pulled the goalie and came with the throw as much crap at the wall and hopefully something sticks offense.

It didn't work ... and now I have an empty net to shoot at.

Here's a recap of April 4th '92 at Santa Anita:

Race #1: Turf
Race #2: 32K older male claimers went 8.5fs in 1:42.76
Race #3: Turf
Race #4: N1X alw race for fillies went 6fs in 1:09.75
Race #5: Santa Anita Derby went 9fs in 1:49.25
Race #6: a MSW race at 6.5fs went in 1:16.01
Race #7: Turf
Race #8: San Bernardino went 9fs in 1:47.33
Race #9: a MSW race at 6.5fs went in 1:16.56


You're claiming that a variant should have been split. Well, at what point in the card exactly?

32K older male claimers ran a 95 Beyer in race 2 - A. P. Indy ran a 95 Beyer in race 5 - and Another Review ran a 114 in Race #8.

You're basically arguing that the track was very fast for the first two dirt races ... and someone slowed the speed of the track down markedly for the Santa Anita Derby ... but just minutes after the SA Derby... the track had magically returned to the same speed it was just minutes before the SA Derby.

The only rational thing you could have attempted to argue is that a timer malfunction occured.

I've already discussed how the winner was scratched from his next race - and the 2nd and 3rd place horses didn't win a single race the rest of the year ... but here's a recap of the rest of that field:

4th place finisher Hickman Creek - came out of the race with an injury and was sidelined the rest of the year. Failed in his next 5 starts - all at the N2X alw level.

5th place finisher Fax News - was soundly beaten in each of his next 7 starts

6th place finisher Solid Turth - made his next start in a 50K claimer and finished 7th

7th place finisher Proud Memories - Was beaten 16 lengths in a MSW race his start before the SA Derby - was beaten 15 lengths in the SA Derby - and was 9th beaten 10 lengths at the MSW race level his start after the SA Derby.

I cannot account for how they do things, or how they used to do things, but I do know I've seen them adjust figs on a card seemingly without reason.

I don't care what nonsensical facts you throw at me. I saw the race, my friends saw the race, thousands of others saw the race, and that was no allowance type of performance.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

Yeah. It was a pretty crappy Travers. In defeat was the Preakness/Belmont winner, Florida Derby/2yo champion, Kentucky Derby/Blue Grass winner, and the Haskell/Dwyer/Peter Pan winner.

To be fair, Corporate report was bested by Best Pal in the Swaps in CA, and Olympio beat him in the Arkansas Derby (though CR was making maybe his 3rd career start). So I guess that means Dinard was a lock for the Travers, too.



You mean the Best Pal who won the Oaklawn Handicap and was runner-up in the Kentucky Derby? Please spare me the 6- and 7-year old out-of-state runs.



You could easily place him if you were to use a head to head matchup with Dinard as a measuring stick.

Cool.

So now you are using the Travers winner to show how good the Preakness and Belmont winner was, and you are using the Preakness/Belmont winner to show how good the Travers winner is.

Yeah, Best Pal was 2nd in the derby. Again, the field wasn't very strong, but since he beat Hansel, I guess you'll argue differently.

I had forgotten about the Oaklawn race. Honestly, I don't remember who he beat nor do I have the ability to find out right now. Refresh my memory please, as to whom he beat.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I don't care what nonsensical facts you throw at me. I saw the race, my friends saw the race, thousands of others saw the race, and that was no allowance type of performance.

Anyone who thought AP Indy was a lock in the Derby on the basis of that performance .. is a lock to have bowed out of betting on horse racing by now, no matter the good skills they have in other areas of handicapping.

Unless they have a fortune of money to lose and don't mind losing it.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Cool.

So now you are using the Travers winner to show how good the Preakness and Belmont winner was, and you are using the Preakness/Belmont winner to show how good the Travers winner is.

No, you used "Travers" and "whoopdeedoo" in the same breath and I felt obliged to review the race. I was just pointing out that it was a strong field, as opposed to comparing specific horses. Hence the references to Fly So Free, Strike The Gold, and Lost Mountain as well.

Yeah, Best Pal was 2nd in the derby. Again, the field wasn't very strong, but since he beat Hansel, I guess you'll argue differently.

I know top handicap horse Another Review was in there. Just under a year later, he would prove to be much faster than AP Indy.

I had forgotten about the Oaklawn race. Honestly, I don't remember who he beat nor do I have the ability to find out right now. Refresh my memory please, as to whom he beat.

This should give you more ammo. Sea Cadet. Though look out for DrugS, because Sea Cadet would go on to run faster races than any of the nags we've been talking about.

In 3rd was the very good Twilight Agenda.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

King Glorious reportedly had physical issues throughout his career, specifically with his knees (the reason why he missed the Triple Crown). Given the way he tended to finish up his races, plus the fact that he was allegedly pointed for 4 big races, one after he defected from the other, namely the Travers, Iselin, Molson Million, and Super Derby, its not hard to presume that some sort of physical issue ended his career. His sale to the JRA was announced in October, after all four of those races had been run.

I think we've all well established that the Haskell field year was anything but "premier".

Sunday Silence wasn't favored anyway. Another sprinter/miler type like KG, Houston , was.

Well, while you put all your stock in what the jockey's say, I'll stick with the journalists, like Steven Crist, who wrote after the Haskell (echoed by several other turf writers):

King Glorious was good enough to hold on for a three-length victory in the $500,000 Haskell Handicap today at Monmouth Park, but left the impression that stronger opposition and longer distances may give him serious trouble.

The California-based front-runner ran his career record to 8 for 9 today and became the sport's newest millionaire. But his slow final furlong and final time, as he shortened stride badly through the stretch, suggested he would have difficulty handling Easy Goer and Sunday Silence, the nation's top 3-year-olds.

He missed the TC races because he was sick, not because he was injured. After the chance to run in the TC was lost, Hollendorfer mapped out a plan that he called his own TC and it included the Ohio Derby, the Haskell, and the Travers. There were a lot of people that thought he was a miler and wouldn't go past 8f and when he lost his first try beyond it (to Avenging Force at 8.5f), most of those detractors thought their opinion had been verified. They thought Hollendorfer was stupid for deciding to go further with him for his next race but Hollendorfer, after listening to McCarron tell him 9f wouldn't be a problem, decided on the two 9f races. I remember sitting with Jerry one day and my buddy damn near cursed him out for deciding on that path instead of pointing to the King's Bishop. Again, I will admit that after the Ohio Derby, I didn't think that 9f was the best distance for KG and I think it's more than likely that in a full field with a decent and contested pace, Sunday Silence and EG both could beat him and I while a part of me was looking forward to seeing him face EG in the Travers, another part of me didn't want it to happen. But up to 8f and depending on the makeup of the race, even up to 9f, I'd have loved KG's chances. As for the sale to Japan, it wasn't announced til later but the deal was done well before and that was why he didn't race anymore.

That was my mistake about the SA Derby. He said Houston wouldn't be favored and Sunday Silence would be the third choice. As for who's got more credibility between the riders and the writers, take your choice. I'd rather have the opinion of those that have ridden him and competed against him over someone who's just watching them. Writers aren't always right. It was writers that made Favorite Trick the 1997 HOY. But even in that piece from Crist, notice that he said that the impression is that LONGER distance and STRONGER opposition would give him trouble. I've never disagreed with that.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

He missed the TC races because he was sick, not because he was injured.

No, the sick excuse (a "fever" to be exact) was allegedly the reason for being on the shelf for 4 months of his 2yo year.

The excuse in January in the press:

King Glorious's physical condition has been under a cloud for most of his career, but it remains unclear whether he will skip the Triple Crown races because of his knee injury or because his handlers think he cannot handle the longer distances of those races. Hollendorfer has said that he thinks the colt's best distance is a mile or less, rather than the mile and a quarter of the Derby. Most handicappers had strong reservations about King Glorious's ability to handle the Triple Crown distances even before he was injured.

He was voted the nation's second-best 2-year-old behind Easy Goer, and was scheduled to begin his 3-year-old campaign in the El Camino Real Derby on Jan. 15. A few days before that race, however, Hollendorfer said the colt had strained his right knee. He said X-rays have shown some minor bone deterioration in the knee that veterinarians say will correct itself if the colt is rested.

Of course, a few weeks later, one his owners, once King Glorious was ready to run again, claimed it was all just a very elaborate lie to get out of running in the ECR Derby. So I guess they were always passing off different flavored bullsh!t when it came to this horse and you can pick the one you like.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

No, the sick excuse (a "fever" to be exact) was allegedly the reason for being on the shelf for 4 months of his 2yo year.

The excuse in January in the press:

King Glorious's physical condition has been under a cloud for most of his career, but it remains unclear whether he will skip the Triple Crown races because of his knee injury or because his handlers think he cannot handle the longer distances of those races. Hollendorfer has said that he thinks the colt's best distance is a mile or less, rather than the mile and a quarter of the Derby. Most handicappers had strong reservations about King Glorious's ability to handle the Triple Crown distances even before he was injured.

He was voted the nation's second-best 2-year-old behind Easy Goer, and was scheduled to begin his 3-year-old campaign in the El Camino Real Derby on Jan. 15. A few days before that race, however, Hollendorfer said the colt had strained his right knee. He said X-rays have shown some minor bone deterioration in the knee that veterinarians say will correct itself if the colt is rested.

Of course, a few weeks later, one his owners, once King Glorious was ready to run again, claimed it was all just a very elaborate lie to get out of running in the ECR Derby. So I guess they were always passing off different flavored bullsh!t when it came to this horse and you can pick the one you like.

I don't know what we are really debating here. I don't know who that writer is or where he got his info but I know it's not factually correct. Some of it is though. Hollendorfer was unsure about his ability to stretch out and did think he would be best at distances up to 8f, maybe 8.5f at most. He was absolutely not planned to run in the ECR Derby though. The plan was for a break after the Hollywood Futurity and to come back in the San Vicente and the San Rafael and if all went well, to try the SA Derby. That's what was told to us. We were told that it was his shins and not his knees that kept him out of action during the summer of his 2yo season. Hollendorfer said he was really concerned though after the Hollywood Futurity with why he kept trying to get out and wouldn't take any chances. He did miss some training so he wasn't going to make the San Vicente or the San Rafael and Hollendorfer was not going to bring him back in the San Felipe. What he said was that he wasn't going to have him ready to try 9f by SA Derby time and without finding the answer to that question, he saw no sense in pushing him early in the season so he backed off and wanted to point to the summer. He said that he planned on trying to get him ready for the Affirmed and the Swaps but after his loss in May in the Gold Rush, he was still not sure the horse wanted to go beyond 8f. It was McCarron who convinced him that not only could he do it but he could be good at it. McCarron took complete blame for the loss and it was after that when the decision was made to try him longer. The reason he went to Ohio was because he didn't want to have to face Sunday Silence in the Swaps. He then figured he'd try the Jim Dandy or the Haskell, whichever one Easy Goer wasn't in. Make no mistake about it, he wasn't eager to take on either of those two at 9f and I don't blame him. After the Haskell, he wanted to go to the Travers but it never happened.

[chucklestheclown]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't know what we are really debating here. I don't know who that writer is or where he got his info but I know it's not factually correct. Some of it is though. Hollendorfer was unsure about his ability to stretch out and did think he would be best at distances up to 8f, maybe 8.5f at most. He was absolutely not planned to run in the ECR Derby though. The plan was for a break after the Hollywood Futurity and to come back in the San Vicente and the San Rafael and if all went well, to try the SA Derby. That's what was told to us. We were told that it was his shins and not his knees that kept him out of action during the summer of his 2yo season. Hollendorfer said he was really concerned though after the Hollywood Futurity with why he kept trying to get out and wouldn't take any chances. He did miss some training so he wasn't going to make the San Vicente or the San Rafael and Hollendorfer was not going to bring him back in the San Felipe. What he said was that he wasn't going to have him ready to try 9f by SA Derby time and without finding the answer to that question, he saw no sense in pushing him early in the season so he backed off and wanted to point to the summer. He said that he planned on trying to get him ready for the Affirmed and the Swaps but after his loss in May in the Gold Rush, he was still not sure the horse wanted to go beyond 8f. It was McCarron who convinced him that not only could he do it but he could be good at it. McCarron took complete blame for the loss and it was after that when the decision was made to try him longer. The reason he went to Ohio was because he didn't want to have to face Sunday Silence in the Swaps. He then figured he'd try the Jim Dandy or the Haskell, whichever one Easy Goer wasn't in. Make no mistake about it, he wasn't eager to take on either of those two at 9f and I don't blame him. After the Haskell, he wanted to go to the Travers but it never happened.

Did you own King Glorious?

[CSC]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

She would have been thumped soundly by BTA.... but Inside Information probably would have beaten Cigar had she run in the '95 Classic.

I wouldn’t say thumped for 2 reasons, she already had beaten Fly So Free decisively in the Molson Million and he was hardly disgraced in the Classic beaten by less than 4 lengths by a loose on the lead Black Tie Affair. The times of the Classic and Distaff were not overly dissimilar 1:50.95 & 2:02.95. I think she would have given him a better run for his money than Twilight Agenda had.

Inside Information raced against the clock in the distaff on a sloppy track earlier in the day and the time was impressive, but at 1 ¼ and on a listed stickier track in the Classic, Cigar would have broke her down, one thing times do not tell in a race are race dynamics and the pressure a horse can emit on its competition. Cigar would have tracked her, pressured her and broke her in the last furlong. I will say this she was a slop monster but as we have seen Cigar was not chopped liver on a wet track either.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by chucklestheclown

Did you own King Glorious?

No.