Gotta love Watchmaker....

...it is obvious who he lost his money on at 8-5 in the Champagne

http://www.drf.com/news/article/79671.html

[blackthroatedwind]

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

I agree with this and I would add that I don't understand the importance of giving credit to one horse over the other. Scat Daddy ran a great race. Why couldn't No Biz have run an equally great race (his 2nd lifetime start) Joel, why exactly are the two mutually exclusive? They sure as hell shouldn't be.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This idea that someone who points out a trip that cost a horse a victory in a race somehow infers that the same person also lost money on said horse is ridiculous. Even if the person did lose money on said horse, which I doubt Watch did, it doesn't take away from the validity of the comments. Anyone can watch the replay of the Champagne and verify what was stated...it is obvious his analysis of NoBiz's trip is accurate.

For a 8-5 favorite to get beat and then an article to be written about him headlined "You can pin a star on this colt's stall" is a tad ridiculous to me....

Apparentally, he was supposed to win by his odds and he didn't....he had no real excuse IMO....hell, Scat Daddy had worse journeys in the Sanford and Hopeful IMO and nobody came out and wrote excuses about his trip....the way I look at it, Nobiz saved a lot of ground, while Scat Daddy raced far wider and moved far wider....and Scat Daddy still flew by him with plenty left in the tank while racing green.....

I smell a wagering-induced article...<sniff, sniff>

[Cajungator26]

My Champagne pick is still running, I think...

I thought that both Scat Daddy AND Nobiz were running green... I still think that Scat Daddy wins the BC Juvy though.

[ArlJim78]

He just described what happened, I didn't detect at all any bitterness over losing a bet. Make no mistake, No Biz had a real bad time of it as MW pointed out. This horse has really impresssed me. Considering his trip and the race experience that he gave away to the others like Scat Daddy, I think you've got to give him a big look in the juvenile.

Originally Posted by randallscott35

I agree with this and I would add that I don't understand the importance of giving credit to one horse over the other. Scat Daddy ran a great race. Why couldn't No Biz have run an equally great race (his 2nd lifetime start) Joel, why exactly are the two mutually exclusive? They sure as hell shouldn't be.

I never said Nobiz didn't run a good race...he did...but you never saw Watchmaker write an article about Scat Daddy's trip when he had a HORRID trip in the Hopeful, did he?...NO...

If you have the audasity to write about a loser, they better not have been a false favorite at 8-5 IMO....give the public something not from the Captain Obvious playbook....I see it as making excuses for foolishly taking a short price on a non-deserving favorite.....

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

For a 8-5 favorite to get beat and then an article to be written about him headlined "You can pin a star on this colt's stall" is a tad ridiculous to me....

Apparentally, he was supposed to win by his odds and he didn't....he had no real excuse IMO..

Its statements like this that really make me laugh.

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

He just described what happened, I didn't detect at all any bitterness over losing a bet. Make no mistake, No Biz had a real bad time of it as MW pointed out. This horse has really impresssed me. Considering his trip and the race experience that he gave away to the others like Scat Daddy, I think you've got to give him a big look in the juvenile.

No doubt he is talented, but Mike cannot say that he was the best horse...that would be asonine....I haven't seen a two-year-old train in the mornings like Scat Daddy does since Afleet Alex....he's no fluke and very much deserves more credit than people give him....

NLS didn't lose that race...Scat Daddy won it

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

I never said Nobiz didn't run a good race...he did...but you never saw Watchmaker write an article about Scat Daddy's trip when he had a HORRID trip in the Hopeful, did he?...NO...

If you have the audasity to write about a loser, they better not have been a false favorite at 8-5 IMO....give the public something not from the Captain Obvious playbook....I see it as making excuses for foolishly taking a short price on a non-deserving favorite.....

I guess my problem is that you act like Scat won this race by 6 under wraps. Simply not the case. I hope he wins the Juvy for you b/c you have a thing for him. I'll leave it at that.....

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

No doubt he is talented, but Mike cannot say that he was the best horse...that would be asonine....I haven't seen a two-year-old train in the mornings like Scat Daddy does since Afleet Alex....he's no fluke and very much deserves more credit than people give him....

NLS didn't lose that race...Scat Daddy won it

Keep the faith brother!!

Fyi, why can't Mike say he was the better horse despite losing? You yourself have made the case many times that you don't necessarily go by the race record to determine how good a horse is, that you can just watch them and know how good they are even if they do not win.

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Keep the faith brother!!

Fyi, why can't Mike say he was the better horse despite losing? You yourself have made the case many times that you don't necessarily go by the race record to determine how good a horse is, that you can just watch them and know how good they are even if they do not win.

True, but when a horse by Albert the Great is a false favorite at 8-5 over a horse established as the class of the field by being a graded stakes winner from the best barn in New York, I wouldn't expect a feature article on how great Nobiz is....he failed the public as the chalk...plain and simple...why should he command the repsect he is getting now? It was expected that he should have won the Champagne and he failed....so why pin a star on his stall?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

True, but when a horse by Albert the Great is a false favorite at 8-5 over a horse established as the class of the field by being a graded stakes winner from the best barn in New York, I wouldn't expect a feature article on how great Nobiz is....he failed the public as the chalk...plain and simple...why should he command the repsect he is getting now? It was expected that he should have won the Champagne and he failed....so why pin a star on his stall?

Its obvious to most.

BTW: What's wrong with being by Albert the Great? Does that automatically disqualify him from being able to win a GR1?

[blackthroatedwind]

Watch's job is to analyze the races. In doing so the odds are irrelevent. HIS analysis, which apparently corresponds to many others here, was that NoBiz ran the best race. He gave his reasons for this. Now, others can disagree, and that's fine and one of the things many of us find enjoyable about racing, in that there are often different interpretations of the same events. Often there are valid points on both sides. Sometimes someone else will point something out not noticed by another that may lead that other person in the right direction in the future. To deny the rightful legitimacy of this is folly.

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Since you have ignored my posts in which your inaccuracies were pointed out, I'm curious, why do you keep bringing up the fact that Nobiz is by Albert the Great? What subtle immature shot are you attempting to make there?

Statistics say that the upside is limited....everybody has their theories and this is mine....it isn't an exact science, obviously, and he could be a freak. But you cannot base theories on outliers....

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

Statistics say that the upside is limited....everybody has their theories and this is mine....it isn't an exact science, obviously, and he could be a freak. But you cannot base theories on outliers....

This is all good and fine but it appears then that NoBiz has then already established himself as a freak in this case.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

Statistics say that the upside is limited....everybody has their theories and this is mine....it isn't an exact science, obviously, and he could be a freak. But you cannot base theories on outliers....

OK, I don't know much about breeding, and you obviously know a ton more than me, but isn't this Albert the Great's second crop? How reliable can statistics be at this point especially concerning the " upside " of his foals?

[ArlJim78]

Aren't we talking about a fairly small number of crops from Albert the Great so far? like two.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Aren't we talking about a fairly small number of crops from Albert the Great so far? like two.

I just posted the same thing. I don't know anything about breeding but I too am confused by this.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

OK, I don't know much about breeding, and you obviously know a ton more than me, but isn't this Albert the Great's second crop? How reliable can statistics be at this point especially concerning the " upside " of his foals?

I almost wrote word for word the same post, but instead shortened my version.