How Derby winners have performed in Preakness since '89

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

My apologies to Animal Kingdom and Shackleford.

Aww. no Mucho Macho Man love?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

What does any of that have to do with this thread?

No one thinks Pimlico is a speed favoring track. In fact, they typically slow the track down and the rail is sometimes bad on Preakness day.

Then Orb is obviously at no disadvantage.

Last year you made the same arguments to knock I'll Have Another's chances in the Preakness. And as Cmorioles correctly pointed out last year in rebuttal to your knocking of I'll Have Another before the Preakness, where I'll Have Another was laying in the Derby was not indicative of his running style. He was obviously going to be further back in the Derby than he normally would be because they went :45 and change for the half.

The same thing is true this year. Orb is not some dead last come-from-behind plodder. He's not a horse who normally comes from 18 lengths back. So to say that he has somehow has less of a chance to win the Preakness because he came from 18 lengths back in the Derby is not a good argument.

It is obviously true that when there is a really fast pace in the Derby, there will be some horses that come from 20 lengths back, that run much better than they normally would have run. The job of a handicapper is to separate the good horses that ran well with good trips, from the bad horses who performed much better than they normally would have because of a good trip. A good handicapper doesn't just throw out every horse who got a good trip.

For example, I think most good handicappers take Golden Soul's performance with somewhat of a grain of salt (and rightfully so). The pace and the track conditions really helped him and he got a perfect trip (even better than Orb). There is no way that he would have run 2nd on a fast track with an average pace. Yet most good handicappers would not say the same thing about Orb. Orb totally figured in the race. He looked like the horse to beat and he won. Sure he got a good ride, but I wouldn't downgrade his chances in the Preakness because of that. If we could look back at the Derby and come up with some other horses that we think may have beaten Orb if they would have gotten his trip, that would be a different story. But what horse could you say that about? I don't think there are any. The only horse that might have come close would be NI.

All that being said, I don't think Orb is a lock in the Preakness. I think he is totally the horse to beat. He will be the favorite and he should be the favorite, but he's not a lock. Will he be overbet? If history is any indicator, I would say "no". If you look at the past 20 years or so, Derby winners have actually been underbet in the Preakness. In fact, if you blindly bet every Derby winner in the Preakness, I believe you would actually have made a large profit. Derby winners are usually overlays in the Preakness. Don't get me wrong, I highly doubt Orb will be some great overlay in the Preakness, but considering that Derby winners are usually overlays in the Preakness, I doubt Orb will be some big underlay. He will probably end up going off at right around the odds he should be.

[Calzone Lord]

I only knocked I'll Have Another's chances relative to Bodemeister...and of course you would bring that up and not Street Sense. It's par for the course with you.

Dullahan (12 lengths) and Went The Day Well (18 lengths) finished a close third and fourh in a similar paced Derby ... and were the real performances knocked.

I'll Have Another (8 lengths back) was closer to last years pace than Normandy Invasion (8.5 lengths back) was this year.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Then Orb is obviously at no disadvantage.

Whoever said he will be at a disadvantage in the Preakness?

Again, you have some of the worst (or most selective) reading comprehension skills I've ever seen.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Whoever said he will be at a disadvantage in the Preakness?

Again, you have some of the worst (or most selective) reading comprehension skills I've ever seen.

I guess I misinterpreted the whole thread. I foolishly thought that the point of the thread was that you were suggesting that horses who win the Derby from further off the pace are at a disadvantage in the Preakness compared to horses who win the Derby from close to the pace. And in addition, I thought you were saying that horses who win the Derby from further off the pace are good horses to bet against in the Preakness. I guess that is not what you were suggesting.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I only knocked I'll Have Another's chances relative to Bodemeister...and of course you would bring that up and not Street Sense. It's par for the course with you.

Dullahan (12 lengths) and Went The Day Well (18 lengths) finished a close third and fourh in a similar paced Derby ... and were the real performances knocked.

I'll Have Another (8 lengths back) was closer to last years pace than Normandy Invasion (8.5 lengths back) was this year.

But why would you bring up Dullahan and went Went the day Well when we are talking about the chances of horses that won the Derby from off the pace?

Nobody is arguing with you about the fact that there have been plenty of also-rans who came from 20 lengths back on a fast pace and picked up a piece. I totally agree with you about that. If Golden Soul was running in the Preakness, I would not like his chances at all. I'm with you there. But I don't think Orb is a similar horse to Golden Soul or Make Music for Me or any of the horses you've been bringing up in all these threads.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I guess I misinterpreted the whole thread. I foolishly thought that the point of the thread was that you were suggesting that horses who win the Derby from further off the pace are at a disadvantage in the Preakness compared to horses who win the Derby from close to the pace. And in addition, I thought you were saying that horses who win the Derby from further off the pace are good horses to bet against in the Preakness. I guess that is not what you were suggesting.

The point of the thread was that Orb, Golden Soul, Revolutionary, and Mylute were all at a relative advantage in the Kentucky Derby.

The pace of the race was WAY over +20.

At no point did I suggest, they were at a disadvantage in the Preakness.

Each race is its own entity ... and who is to say the Preakness pace won't also be historically fast?

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

But why would you bring up Dullahan and went Went the day Well when we are talking about the chances of horses that won the Derby from off the pace?

Dullahan and Went The Day Well relate more to Golden Soul, Revolutionary, and Mylute.

They all successfully closed more than 10 lengths and finished in the Derby superfecta.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Dullahan and Went The Day Well relate more to Golden Soul, Revolutionary, and Mylute.

They all successfully closed more than 10 lengths and finished in the Derby superfecta.

I agree with you. I think those are legit comparisons. I just wouldn't compare those horses to Orb.

[tywizard]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I'll post this chart again ... pay close attention to the horses who SKIPPED the Preakness and ran in the Belmont.

I'm waiting for your next analysis. Derby horses who closed 10+ lengths, ran a losing Preakness. How do they do in the Belmont?

Gotta think the n is very small there.