Preakness - I don't think I like anyone

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by JDank34

Everyone keeps saying "Hard Spun has a much better shot because the Preakness is shorter"....well it is 1/16th shorter...does anyone remember where SS and HS were in relation to each other at the 1/16th pole at CD in the Derby? I do. Also, the Preakness pace will seem to me to be quicker solely with the addition of FFC and Xchanger.

more to the thinking that hard spun will be there at the end than the 1/16th shorter. second off a six week layoff, with his trainer seemingly looking past the derby in planning and training, vs a horse who was being pointed (as his trainer admitted) to the derby. there was no bigger picture involved when planning and executing street senses derby campaign. also, hard spun doesn't have to have the lead, he's won while laying just off, so the inclusion of speedsters isn't necessarily a bad thing. also, his early run in the derby only cost him a length at the end of the derby--hopefully mario will be a bit more patient a bit longer, and allow the horse to relax a little longer early and mid-race.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

How can the top three be vulnerable if there are no legitimate alternatives?
Doesn't that kinda make them invulnerable?

maybe each is vulnerable to the other two, but as a whole, not to the rest of the field?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Danzig

maybe each is vulnerable to the other two, but as a whole, not to the rest of the field?

vulnerable to each other I can go with. I was going with the premise of the thread that these are all bounces candidates with nothing to like in the Preakness. I don't see it. I would rate their odds the same as the order of finish in the derby. The newcomers I don't see as an exacta threat, maybe third.

[Travis Stone]

Someone said it -- but SS has only had 3 starts this year! It's not like he's been campaigned since January and he's wobbly. I think he's legit on Saturday. Hard Spun got an easy lead, slowed it down midway and now figures to have company. Just for value, I might try to toss him from exotics and see if I can make a buck.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

How can the top three be vulnerable if there are no legitimate alternatives?
Doesn't that kinda make them invulnerable?

What I meant by vulnerable is that these horses may not run nearly as well this time. If there are no other good horses in the race, then there is still a good chance that one of the favorites will win. But I only look to bet on a horse that I think is going to run a big race. If I think that there is a good chance that a horse won't fire, I'm not going to bet that horse any way and hope that his "B" or "C" game will be good enough to win.

If you think that a horse is not going to fire, I think it's dangerous to bet the horse regardless of the competition. The reason being that it is too hard to predict the extent to which a horse won't fire. Scat Daddy is a perfect example. If you thought that he wasn't going to fire in the Derby, there was still no way to know whether he would get beaten by 8 lengths or 35 lengths. He ended up getting beaten by 35 lengths.

Anyway, we all have different methods of handicapping. The first thing that I personally look for is a horse that I think will run a big race. If I don't think that a horse is going to run something near his best, I won't bet him even if the competition is sub-par.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Richi,

Surprised to hear the above from you. And totally surprised that so many are taking this 'Churchill specialist' view of the Derby winner...

His record:

Four wins on three different tracks (CD; TBD; AP);

2nd a nose in the BG, 3rd by 1.75L to Great Hunter/Circular Quay in Breeders' Futurity on Poly at KEE where both times he gawked at the grandstand off the turn;

Second by 4L in his 6f career debut from the 9 hole while wide throughout and 3rd in the slop by 1.75L in the AP-WAS Futurity from the 9 hole while wide...

Importantly, unlike 'modern' trainers, Nafzger doesn't care about winning every start.. He brought this colt along with the intention of winning 2 races: The BC Juvenile and the Kentucky Derby. How'd that work out? Nafzger had this horse ready to fire best shots wherever these races were going to be run. It is incidental that the BC was at Churchill last year. He would have won the Juvenile wherever it was run. Getting horses' ready for a supreme effort is what he has always done best. But it's also a negative as I'll address below.

Use Unbridled as the model for this discussion both positive and negative. Was the 1990 Breeders' Cup at Churchill? No.. It was at Belmont and that didn't seem to bother Unbridled who had won the Derby easily by 3+ lengths. On the way to the Derby he had been beaten by Shot Gun Scott, twice; Smelly; Summer Squall; Land Rush, and several others in the Blue Grass, Tropical Park Derby, In Reality and Canterbury Juvenile, among others.

(And Unshaded was pointed for the Travers when Nafzger missed the Derby with him saying, "Well, we'll just have to go to New York and paint that canoe.")

It's not a question of Street Sense just being better at Churchill than anywhere else. What is worrisome is the fact that Nafzger really doesn't think about what is upcoming post-Derby. Unbridled was beaten 4L in the Preakness by Summer Squall, and really was empty by the time they reached Belmont. If Street Sense gets beat at Baltimore, it will be because as Nafzger admits, he really had no plan for him beyond the first Saturday in May and his tank may have been emptied in the Derby. As he says, he got him ready for Derby, and now "It's up to the horse."

I agree with most of what you are saying. My main concern is not the track surface. My main concern is the same concern that you and Ateam expressed which is basically that SS may have emptied his tank in the Derby. But in addition to that, he may not be as effective at other tracks as he is at Churchill. I'm not saying that he hasn't run plenty of good race at other tracks. I'm just saying that his freakish performances have been at Churchill. I don't know for sure that he moves up at Churchill. It could just be a matter of Nafzger having him ready for peak permances on those days. It's hard to tell. But there is at least a possibility that the horse moves up by a few lengths at Churchill.

[Travis Stone]

If you think SS emptied his tank, certainly you must think HS did too?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

What I meant by vulnerable is that these horses may not run nearly as well this time. If there are no other good horses in the race, then there is still a good chance that one of the favorites will win. But I only look to bet on a horse that I think is going to run a big race. If I think that there is a good chance that a horse won't fire, I'm not going to bet that horse any way and hope that his "B" or "C" game will be good enough to win.

If you think that a horse is not going to fire, I think it's dangerous to bet the horse regardless of the competition. The reason being that it is too hard to predict the extent to which a horse won't fire. Scat Daddy is a perfect example. If you thought that he wasn't going to fire in the Derby, there was still no way to know whether he would get beaten by 8 lengths or 35 lengths. He ended up getting beaten by 35 lengths.

Anyway, we all have different methods of handicapping. The first thing that I personally look for is a horse that I think will run a big race. If I don't think that a horse is going to run something near his best, I won't bet him even if the competition is sub-par.

I don't expect Street Sense, Hard Spun, or Curlin to 'not fire". I'm expecting good efforts from all of them. None of them have shown me the type of signals that they are inconsistent, over-raced, over-the-top etc.
It's not a race that I'm interested in betting. I just don't get all the expectations of bouncing and not firing. These horses have nearly spotless records and always have shown up when the gates open.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

If you think SS emptied his tank, certainly you must think HS did too?

Yes, absolutely. HS ran even harder than SS.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I don't expect Street Sense, Hard Spun, or Curlin to 'not fire". I'm expecting good efforts from all of them. None of them have shown me the type of signals that they are inconsistent, over-raced, over-the-top etc.
It's not a race that I'm interested in betting. I just don't get all the expectations of bouncing and not firing. These horses have nearly spotless records and always have shown up when the gates open.

This is a totally different situation. These horses have never come back on only two weeks rest.

Not that horses who run well in the Derby don't often come back and run well in the Preakness. They often times run well. Derby winners have done exceptionally well in the Preakness in recent years. It just depends on the situation and the horse. I didn't expect Barbaro, Giacamo, or Smarty Jones to bounce in the Preakness. It just depends on the situation. I judge every horse as an individual.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

This is a totally different situation. These horses have never come back on only two weeks rest.

Not that horses who run well in the Derby don't often come back and run well in the Preakness. They often times run well. Derby winners have done exceptionally well in the Preakness in recent years. It just depends on the situation and the horse. I didn't expect Barbaro, Giacamo, or Smarty Jones to bounce in the Preakness. It just depends on the situation. I judge every horse as an individual.

The Preakness is normally the first time almost any three year old comes back on only two weeks rest, so to say that these have never come back before on only two weeks rest doesn't mean much to me. It was the same for other Kentucky derby winners who have done well in the Preakness as you have mentioned.

Why did you not expect Barbaro, Giacomo or Smarty Jones to bounce, but you are expecting Street Sense and Hard Spun to do so? What is it about their individual situations that makes it so clear in your mind?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

The Preakness is normally the first time almost any three year old comes back on only two weeks rest, so to say that these have never come back before on only two weeks rest doesn't mean much to me. It was the same for other Kentucky derby winners who have done well in the Preakness as you have mentioned.

Why did you not expect Barbaro, Giacomo or Smarty Jones to bounce, but you are expecting Street Sense and Hard Spun to do so? What is it about their individual situations that makes it so clear in your mind?

For what it's worth, if any of those were bounce candidates (depending on the extent to which you believe in it...), it was Giacomo.

Barbaro ran a career top in the Derby, Smarty Jones had been consistently fast going into it, but Giacomo ran his best TG fig by far -- improving his best ever performance by 4.5 points, which if I'm not mistaken correlates to roughly ten lengths better than any of his previous performances which were in and of themselves sort of sneakily better than they looked.

I know that numbers aren't everything by any stretch, but if we believed that Giacomo shouldn't bounce but Street Sense should, something doesn't add up.

[blackthroatedwind]

Giacomo must have bounced the rest of his career as well.

Enough with bounce....it's imaginary and the sooner people realize this and start handicapping and analyzing races logically the better off they will be.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Giacomo must have bounced the rest of his career as well.

Enough with bounce....it's imaginary and the sooner people realize this and start handicapping and analyzing races logically the better off they will be.

Well that solves it.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

The Preakness is normally the first time almost any three year old comes back on only two weeks rest, so to say that these have never come back before on only two weeks rest doesn't mean much to me. It was the same for other Kentucky derby winners who have done well in the Preakness as you have mentioned.

Why did you not expect Barbaro, Giacomo or Smarty Jones to bounce, but you are expecting Street Sense and Hard Spun to do so? What is it about their individual situations that makes it so clear in your mind?

Barbaro had 5 weeks before the Derby, whereas SS only had 3 weeks.

With Smarty Jones, I got to see some footage of him training between the Derby and the Preakness and he looked great. That is the only reason that I didn't expect him to regress in the Preakness. If I didn't know how well he was doing, I would have been concerned about a possible bounce. I was actually shocked at how good he looked training between the Derby and Preakness. He had run a lot of hard races on short rest. That horse was made of steele.

With Giacomo, he had 4 weeks before the Derby. Not only that, he had been coming from behind and just picking up the pieces and hitting the board, but not winning, in his races leading up to the Derby. I wouldn't expect that to take as much out of a horse.

With Curlin, I thought they were asking a huge amount of him to run in the Derby. He'd only run 3 times and he was coming back in 3 weeks. I thought that was more than the horse could take. Now to ask him to come back in 2 weeks is really asking a lot.

None of this is an exact science. I can't tell you what will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. All I can do is make an educated guess as to what I think is asking a horse too much.

I'm not saying that I'm confident that these 3 horses won't fire. I'm just saying that all 3 of these horses are being asked for a lot under the circumstances and I think that all 3 are vulnerable to regress in the Preakness.

[fpsoxfan]

Well, as always we know who the folks at NYRA are rooting for. I really think Street Sense will come right back and be very tough.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

For what it's worth, if any of those were bounce candidates (depending on the extent to which you believe in it...), it was Giacomo.

Barbaro ran a career top in the Derby, Smarty Jones had been consistently fast going into it, but Giacomo ran his best TG fig by far -- improving his best ever performance by 4.5 points, which if I'm not mistaken correlates to roughly ten lengths better than any of his previous performances which were in and of themselves sort of sneakily better than they looked.

I know that numbers aren't everything by any stretch, but if we believed that Giacomo shouldn't bounce but Street Sense should, something doesn't add up.

I know that there are people that believe that a horse will "bounce" if the horse runs a career-best race. I'm not a big believer in that theory. I believe that horses should have plenty of time between races and if you bring them back too soon, they may not be able to repeat their previous race. I don't know if you would define that as a "bounce".

[brockguy]

I like King of the Roxy here.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brockguy

I like King of the Roxy here.

someone else has to finish up the super, he's my pick of horses other than the 'big three'.
but then, i'd add him to any tri's before i added curlin...

[brockguy]

Originally Posted by Danzig

someone else has to finish up the super, he's my pick of horses other than the 'big three'.
but then, i'd add him to any tri's before i added curlin...

the last furlong will be issue with him, but horses best performances are (I believe) usually when they are at the upmost limit of their stamina..btw, you see whose son won the French 2000 Guineas today.