Ride on Normandy Invasion

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This is as indefensible an absolute as someone that says Normandy Invasion would definitely have won had he been ridden well.

There are a lot of misconceptions in racing, but to me, few things are as misunderstood as how seemingly minor events in a race can dramatically affect the outcome. The ride on Normandy Invasion was far from a minor event.

Let me pose a question that hasn't been asked....if Orb had gotten the same ride/trip that Normandy Invasion did, and Normandy Invasion had gotten Orb's trip and ride, what do you think the outcome would have looked like?

I think Orb is a much better horse.

We can all guess all day long what would have happen. What if Will Take Charge hadn't been stopped cold? Would have he made a race out of it?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

I guess what I'm saying is that, for example, a 2:02 flat (for example) final time was not completely unreasonable for NI even considering the fractions of the race. That's not asking him to be Secretariat at all...just a little better caliber horse. If he was able to get him home in 2:02 flat, he wins by 4 lengths or so & everyone is on JC's jock. Instead, he gives the horse an opportunity to succeed.& he's the goat. One of the things I thought I learned on this board over the years from people like BTW was that it's mostly the horse & not so much the jockey. I guess I just don't see it as the gross blunder that everyone else seems to view it as...and I personally don't believe it cost NI the win.

I think a 2:02 flat final time, under the conditions would be totally unreasonable. I'm not big on speed figures but let's talk speed figures for a second just to make a point. Let's assume that Orb's Beyer of 104 is an accurate figure. You said you didn't see why NI couldn't have run 2:02 flat. A 2:02 flat would equate to about a 113 Beyer. Why would you expect NI to be able to run a 113 Beyer?

With regard to whether Javy's move was a "gross blunder", I guess it depends what your definition of "gross blunder" is. I think the majority of us think he cost the horse 2nd place. I don't know if that qualifies as a gross blunder.

[ninetoone]

If he was a special horse I think a 113 beyer would be reasonable. We didn't know if he was going to be that kind of horse until Saturday. ...and now we know.

[Seattleallstar]

Chad was better off leaving Jose Lezcano on the horse, Castellano in the Wood must was given some sense of false security on the horse that he thought would work in the Derby by moving earlier

[Seattleallstar]

plus notice how there is no official Chad Brown quote regarding the derby, unoffically they are not some happy people right now

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

If he was a special horse I think a 113 beyer would be reasonable. We didn't know if he was going to be that kind of horse until Saturday. ...and now we know.

Orb ran 2:02 4/5. Does that mean he's not a special horse? Did he need to run 2:02 flat to be a special horse?

I don't understand your logic at all. By the way, I think it is totally irrelevant how good of a horse NI is. That is not relevant to the conversation at all. What a jockey is supposed to do is to position his horse and to ride his horse in a way as to maximize that horse's finish position in the race. It doesn't matter how good the horse is. Just put the horse in the spot that will maximize his finish. That was not done with this horse.

I guess if you are a jockey and you are on a 1-9 shot that you think is the best by 10 lengths, then I could see some situations where making a premature move might make sense if you were in danger of otherwise getting boxed in. But Javy was not on a 1-9 shot and he was not in danger of getting boxed in.

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Orb ran 2:02 4/5. Does that mean he's not a special horse? Did he need to run 2:02 flat to be a special horse?

I don't understand your logic at all. By the way, I think it is totally irrelevant how good of a horse NI is. That is not relevant to the conversation at all. What a jockey is supposed to do is to position his horse and to ride his horse in a way as to maximize that horse's finish position in the race. It doesn't matter how good the horse is. Just put the horse in the spot that will maximize his finish. That was not done with this horse.

I guess if you are a jockey and you are on a 1-9 shot that you think is the best by 10 lengths, then I could see some situations where making a premature move might make sense if you were in danger of otherwise getting boxed in. But Javy was not on a 1-9 shot and he was not in danger of getting boxed in.

2:02 flat was just a random number. I think you're missing the point. Maybe I should have said 2:02 3/5 to better explain. As for whether or not Orb is special...IMO that remains to be seen. I hope so!

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Orb ran 2:02 4/5. Does that mean he's not a special horse? Did he need to run 2:02 flat to be a special horse?

I don't understand your logic at all. By the way, I think it is totally irrelevant how good of a horse NI is. That is not relevant to the conversation at all. What a jockey is supposed to do is to position his horse and to ride his horse in a way as to maximize that horse's finish position in the race. It doesn't matter how good the horse is. Just put the horse in the spot that will maximize his finish. That was not done with this horse.

I guess if you are a jockey and you are on a 1-9 shot that you think is the best by 10 lengths, then I could see some situations where making a premature move might make sense if you were in danger of otherwise getting boxed in. But Javy was not on a 1-9 shot and he was not in danger of getting boxed in.

I'll try this one last way. If NI manages to run that race in 2:02 3/5, he wins by a small margin, right?

Now are you saying that it's impossible that a horse that's not Secretariat could have done that, given his position at 6F? At a mile? If so, I disagree.

My contention is that JC didn't so much misjudge the pace as he did the ability of the horse under him.

I realize I'm in the minority here...no hard feelings though, I'm wearing my big boy pants tonight

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

If he was a special horse I think a 113 beyer would be reasonable. We didn't know if he was going to be that kind of horse until Saturday. ...and now we know.

I don't think we know yet whether NI is a special horse. What is your definition of a special horse? I think NI will win some graded stakes races before all is said and done.

If he runs in the Preakness I have no idea how he will do. He's not the sturdiest horse in the world. He doesn't carry a ton of weight. Those types of horses often times require more time between races. Coming back on only two weeks rest would be a tall task but he might be able to do it.

[art vanderlay]

If I had to take a shot and guess who moved to soon I would have to go with Mike Smith, right out of the gate.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Seattleallstar

plus notice how there is no official Chad Brown quote regarding the derby, unoffically they are not some happy people right now

What was wrong with his praise of Castallano in all the write ups post race? That seemed official enough for me.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I think Orb is a much better horse.

We can all guess all day long what would have happen. What if Will Take Charge hadn't been stopped cold? Would have he made a race out of it?

Based on the actual race, the first part is another indefensible position.

As for the second part, as much as it would have meant to me if he had won, I am guessing he would have had a hard time making the Super. But that's just a guess with no solid ground either way.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

I'll try this one last way. If NI manages to run that race in 2:02 3/5, he wins by a small margin, right?

Now are you saying that it's impossible that a horse that's not Secretariat could have done that, given his position at 6F? At a mile? If so, I disagree.

My contention is that JC didn't so much misjudge the pace as he did the ability of the horse under him.

I realize I'm in the minority here...no hard feelings though, I'm wearing my big boy pants tonight

NI lost the race by a little more than 3 1/2 lengths. What your'e saying is right. If NI had 4 lengths more ability (talent), he would have won. Yes, that is true. I don't know what that has to do with anything. You could say that about any bad ride. If a horse gets a bad ride and loses a race by 2 lengths, you could always say, "It wasn't the ride that cost the horse. If the horse had 2 1/2 lengths more ability, then he would have won any way." That is true I suppose but what kind of argument is that?

I couldn't tell you why Javy moved way too soon. Did he misjudge how fast they were going or did he misjudge how long his horse could sustain his run? Does it matter? He made a major miscalculation either way. I don't know why he moved too soon. I just know he moved too soon.

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

NI lost the race by a little more than 3 1/2 lengths. What your'e saying is right. If NI had 4 lengths more ability (talent), he would have won. Yes, that is true. I don't know what that has to do with anything. You could say that about any bad ride. If a horse gets a bad ride and loses a race by 2 lengths, you could always say, "It wasn't the ride that cost the horse. If the horse had 2 1/2 lengths more ability, then he would have won any way." That is true I suppose but what kind of argument is that?

I couldn't tell you why Javy moved way too soon. Did he misjudge how fast they were going or did he misjudge how long his horse could sustain his run? Does it matter? He made a major miscalculation either way. I don't know why he moved too soon. I just know he moved too soon.

I don't think I can lay it out any clearer than what I did in my last post that you quoted. You didn' t answer my 2nd question. Is it impossible for you to believe that NI could have run a 2:02 3/5 given his position and the time on the timer at a mile? I believe he could have, and that's why I don't think the crucifying of JC is warranted & I don't think it was a terrible ride at all, as many are saying. You are focusing on the jockey instead of the horse. I guess it comes down to whether you believe (based on the question above) whether or not the jockey asked the horse to do something completely unreasonable...in this case he was 1st at a mile @1:36.16, so finishing his last quarter in 26.73 or less would have won the race. I was OK with that decision & obviously you weren't. Whether or not the horse could have finished 2nd or not...who knows. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me anyway...I bet the horse to win & if I were Brown I'd ride JC back with no hesitation.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ninetoone

I don't think I can lay it out any clearer than what I did in my last post that you quoted. You didn' t answer my 2nd question. Is it impossible for you to believe that NI could have run a 2:02 3/5 given his position and the time on the timer at a mile? I believe he could have, and that's why I don't think the crucifying of JC is warranted & I don't think it was a terrible ride at all, as many are saying. You are focusing on the jockey instead of the horse. I guess it comes down to whether you believe (based on the question above) whether or not the jockey asked the horse to do something completely unreasonable...in this case he was 1st at a mile @1:36.16, so finishing his last quarter in 26.73 or less would have won the race. I was OK with that decision & obviously you weren't. Whether or not the horse could have finished 2nd or not...who knows. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me anyway...I bet the horse to win & if I were Brown I'd ride JC back with no hesitation.

I answered your question. The answer is "yes", it would have been possible for NI to run 2:02 3/5 with the trip he got, if he had about 4 lengths more ability (talent) than he has. You could say that about any horse that has trouble or gets a bad ride. If a horse has 2-3 lengths of trouble and loses a sprint race by 2 lengths, and the final time of the race was 1:09 3/5, I think most people would say, "That trip really cost that horse." I guess you would be the only one to say, "If that horse could have run 1:09 2/5, he would have won, even with the trouble." That is a strange argument, to say the least.

Every single handicapper, regardless of approach thinks NI was compromised by his ride. Some people may think the ride cost him a length. Others may think the ride cost him two lengths. Others may think the ride cost him 3 lengths or even more. It's debatable exactly how many lengths the ride cost him, but it's not debatable that he would have finished at least somewhat closer with a more patient ride. BTW thinks so, Cmorioles thinks so, Doug thinks so, Beyer thinks so (he mentioned it in his article), Ateam thinks so, Bigjag thinks so, NTamm thinks so, Port Conway thinks so, etc. It's hard to find anyone, regardless of their handicapping approach, that doesn't think the move was premature.

[Seattleallstar]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

What was wrong with his praise of Castallano in all the write ups post race? That seemed official enough for me.

Where at, I haven't read anything that has had much post race reaction

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I answered your question. The answer is "yes", it would have been possible for NI to run 2:02 3/5 with the trip he got, if he had about 4 lengths more ability (talent) than he has. You could say that about any horse that has trouble or gets a bad ride. If a horse has 2-3 lengths of trouble and loses a sprint race by 2 lengths, and the final time of the race was 1:09 3/5, I think most people would say, "That trip really cost that horse." I guess you would be the only one to say, "If that horse could have run 1:09 2/5, he would have won, even with the trouble." That is a strange argument, to say the least.

Every single handicapper, regardless of approach thinks NI was compromised by his ride. Some people may think the ride cost him a length. Others may think the ride cost him two lengths. Others may think the ride cost him 3 lengths or even more. It's debatable exactly how many lengths the ride cost him, but it's not debatable that he would have finished at least somewhat closer with a more patient ride. BTW thinks so, Cmorioles thinks so, Doug thinks so, Beyer thinks so (he mentioned it in his article), Ateam thinks so, Bigjag thinks so, NTamm thinks so, Port Conway thinks so, etc. It's hard to find anyone, regardless of their handicapping approach, that doesn't think the move was premature.

Sorry, I disagree. If you don't have trouble & you don't get a bad ride, sometimes you're still just not good enough to win. I appreciate all the names you mentioned, but not "every single handicapper" feels the same way. I already said I realize I'm in the minority here, and that's fine. You can keep saying the argument is strange & putting the dizzy symbols down if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that (I believe) the ride was OK.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Based on the actual race, the first part is another indefensible position.

As for the second part, as much as it would have meant to me if he had won, I am guessing he would have had a hard time making the Super. But that's just a guess with no solid ground either way.

Forums would not survive without a plethora of indefensible positions.


I will stand by my assertions.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Forums would not survive without a plethora of indefensible positions.


I will stand by my assertions.

I agree with you, but the issue is the following. Is NI a worthy challenger defined as a colt that with the right race dynamics can beat the Florida and Kentucky Derby winner? If so then the "much better" assesment is based on accomplishments instead of actual ability. Horses that are much better can overcome adverse trips and poor rider judgement. Has Orb done that? If not then much better has not been determined in minds of many

I think if you believe in NI you believe his abilty/potential is equal to Orb's. Like you I dont but what do I know and I could not be more subjective in my peference for the connections.

[Danzig]

was the move premature for normandy invasion, or just premature? would it have been a winning move on a better horse?
i'm not sure that NI is that good, and like chuck i don't think he's bred to go 10f.
did the ride really cost him, or was it the final nail in the coffin?