Final Verdict ... Fog Is A Fraud

[blackthroatedwind]

Now he " didn't try ".

He was outrun.

I gotta say, I have enjoyed reading this thread, and am strongly on the side of the posters who claim he was never as good as his unearned reputation and is now being exposed. Hey, I give a lot of credit to his connections, he danced every dance last year ( save perhaps the Vosburgh ) and shipped back and forth across the country. He ran in all the big 3YO races and it is hardly his fault the competition sucked ( and sucked it did ). But, it is a very dangerous thing to evaluate horses by being overly result oriented.

The truth is out now and the Emporer has no clothes.

[Athletics005]

I think you have 6 options with the Fog:


1. Retire him due to injuries (sounds like he is not near 100%)

2. Continue to try him in G1 sprints, and try to overcome the extremely fast fractions.

3. Pick and choose easier graded spots, with smaller fields, likely get another win streak and look impressive like last year, but won't silence any skeptics.

4. Try the turf... his pedigree says he should handle it, and it may help with the injuries.

5. Strech him out, see what he can do at 8-8.5F when he is assured to have everything his own way on the front end. No longer any pressure to go the BC.

6. Give him one more start to fittingly go out a winner, knowing its his last, at Golden Gate called the 100k Lost in the Fog Stakes, and give the fans one last chance to appreciate one of the best bay area sprinters of all time showcasing his talent. (Hope Carthage does not show up).


While I don't think he was near as bad as he looked at Calder, it may be clearer now that he needs a softer early pace if he is going to look like he did last year. While this means he is not the greatest sprinter of all time, he certainly is a very solid horse who deserves all the credit in the world.


So, which option would you choose?

Originally Posted by Athletics005

Retirement a possibility for Lost in the Fog
By CHUCK DYBDAL
In the wake of Lost in the Fog's ninth-place finish Saturday in the Grade 2 Smile Sprint at Calder, trainer Greg Gilchrist said that he and owner Harry Aleo are giving thought to retiring the colt.

From my post on page 2 of this thread on Saturday, July 15 at 11:31pm ...

"Not gonna be a 'next out' ... they'll retire him while they still can round up some gullible investors to form a stallion syndicate. If they run him again ... they won't be able to con anyone. Look for the staged 'bone chips ... best interest of the horse' press conference by next week."

And from my post on page 3, Saturday, 11:52pm ...

"Lost Like A Fraud 'won' an Eclipse Award ... and he's from the Danzig branch of the Northern Dancer line ... and he's got Secretariat, Ribot, and Native Dancer in his pedigree ... that's enough to sweet-talk some eager, wealthy investors into buying into a syndicate. It won't be a $100 million dollar syndicate ... but if you can get $5 million or even $3 million ... that's a heckuva lot more than this fraud will ever win in ungraded stakes races at Golden Gate. Dontcha think? Yeah ... it'll be 'bone chips' and 'for the good of the horse' ... any day now."

I can see through these people like a laser beam through tissue paper. At least they're being a little more honest about it than Lying-Through-My-Nose-Tubes "Chappy" was with Smarty Jones ... and I applaud them for that.

[Rupert Pupkin]

"Maybe it’s you who needs to learn a bit more on evaluating horses when they race against weak fields. I was the one who wasn’t fooled by his wins over weak fields. Frankly this is so obvious I’m surprised that it is taking people so long to catch on."[/quote]

As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

"Maybe it’s you who needs to learn a bit more on evaluating horses when they race against weak fields. I was the one who wasn’t fooled by his wins over weak fields. Frankly this is so obvious I’m surprised that it is taking people so long to catch on."

As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.[/quote]

Rupe ... now I know why you're the King Of Comedy.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.

No disrespect intended, as regardless of your unnecessary boasts, you are obviously extremely knowledgable about racing. However, how exactly do you think your supposed respect in the industry bolsters your case for LITF? It seems to me if you felt your opinion, in this instance, stood well enough on its merits you wouldn't have had to have told us how respected you are in the game.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

LITF clearly did not run his race and was never himself. He is a much better horse than he showed this past weekend. I can't believe the arguments I am hearing that are saying this horse is a fraud when it is obvious that something was definitely bothering him. He may not be a great horse, but he is a good one. I hope that the connections can overcome whatever is troubling this horse. They've done right by him so far and will make the right decision.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

No disrespect intended, as regardless of your unnecessary boasts, you are obviously extremely knowledgable about racing. However, how exactly do you think your supposed respect in the industry bolsters your case for LITF? It seems to me if you felt your opinion, in this instance, stood well enough on its merits you wouldn't have had to have told us how respected you are in the game.

Again intending no disrespect .. somehow that post reminds me of the awful Shirley Temple version of "The Story Of Seabiscuit" ... where Barry Fitzgerald ... the feisty wee Irish "trainer" of Seabiscuit ... claims he can tell a good race horse "by lookin' 'im in the oye."

I don't think looking at a horse's stride is much more worthwhile than "lookin' 'im in the oye" ... because good horses come in all sizes, shapes, and strides ... from the mighty-mite Dark Mirage to the really mighty Forego.

The only sure way to tell if a horse is good ... is to put him on a track with other horses in a competitive race for a purse ... and see what happens.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

"Maybe it’s you who needs to learn a bit more on evaluating horses when they race against weak fields. I was the one who wasn’t fooled by his wins over weak fields. Frankly this is so obvious I’m surprised that it is taking people so long to catch on."

RP "As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.[/quote]

Not necessary to trot out your resume for me, it's tacky and also it doesn't mean that I'm not correct about LITF. When someone resorts to the resume I translate it to mean "I'm all out of arguements but look how great I am at these other things so I just have to be right." I'm not sure how all the details about your picking out young horses to purchase is relavent. I'm sure you're good at what you do.
I only question how good you are at handicapping sprint races because you do not seem able to even entertain the idea that LITF was going to have big trouble winning any G1 sprints against older horses. I've given you all kinds of reasons to demonstrate why this is, but honestly I figured it out mainly by watching him race. Great sprinters have to do things to win the tough races that LITF has never shown he can do. He has a rather one-dimensional style.
The reasoning you have offered is that he was possibly tired from the traveling and/or didn't fire. You also didn't respond to my last post which showed that he actually really did fire in recent races and consequently slowed down late. I guess that's when you decided to unfurl your resume.

I'll tell you what, if LITF does continue to race in sprints I will inform you before the race if he will fire or not. Won't that make me one of the greatest handicappers in history if I can predict correctly if a horse will fire or not?!
Maybe they'll start flying me around on private jets!! lol

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Again intending no disrespect .. somehow that post reminds me of the awful Shirley Temple version of "The Story Of Seabiscuit" ... where Barry Fitzgerald ... the feisty wee Irish "trainer" of Seabiscuit ... claims he can tell a good race horse "by lookin' 'im in the oye."

I don't think looking at a horse's stride is much more worthwhile than "lookin' 'im in the oye" ... because good horses come in all sizes, shapes, and strides ... from the mighty-mite Dark Mirage to the really mighty Forego.

The only sure way to tell if a horse is good ... is to put him on a track with other horses in a competitive race for a purse ... and see what happens.

I'll answer that since he hasn't and I can say from personal experience that your assessment is far from the reality. I don't have to see them race against other horses to tell if they are good...I just have to see them gallop and breeze. Astute horsemen can look them "in the face", their conformation, and their movement over the track to distinguish the good ones from the not so good. It is very difficult to explain because so many elements are involved. It takes years of experience in watching two year olds mature, judging movement and conformation, watching them race, and much, much more. Most of the two year olds that turn into great horses have a quality about them that distinguishes them from the other horses.

There are exceptions to some exceptions to this though...Seabiscuit is a prime example...God what an ugly gallop! But Smith saw it in his face. Just like Lava Man. You could see it before it showed up in his performances. I'll tell you one thing, Lava Man has more heart than any horse I have ever seen. I know this may sound weird, but I can feel it when I look at him, but, then again, all true horseman can.

Some other examples of great purchases based solely on movement, character, and how they breezed over the track were in Funny Cide and Showing Up, both of whom Barclay Tagg picked out. They weren't really expensive horses and it is not a mere coincidence that both of these horses ended up in his stable. He picked them because he knew what he was looking for and knew what he was doing. There are quite a few out there in this business that have that kind of ability such as Tagg, and the really good ones are treasured in this game.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

No disrespect intended, as regardless of your unnecessary boasts, you are obviously extremely knowledgable about racing. However, how exactly do you think your supposed respect in the industry bolsters your case for LITF? It seems to me if you felt your opinion, in this instance, stood well enough on its merits you wouldn't have had to have told us how respected you are in the game.

I wasn't saying that it proves that I am right about LITF. I was simply responding to Jim's comment that maybe I am not that good at judging horses who beat nobody. I was simply saying that that is not true. I am very good at judging a horse's abilty simply by watching the horse run. I can make a good judgement of a horse's ability by watching them work an 1/8th of a mile alone. That's much tougher than judging a horse's ability based on a maiden win. With LITF, it was much easier than that. We got to watch him run 10 times.
I agree with you that it is not good to boast and boasting can be obnoxious. However, there is a difference between boasting out of the blue and boasting to defend yourself. In fact, I think I can make a good argument that if you use your credentials to defend yourself, that is not boasting. For example, if a guy went to college at Harvard and he always brags about it, then that is boasting. But if a guy who went to Harvard is accused of being uneducated, I think it would be appropriate for him to say, "Of course I am educated, I went to Harvard." In that situation, I would not call that boasting. The guy is simply defending himself.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Not necessary to trot out your resume for me, it's tacky and also it doesn't mean that I'm not correct about LITF. When someone resorts to the resume I translate it to mean "I'm all out of arguements but look how great I am at these other things so I just have to be right."

Pupkin is the king of this.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.

Rupe ... now I know why you're the King Of Comedy.[/quote]
There are plenty of people on this board who know who I am including Steve. Everything I said in that post is true.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Again intending no disrespect .. somehow that post reminds me of the awful Shirley Temple version of "The Story Of Seabiscuit" ... where Barry Fitzgerald ... the feisty wee Irish "trainer" of Seabiscuit ... claims he can tell a good race horse "by lookin' 'im in the oye."

I don't think looking at a horse's stride is much more worthwhile than "lookin' 'im in the oye" ... because good horses come in all sizes, shapes, and strides ... from the mighty-mite Dark Mirage to the really mighty Forego.

The only sure way to tell if a horse is good ... is to put him on a track with other horses in a competitive race for a purse ... and see what happens.

That is completely untrue. You can totally tell which horses are good at the 2 year old sales if you know what you're looking at. There are certain things you can't tell. You can't tell how much heart a horse has. But you can make a good assessment of a horse's ability. Why do you think What a Song(who didn't have much pedigree) went for $1.8 million? It was because it was obvious that he could really run. He worked a quarter in :20 3/5 and he had a great way of moving. He was a slam dunk to be at least a half-way decent horse. I would have never paid anything close to that for him, but he could obviously run. He was easy to pick. That's why he went for so much money. The trick is not to pick one like him. The trick is to pick one that isn't so obvious, so you can get a bargain. Tim Ritchey picked Afleet Alex for $75,000. Now that is one to be proud of.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

RP "As I said before, I have no problem judging a horse's ability even off a maiden win. Practically every horse I have bought or have tried to buy privately was off a race where they pretty much beat nobody. I usually don't buy horses after they have won a stakes race. I usually buy horses off a maiden win and sometimes an allowance win. It's the way the horse moves that is the most important thing. I don't care who is behind them. There doesn't have to be anyone behind them. As I told you before, I can judge a horse's ability from watching them work alone. At the 2 year old sales, the horses don't work in company. They usually work either an 1/8th of a mile or a 1/4 of a mile alone. If I didn't have a great eye, people wouldn't fly me all over the country on private jets to pick out horses for them. My eye is as good as anyone's in the business. I don't think anyone's batting average is higher than mine when it comes to picking out huge winners to buy. I tried to buy both Roses in May and English Channel before either of them had ever won a stakes race. We tried to buy Wild Fit off of her maiden win. We were offering huge amounts of money for these horses too. We offered $800,000 for Wild Fit off her maiden win. We offered $700,000 for English Channel off an allowance win and $1 million for Roses in May off an allowance win. These horses beat nobody in the races I tried to buy them off, yet we had no problem offering huge money for these horses because I was extremely confident in the ability off all three of these horses. I didn't look at any pace figures either. I am one of the only people in the business who gets a free 10% ownership in every horse I select. It must be beacuse I'm a nice guy.

Not necessary to trot out your resume for me, it's tacky and also it doesn't mean that I'm not correct about LITF. When someone resorts to the resume I translate it to mean "I'm all out of arguements but look how great I am at these other things so I just have to be right." I'm not sure how all the details about your picking out young horses to purchase is relavent. I'm sure you're good at what you do.
I only question how good you are at handicapping sprint races because you do not seem able to even entertain the idea that LITF was going to have big trouble winning any G1 sprints against older horses. I've given you all kinds of reasons to demonstrate why this is, but honestly I figured it out mainly by watching him race. Great sprinters have to do things to win the tough races that LITF has never shown he can do. He has a rather one-dimensional style.
The reasoning you have offered is that he was possibly tired from the traveling and/or didn't fire. You also didn't respond to my last post which showed that he actually really did fire in recent races and consequently slowed down late. I guess that's when you decided to unfurl your resume.

I'll tell you what, if LITF does continue to race in sprints I will inform you before the race if he will fire or not. Won't that make me one of the greatest handicappers in history if I can predict correctly if a horse will fire or not?!
Maybe they'll start flying me around on private jets!! lol[/quote]
I agree with you. My resume does not mean that you are wrong about LITF. I am certainly not right every time. With regard to your pace figures about LITF, I really can't comment. I don't use pace figures. However, I would imagine that many of the other speed figures and sheet numbers contradict what you are saying. I don't know that for sure but I am just guessing that. If LITF did not have the numbers to compete with the good sprinters, I'm sure we all would have heard something about that.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I'll answer that since he hasn't and I can say from personal experience that your assessment is far from the reality. I don't have to see them race against other horses to tell if they are good...I just have to see them gallop and breeze. Astute horsemen can look them "in the face", their conformation, and their movement over the track to distinguish the good ones from the not so good. It is very difficult to explain because so many elements are involved. It takes years of experience in watching two year olds mature, judging movement and conformation, watching them race, and much, much more. Most of the two year olds that turn into great horses have a quality about them that distinguishes them from the other horses.

There are exceptions to some exceptions to this though...Seabiscuit is a prime example...God what an ugly gallop! But Smith saw it in his face. Just like Lava Man. You could see it before it showed up in his performances. I'll tell you one thing, Lava Man has more heart than any horse I have ever seen. I know this may sound weird, but I can feel it when I look at him, but, then again, all true horseman can.

Some other examples of great purchases based solely on movement, character, and how they breezed over the track were in Funny Cide and Showing Up, both of whom Barclay Tagg picked out. They weren't really expensive horses and it is not a mere coincidence that both of these horses ended up in his stable. He picked them because he knew what he was looking for and knew what he was doing. There are quite a few out there in this business that have that kind of ability such as Tagg, and the really good ones are treasured in this game.

Jessica is 100% correct. I don't know about the part of looking a horse in the eye. I have no ability to do that. It's possible that some people might be able to do that. Some people make the mistake of thinking that just because they can't do something, that it can't be done. I can't tell anything from looking a horse in the eye but I guess it's possible that some people may have some ability to do that. But even if someone can get information from looking a horse in the eye, I highly doubt that this would be nearly as accurate of a method as watching a horse work out. It's not that difficult to judge a horse if you know what you're doing, if you can watch them run full-speed like they do at the sales.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Pupkin is the king of this.

Sometimes trotting out the resume is signicant info. It definitely is in Rupert's case. I was initially highly skeptical that Rupert's skills at evaluating a horse's motion would translate to handicapping success, but I am a big believer now.

I recently posted that I almost never bet maiden races, especially if there are first-timers in the race. The exception is if Rupert likes a first- or second-timer in a race. That by itself is enough for me to make a bet. I don't even look at the form. And I am someone who refuses to make a bet unless I have good reason to think I have an edge.

--Dunbar

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Sometimes trotting out the resume is signicant info. It definitely is in Rupert's case. I was initially highly skeptical that Rupert's skills at evaluating a horse's motion would translate to handicapping success, but I am a big believer now.

I recently posted that I almost never bet maiden races, especially if there are first-timers in the race. The exception is if Rupert likes a first- or second-timer in a race. That by itself is enough for me to make a bet. I don't even look at the form. And I am someone who refuses to make a bet unless I have good reason to think I have an edge.

--Dunbar

Thanks for the kind words Dunbar. I take it as a real compliment coming from you because I respect you as one of the most knowledgable people I have ever known when it comes to professional gambling. I look forward to meeting you in person one day.

Originally Posted by Athletics005

I think you have 6 options with the Fog:


1. Retire him due to injuries (sounds like he is not near 100%)

2. Continue to try him in G1 sprints, and try to overcome the extremely fast fractions.

3. Pick and choose easier graded spots, with smaller fields, likely get another win streak and look impressive like last year, but won't silence any skeptics.

4. Try the turf... his pedigree says he should handle it, and it may help with the injuries.

5. Strech him out, see what he can do at 8-8.5F when he is assured to have everything his own way on the front end. No longer any pressure to go the BC.

6. Give him one more start to fittingly go out a winner, knowing its his last, at Golden Gate called the 100k Lost in the Fog Stakes, and give the fans one last chance to appreciate one of the best bay area sprinters of all time showcasing his talent. (Hope Carthage does not show up).


While I don't think he was near as bad as he looked at Calder, it may be clearer now that he needs a softer early pace if he is going to look like he did last year. While this means he is not the greatest sprinter of all time, he certainly is a very solid horse who deserves all the credit in the world.


So, which option would you choose?

OaklandA's.. I guess you have gone to the LITF well one too many times (either that, or you need more options). I will go with Door No. 3, however, it sure sounds like retirement is next on his dance card. Hope you get to see him win one more in the Bay Area, I really do.

Ez

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I'll answer that since he hasn't and I can say from personal experience that your assessment is far from the reality. I don't have to see them race against other horses to tell if they are good...I just have to see them gallop and breeze. Astute horsemen can look them "in the face", their conformation, and their movement over the track to distinguish the good ones from the not so good.

Hmmm ... yes, I said "hmmm" ... then ...

... then how come 90% of all the high-priced yearlings that these "astute" horsemen recommend ... turn out to be garbage?

Once again ... I say, "hmmmm .... "