Beyer: Espinoza's ride could have cost Chrome Crown

[Benny]

Beyer agrees with Moss ; CC should have been sent.

http://www.drf.com/news/beyer-espino...e-triple-crown

[Stickhorse]

I'm surprised that Beyer would say that.

I would have guessed he'd be in the camp that Chrome wasn't fast enough and he just ran his race.

More than anything maybe Victor had too much confidence in the horse.

[Danzig]

i'm not sure that chrome should have been sent-there's no way he'd have been left alone to set the pace, so then espinoza would have been questioned for sending.
the only thing i was concerned about was him opting to go four wide all the way around the turn. how much ground was lost doing that?

[Calzone Lord]

It was the textbook Jerry Bailey ride, at Belmont.

He put him in the pocket, got the horse to relax, and gradually worked out his way out for a clear run in the stretch.

When you're in the pocket like that, you're covered up and you're not taking much dirt in the face. The dirt doesn't get up high enough.

Obviously, I agree that he should have tried to make the lead. However, he wasn't exactly pulling his way to the front. He wasn't so sharp after the break. And, had he made the lead, he ran the risk of getting run at in-waves like other horses going for a triple crown have.

It was a trip that a horse who is good enough should handle.

It's not exactly like he took a ton of dirt in his face, like in the California race last year, where he blew the break and got beat:




Obviously, his trip could have been much easier if he made the lead and they let him relax like they did for Commissioner. But, it's really hard to say that the trip beat him. That was sort of the generic, text-book Belmont trip.

[Danzig]

agree, doug. i know moss said 'he doesn't like dirt' but he wasn't far enough back to be pelted with kickback.

he didn't win, and nothing can change it. he and victor did their best, it wasn't enough.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Has Violette or Ortiz commented on Samraat's ride? Was the horse off, or did they decide that on that particular day he'd be better off as a deep closer rather than the projected lone speed where he could have controlled the pace?

Easy to say now that CC should have been closer, but realistically, no one knows how the break and subsequent injury (however superficial it may or may not be) affected Espinoza's ability to put the horse in a more opportune position.

It would be refreshing to see DRF focus on the tangibles that affected the outcome rather than inane speculation.

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Has Violette or Ortiz commented on Samraat's ride? Was the horse off, or did they decide that on that particular day he'd be better off as a deep closer rather than the projected lone speed where he could have controlled the pace?

Easy to say now that CC should have been closer, but realistically, no one knows how the break and subsequent injury (however superficial it may or may not be) affected Espinoza's ability to put the horse in a more opportune position.

It would be refreshing to see DRF focus on the tangibles that affected the outcome rather than inane speculation.

I was wondering the same thing about Samraat. Shocked to see him so far back.

[Mack]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Has Violette or Ortiz commented on Samraat's ride? Was the horse off, or did they decide that on that particular day he'd be better off as a deep closer rather than the projected lone speed where he could have controlled the pace?

The ride on Samraat was incredibly frustrating. He broke incredibly well and then he closed extremely well at the finish. Given how gutty he finishes, I'd have liked to see what he could have done up on that soft pace.

[Benny]

Originally Posted by golfer

I was wondering the same thing about Samraat. Shocked to see him so far back.

Make that 3 , me too, I was thinking he would be an important early factor and a key to the race. Didn't see Commissioner as a pace factor at all, hand it to Byk for seeing him.

[Mack]

Originally Posted by Benny

Make that 3 , me too, I was thinking he would be an important early factor and a key to the race. Didn't see Commissioner as a pace factor at all, hand it to Byk for seeing him.

And I'd bet Steve didn't expect Commissioner to be up on the pace. Rather he'd be the type of horse that would grind out those 24-25s quarters and pick up the faster pacers at the end.

(and I guess he did grind out those qtrs, he just did it on the front!)

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

It was the textbook Jerry Bailey ride, at Belmont.

He put him in the pocket, got the horse to relax, and gradually worked out his way out for a clear run in the stretch.

When you're in the pocket like that, you're covered up and you're not taking much dirt in the face. The dirt doesn't get up high enough.

Obviously, I agree that he should have tried to make the lead. However, he wasn't exactly pulling his way to the front. He wasn't so sharp after the break. And, had he made the lead, he ran the risk of getting run at in-waves like other horses going for a triple crown have.

It was a trip that a horse who is good enough should handle.

It's not exactly like he took a ton of dirt in his face, like in the California race last year, where he blew the break and got beat:




Obviously, his trip could have been much easier if he made the lead and they let him relax like they did for Commissioner. But, it's really hard to say that the trip beat him. That was sort of the generic, text-book Belmont trip.

Very well said, I totally agree. If he was good enough, Espinoza gave him every chance to win with that trip.

[letswastemoney]

Originally Posted by Mack

The ride on Samraat was incredibly frustrating. He broke incredibly well and then he closed extremely well at the finish. Given how gutty he finishes, I'd have liked to see what he could have done up on that soft pace.

It was reminiscent of the ride Jose Ortiz gave speed horse Itsagoodtendollars last winter in a claiming race at Aqueduct. I thought he'd have learned, as I bet on Samraat.

[Indian Charlie]

Isn't it pretty obvious that with that pace on that track that day he should have been in front early?

He never looked good though, which leads me to believe the biggest issue was the foot.

It took a few things to happen for this horse to lose to these, and they did happen.

[ontheoutside]

he couldnt have asked for a better trip inside until top swing out 3 wide turning for home'
he was just empty period
maybe ankle had something to do that he had no explosion like last 2

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Isn't it pretty obvious that with that pace on that track that day he should have been in front early?

He never looked good though, which leads me to believe the biggest issue was the foot.

It took a few things to happen for this horse to lose to these, and they did happen.

I didn't think so either and it wasn't the "he doesn't want to be behind horses" look.

[ateamstupid]

Anyone blaming Espinoza for Chrome's loss is completely grasping at straws. He saved ground on the first turn, had zero significant traffic trouble and gave his horse a clear shot to reel in the leaders in the stretch. The horse wasn't good enough to get it done.

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

It took a few things to happen for this horse to lose to these, and they did happen.

I thought he was the lock of the century?!

[JohnGalt1]

I thought he ran well, finishing only 1 3/4 lengths behind the winner, for a horse with a bloody gash in his foot.

[ScottJ]

Beyer's article does represent one view, but I had a slightly different take on Victor Espinoza's ride that has not been discussed : If you (as Espinoza did) decide to tuck after the opening quarter, what do you do after that point? As they headed up the backstretch, I was sure that Espinoza had sufficient horse to sit the pocket and pick a seam coming to the head of the stretch. Yes, this was a risky strategy, but it was how to play the pocket trip at Belmont once you decide to relinquish the lead.

Instead, my view was that the race was lost heading into the far turn. With my cheering, I implored Victor to stay inside. Instead, he swung four wide heading into the far turn losing a great deal of momentum in the process.

Now, was that a deciding factor? I am not sure - the Trakus data shows Tonalist running 8081 feet with every other competitor running less distance (which was a shocker to me) including California Chrome (-38), Commissioner (-67), Medal Count (-64), and Wicked Strong (-18).

[-BT-]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Has Violette or Ortiz commented on Samraat's ride? Was the horse off, or did they decide that on that particular day he'd be better off as a deep closer rather than the projected lone speed where he could have controlled the pace?

Easy to say now that CC should have been closer, but realistically, no one knows how the break and subsequent injury (however superficial it may or may not be) affected Espinoza's ability to put the horse in a more opportune position.

It would be refreshing to see DRF focus on the tangibles that affected the outcome rather than inane speculation.

yeah, if anyone should be question rides in that race, people should definitely take a look at Ortiz. No urgency what so ever to get near the lead, makes what i thought was a huge move going into the stretch, gets to the top of the lane and he nose dives the horse to the rail while entering the stretch 6 wide. I'm not saying he was winning, but after a big move why not continue outside

-bt-

[Aly-Sheba]

How many races has Beyer and Moss rode in, compared to Bailey? I will take Bailey's opinion in that spot. The ride was fine, he was tired from the 3 races and got beat less then 2 lengths. I thought he ran great in defeat!!