JB,
After Ashado won did you change your opinion on STown? If so, the superfecta is possible - agree or disagree?
After the first two races my questions about how the Northern horses were running were answered, and Ashado indicated the Pletcher horses might be okay, although given the weight and ground it was clear she did not run a top. But it would have been very, very hard for me to use Speightstown under any circumstances-- if I upgraded his chances I also had to upgrade Frankel, Mitchell and the other Northern horses.
This, by the way, was a real problem in doing the analysis, as opposed to the seminar. The analysis has to be concise (3 1/2 minutes total on the 900#), and the picks can\'t be if/then. I couldn\'t really say, \"if the the move-up horses are running, bet...\"
The biggest questions about this BC, by the way, concern those issues that John Chance raised here Sunday. I didn\'t know anybody who was on the BC backstretch this year, and I would very much like to know how tight security was, and what exactly they did. If indeed it was tight, and if some of us are right in thinking that some things happened anyway, the issue of detention barns is a complete irrelevency, because race day medication is not the issue. Mall? Anybody?
TGJB,
What things do you think happened anyway? Do you mean GZ was juiced to run that lights out race or that Pletcher had a bag of nutrients.Curious.
I mean that there are some trainers who have been moving up horses, which most of us agree about, but they haven\'t been able to get them to run at the BC. This year a number of them did, as John pointed out.
If I knew how, the conversation would not be taking place here.
JB,
Can\'t you rationalize the races on BC day without the \"juice\" angle?
Ashado ran a nice race, got a perfect trip from Johnny V., and ran down a pretty mediocre field. No \"juice\" necessary.
Speightstown (in hindsight), may not have taken to the \"cuppy\" track in his last or was not \"wound tight\" by Pletcher, knowing the BC was the next race. He got another \"saving ground\" trip and may not have run his top either, despite winning. The fact that Matt and Bwana were 3rd/4th makes me think that the race may have fallen apart.
Ghostzapper was the best horse going in, on your figures and alson on Beyers and Ragozin. He got a softer lead than expected and ran to his numbers (or regressed and still won - you tell me)
The other Frankel\'s certainly didn\'t run well. The two F&M turfs weren\'t fast going in and didn\'t run fast. Midas Eyes and Cajun Beat didn\' run big either. I saw your post about doing quick figures on each horse and with ground loss you thought they ran \"ok\". I don\'t know if your official figure will show it, but if you come up with a negative 3.5 for Midas Eyes in that race, it would be a shock.
So, one of Frankel\'s horses ran to his figures and two of Pletcher\'s got great rides in mediocre fields.
It is \"believable\" to me, without any other explanation.
You don\'t buy it?
Without going into specific horses, what I\'m saying is this: there are horses trained by certain trainers and treated by some vets who run numbers throughout the year, but which in the past have been unable to run those numbers at the BC. Some of us suspect that is why a lot of horses didn\'t show up. This year, many of those horses ran their races.