Not to gloat, he was one of my Oaks/Derby plays, but I\'m surprised he was so disrespected on this board. My reasons were:
1. his speed and pace figure from his last race were the highest in the field and that race was run like a dirt race.
2. Mike Welsch\'s workout reports.
3. The enlightening study posted, on this site concerning herd running tendencies and peculiarities.
4. his odds
joekay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not to gloat, he was one of my Oaks/Derby plays,
> but I\'m surprised he was so disrespected on this
> board. My reasons were:
>
> 1. his speed and pace figure from his last race
> were the highest in the field and that race was
> run like a dirt race.
>
> 2. Mike Welsch\'s workout reports.
>
> 3. The enlightening study posted, on this site
> concerning herd running tendencies and
> peculiarities.
>
> 4. his odds
Uhh..I don\'t think any of those things are on the sheets..
Why were you skeptical of the GP numbers given out this spring?
JR, I assume you\'re referring to an earlier post. I\'m not skeptical of the GP numbers. It\'s just that I don\'t think most horses, especially speed horses, can replicate those figs on another track. I think the speed of the track carries them.
Lost Cause (by the way,I\'m the guy with the Belmont Stakes ticket ), agreed, I\'m not relying solely on TG. The numbers are too good and they definitely affect the prices; that\'s why I think you need other sources to get an edge, like pace, Welsch, visuals and the valuable insights on this board.
I thought the insights provided by the \" horse psychologist \" were mind opening and I think AK\'s intelligence and adaptability will prove to be just as valuable as his physical prowess.
I thought that\'s what you meant. I enjoyed the GP meet this year. They had some great cards - full fields, plenty of turf races and very little rain. But I think there was a speed bias on both grass and dirt and I\'m skeptical of those front runners ability to duplicate that form over different tracks.