The more I look at the Belmont, the less I understand why so many here keep saying its a bad race to play.
Everyone crushed me for suggesting that the sheets aren\'t the most valuable tool for this one particular race (heaven forbid) so let\'s use a more classic analysis on the race, which by the way, leads to the same conclusion that I came to last week when I said that I was simply going to look for a fresh horse that is bred for the distance. I define \"fresh\" as not having run in both the derby and the preakness.
So, with this in mind, first of all, I think you can throw 3 of the top 4 horses out BOTH because of patterns and race spacing (or lack there of).
I believe a strong case can be made that Animal Kingdom is looking at an \"X\" race. He has the classic 0-2-x pattern with the Derby being his big jump up, then a slight regression in the Preakness and then a bigger move backward coming, especially given the 3rd race in 5 weeks. I played him in the Preakness but I don\'t like him at all in this race.
Shackleford is coming off a new top and also running his 3rd race in 5 weeks. He is also not bred to get this distance (huge difference in a 1 3/16ths and 1 1/2 in my view). He also has a bit of an alternating pattern going into this. The \"bad\" races are getting less bad each time but this potential alternating pattern is another reason to play against him
Mucho Macho Man reacted to the big effort as a 2 year old and the big Derby effort seemingly has the same impact given the BI in the lane in the Derby and the big bounce in the Preakness. He will take money with Ramon taking the mount but I can\'t see a good reason to argue that he gets back to his top on the sheets. I don\'t want to hear anymore about him continually losing his shoes as an excuse. First of all, it likely means he has bad feet as they have had special shoes on him. That\'s likely why he has reacted to the big efforts. Second of all, Blind Luck lost her shoe at the break (when she fell down) on Oaks Day. Really good horses overcome that kind of stuff and this one doesn\'t. I have no problem leaving him out of everything.
Nehro has to be used. He\'s fast, fresh, and bred for the distance. I made my point last week about him finishing 2nd alot so I will play him more heavily to finish 2nd but given I hate 3 out of the other top 4 choices, I can play him in both top spots and not have the ticket get out of control.
That leaves us with 4 other real contendes to pair with Nehro, all of whom will be some kind of price. Master of Hounds, Brilliant Speed, Santiva and Stay Thirsty. I know there are a few others running so I reserve the right to add them if they look ok when we see the final draw on Wed.
Of these 4 though, I will take a stand against MoH and Brilliant Speed. Churchill is very favorable to horses with turf action and Belmont isn\'t. Brilliant Speed in particular is coming off a big new top onto a surface that I don\'t expect him to like as much as Churchill. MAster of Hounds has the same surface issue but has also shipped all over the place in a short period of time and has never run that fast anyway so I will leave him out.
That leaves me with Nehro, Stay Thristy and Santiva. Both ST and Santiva have back figures to run to that put them in the picture and they are both fresh and bred for the distance (Stay Thirsty the best of all). Stay Thirsty is particularly insteresting because he gets Javier in the irons.
So, pending the draw and any late entrants or defections, I will go with a 3 horse box of Nehro, Stay Thirsty and Santiva and then key Nehro in first and second in a ticket which throws out the other 3 favorites but includes most of the rest of the field.
Hi Cove:
How do you come to the conclusion that Nehro is bred to get the distance? With a DI of 4.33 I would suggest not betting the rent money.
I was also of the opinion that the Belmont was not a good betting race until Neil Howard decided to enter Prime Cut. Now I\'m interested.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Joe B,
What is it about Prime Cut that interests you? He did not move forward in the PP, he\'s not fast now, his 2yo top was slow, and even if you give him his 3.50 pts of development to say a 4.00 or so, he\'s still not close. Plus he certainly is not bred for the distance (daddy worse at longer, Mommy a sprinter).
Good timing coming in? Howard?
Just curious. Not trying to beat up the pick (although I suppose I just did).
Brilliant Speed might take to Belmont.He\'s never been a fast works horse but he went quick on May 23rd.
Breezed in 1:00.11 the same day Rodman went 1:00.23 handily prepping for the Met.
Caixa Eletronica went handily in company with Christmas for Liam in 59.23 that day as well getting ready for the Met.
Albertrani in fact thought he went too quick and wanted to slow him down the next time he worked.
In general I like your approach.Belmont is a race for fresh horses and ones that might improve with added yardage.Playing this one with a 0 in mind for the winner.Nehro should be around it if he handles those extra furlongs.One or two horses can jump up in this race as well.Stay Thirsty won\'t pick his feet up if down on the inside in traffic.I like him a little if he draws away from the rail and he\'s trained well over the surface.
I\'ll substitute Brilliant Speed for Santiva.Think he\'s better bred on the bottom,he\'s training regularly over the strip, and if you match them up physically there isn\'t much to Santiva-he\'s a small colt.Big new top for BS no bigger than that of Nehro in the Derby and Albertrani can get these late blooming types.
Six of the last eleven Belmont winners have gone off double digit odds and jumped up.With that in mind I\'ll be keying Brilliant Speed on top with Nehro underneath him on my main tickets.Stay Thirsty a wildcard and even Isn\'t He Perfect should like 12 furlongs.Think he could improve and threaten the bottom of a ticket.
Hey Joe B.
I am absolutely not trying to be a jerk or anything when I say this but I don\'t know or care about dosage index.
when I look at whether a horse can get a mile and a half, I look back into the bottom side of the the horses pedigree.
His first dam sire won the PA Derby and was 2nd in the Queensplate, his 2nd dam sire won the Dwyer and his third dam sire, the great Damascus, won everything including the Remsen, Belmont, Preakness, etc.
With those stamina influences on the bottom side of his pedigree, I am not too worried about what his doasge index is.
Cov,
Congrats,Nice turf win. A great spot, those starter allowances, for that horse.Lobby with PJ Campo to write a few at the SPA.
On the Belmont,Santiva is the semi wise guy horse. One phony wide fig,hanging very late at 1 1/16th mile his total license.Santiva, a small horse to boot, to take to Big Sandy? tough for me to see.
I\'ll use MMM,worked like a tiger yesterday at Belmont, the skinny, tall long gaited grinder.True about the shoe thing but some are adversely affected, gave him a half mulligan for the lost shoe,last had zero to do with bouncing off top imo.Like Rajiv, but Ramon a plus.
AK looks as well as ever to those who saw him on Sunday,more than one horseman that saw him did not see any negatives, physically. Whats inside AK tough to know after tough Preakness race,derby was not. 0 2 X is a nice fairy tale that I used to read to my girls 20+ years ago.
Agree,Nehro cannot be dismissed,too consistent,flashed early in Derby, a solid indicator of improved power/development.Winning trainer to boot.
Brilliant Speed worked great a three occasions over the Belmont strip and will have one of the most dangerous jockeys in the world on his back Sat.Ugly derby trip has this one on my ticket. Never heard that CD dirt kind to turf action horses.Do you mean Barbaro and AK, they both ran well on other dirt tracks.
MOH a slow rat to date.May take euro-dollars after flashing mini late run in derby after crawling for this first mile.
Shack has a \"pair\" and will hit the board if speed is kind on Sat, it wasn\'t really on Preakness day.
Stay Thirsty an enigma, bred to be any kind, but only one good race at 3, tough read, sharp work yesterday at Belmont.
Shame Dialed In not running, the worst short priced horse in TC history.
Continued good luck.
Mike
thanks for the thoughts Mike,
In terms of turfy horses that ran well on the dirt at Churchill but not as well at other tracks, I put Big Brown, Barbaro, Super Saver, Street Sense and HArd Spun on the short list of horses that were bred for the turf that all ran their best dirt figures at CD. A few of them ran well on other dirt surfaces but I believe all of those horses top figs were at CD.
I think we may wind up adding AK, BS and MoH to that list after Saturday.
there are for sure other variables at work but this is an angle I think is worth considering.
Phil:
I don\'t agree with his number in Louisiana back in March. He was one fifth off of the track record and the internal splts and his finish were more impressive than the LA Derby front 3.
Last just a prep and dosage numbers suggest otherwise.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Covel:
While I am not certain of past generations or dosage with regard to AK, my visual
impression of him is that he will like distances of 12 furlongs and beyond.
Does his work over Belmont alter your opinion that 3 in 5 weeks may have drained
him?
With regards to MOH, he will be arriving at Belmont at the last possible moment,
giving him no time to acclimate. Downgrade chances and probably toss now.
You say that Brilliant Speed was aided by a CD surface that favors turf action.
Could be, but BS has trained extensively at Belmont for a trainer who has been
ice cold this year.
Santiva is NW2LT, would have to come to far forward and hard for me to consider
in the top spot.
Stay Thirsty has the pedigree but who was behind this entry -- trainer or owner?
Lone stakes win in dead of winter at AQ against not ready for prime time competition.
Shackleford -- I\'ve underrated him beginning with his Fla Derby and it cost me in
the Preakness. Kind of agree that the once around mile and a half is unique and
that Jesus Castanon will have plenty to think about, even with an anticipated (by
some)clear lead.
Monzon-- If I was playing verticals, I would toss him in, mostly in the 3rd and
4th spots. A race over the track in the Peter Pan and sired by Belmont winner
Thunder Gulch.
Big disappointment -- only 5 in the Brooklyn on Friday.
Hey Richie,
thanks for the thoughts buddy.
In terms of Animal Kingdom, I am just playing the percentages.
9 out of the 10 that have run in all three TC races since 2003 have failed to pair their top in the Belmont and throw in that he already had a slight move backward in the Preakness, I will take my chances.
He could beat me and it would be good for the game if he does but we are all doing this to beat favs and I think there are legit reasons to try and do that in this case.
In terms of Santiva and Stay Thirsty, I don\'t think either of them are great horses but neither were Drosselmeyer, DaTara or Jazil. Only thing they had in common was a pedigree to get the distance and coming in fresh.
Jim-- did you actually look at the sheets for BB, SS, Street Sense, and Hard Spun?
covelj70 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Richie,
>
> thanks for the thoughts buddy.
> In terms of Santiva and Stay Thirsty, I don\'t
> think either of them are great horses but neither
> were Drosselmeyer, DaTara or Jazil. Only thing
> they had in common was a pedigree to get the
> distance and coming in fresh.
Also common to Dross, DaTara and Jazil-- all were stabled at Belmont and trained
over the surface. Advantage Stay Thirsty and Brilliant Speed when looking for
value?
Jim
Food for thought. 11 of the past 25 Belmont winners ran in the Preakness. That\'s 44% of the winners while making up only 31% of the entries. 10 of those 11 winners ran in both the Derby and the Preakness. Touch Gold being the other who ran in the Lexington and Preakness.
Also Da\'Tara ran in the Barbaro Stake and Sarava in the Sir Barton both on the Preakness under-card. There were 5 winners who ran in the Derby and then skipped the Preakness and if you toss in Rags to Riches (Oaks) that number would be 6. Just don\'t think the history of the Belmont is in line with your fresh face theory.
thanks for the info but I look less at the winner percentage than I do at the figures and % of tops. For once I am writing something I know JB will agree with here.
There\'s no one in this race that is so much faster than the others that they can bouncrun off their top and win (like Afleet Alex did for example) so the likelihood of pairing a top is more important than win percentage and that likelihood is very low according to the last decade or so of runners.
JB, I am missing something in your point
All of these runners ran a new top in the Derby at CD (in the case of Street Sense, he had already run that number as a two year old at CD).
In the case of Super Saver, Barbaro, and Big Brown, they never ran those figures again to my knowledge.
Either way, at that time in their careers, the CD surface represented their best figures of their careers.
What am I missing?
BB had already run a huge # in Fla, ran a 1 point top in Ky. Super Saver also ran only a 1 point top. Street Sense paired his # at Pimlico. Hard Spun paired that number something like 5 more times on all surfaces.
Hi Jim:
Me thinks that the DI takes all of what you\'re saying and quantifies it.
I would agree, not an exact science. However, what cannot be ignored as far as dosage is concerned is that 20 of the last 25 Belmont winners not only were under the 4.0 Derby guideline, they were under 3.00.
You\'re a percentage guy from what I can tell and I\'m sure you would agree that 80 percent is an impressive number.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Covelj,
You are getting lots of feedback and a few \"shots\" from TGJB and Miff (board veterans - aka \"old guys\") :)
I will join you in the firing line. I agree with almost everything you wrote, which means you are likely not going to cash in the Belmont!
I won\'t go so far as to make the correlation between running well at Churchill in general and being \"turf bred\", but I will say that it seems to me that when the track at Churchill is cuppy or wet, like it was on Derby day, those type of horses run well. (Pioneer of the Nile, Brilliant Speed, Animal Kingdom and Master of Hounds come to mind). I will admit that I may be under-estimating Animal Kingdom based on his solid run in the Preakness, but I will be against him again on Saturday.
I am against Shackleford and Animal Kingdom for some of the same reasons you are. My \"short list\" is a bit deeper than yours though. I am looking for a dirt bred horse, relatively well rested, with a distance pedigree, with a \"puncher\'s chance\" (means he had to have at least one figure that would win) I do agree that Nehro is the horse to beat and I will be using Santiva and Stay Thirsty as you are. I am also going to throw in Monzon though. By Thunder Gulch, with a disappointing run in the Peter Pan, but he got a trip over the track and he has that \"one figure\" that fits.
As for Santiva, who will likely be my top key, I couldn\'t disagree more than calling his race in Louisiana \"phony wide\". He pressed the pace all the way around the track, one path wider than Mucho Macho Man, while spotting that one 6 pounds. If Mucho is/was a Triple Crown contender, Santiva is as well. I respect Kenneally, but really have to question the strategy of taking 6 weeks off after that race, then running polytrack 3 weeks before the Derby.
I think you could make a bit of an analogy with Santiva to Birdstone and Monzon to Drosselmeyer. Birdstone had a disappointing Bluegrass, with an excuse, then a mediocre but not awful Derby, followed by 5 weeks off, then a big Belmont. Birdstone\'s Bluegrass was that he was trapped down inside, while Santiva\'s excuse is the poly. Birdstone ran mid-pack in the Derby, with Santiva 6th. As for Monzon and Drosselmeyer, both had disappointing Peter Pan runs, but got a race over the track and are marginally competitive in the Belmont, on their best number.
I will also use Mucho Macho Man, if he continues to look good at Belmont over the next few days.
Just wondering, will the Super pay enough such that I need a Social Security card, when it comes in:
Santiva winning at 26-1
Stay Thirsty 2nd at 22-1
Monzon 3rd at 35-1
Mucho Macho Man 4th at 10-1
Jim
\"what cannot be ignored as far as dosage is concerned is that 20 of the last 25 Belmont winners not only were under the 4.0 Derby guideline, they were under 3.00.\"
What percentage of the starters were under 4.0?
Jimbo, this is both hysterical and insightful at the same time.
Monzon is an interesting one, glad you pointed him out.
I actually put in a Derby future bet on this guy after that one big figure earlier this year and he is bred for the dirt and distance so I think he is very usable at the kind of price we are looking at.
The undercard doesn\'t look bad at all with the True North coming up quite deep so there might be some money to be made in the verticals as well if we are right about any of these guys.
Jim,
Pressed? He went app 25 in that first quarter when he was \"losing ground\" too slow to be that relevant,imo. Check him hanging like a chanderlier last 5-6 jumps in that race at 1 1/16th mile.Phony wide, one fig wonder,might not like him in a NW 1x much less here.
Bring a wheelbarrel,in case your exotic hits, I\'ll help fill it up for a small fee. Good Luck!
Mike
One note on the Belmont. Slow slugs have won it in the past simply because they were able to make the trip, where faster ones could not.Last year Drosselmeyer, a slow slug supreme, won the Belmont by attrition getting the last quarter in like 26 secs.
Mike
Wrongly, you are right, but lately, it\'s the other way around.
Only one of the past nine Belmont winners ran in the Preakness (Afleet Alex).
Since 2002,
Preakness runners account for 11% of the Belmont winners (one) while making up 21 % of the entries (22).
Non-Preakness runners account for 89% of the Belmont winners (eight) while making up only 80% of the entries (87).
Da\'Tara and Sarava ran in the Preakness undercard, so maybe it\'s not having a fresh horse as much as the toll of running in the Preakness specifically.
Also, over that span, horses that ran in the Derby-Preakness are 50 percent out of the money in the Belmont (9 of 18). (and obviously 50 percent in the money).
Mike,
I think that is exactly the point that Covello and I are trying to make. I have little doubt that over most any distance Shackleford is better than all the horses I will be betting on Saturday. But I am willing to bet not at 1 1/2 miles. A horse that can stay relatively close to the pace and then continue to grind away in the stretch likely won\'t win the Derby or Preakness, but can win the Belmont. Drosselmayer is case in point. He didn\'t \"close\" last year, he grinded while First Dude slowed to a crawl.
Jim,
On that,we agree totally.If it\'s a war of attrition, a slow slug can get the money.Think that AK,Nehro,Shack and even MMM are pretty consistent runners, so the distance will have to get them all for a slow slug to win.
My invention better than yours.How can leave Joel out???
Mike
Rich:
A relevant question on its own, however the point was my argument against Nehro who has a 4.33.
While no one can argue against the fact that he is a talented 3yo, my gut (along with his DI and his final eight in Louisville) tells me that he is a poor play at 1 1/2, especially @ 7/2.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Wish Rosario was on a dirt horse. Not betting turf/poly horses on dry dirt tracks in Triple Crown races.
Brilliant Speed and Master of Hounds = Stately Victor, Monba, General Quarters, Dominican, Cowboy Cal, Pioneer of the Nile and Adriano.
All horses who ran well on poly or turf and couldn\'t stand up on dry dirt.
At least my invention has some decent dirt races.....(albeit not good enough to win nw/1.....)
7-2 on Nehro is a pipe dream.
5-2 sounds more like it....
Jimbo:
You\'re more likely to be right than wrong with the 5/2 prediction. I just can\'t see him. Should not have been in a dogfight for second after making the lead against that pace.
I saw Paul LoDuca from TVG at Monmouth last Friday. Brilliant Speed a popular choice over there along with MOH. Why the infatuation with late running turf horses??
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Joe B,
I also don\'t understand the affection for late running turf/poly horses, but it is pretty widespread, even on this board, even when the TG numbers don\'t really support them as contenders.
I guess the belief is that with the breed so \"speed oriented\" with barely any stamina in the dirt stallions, people are believing that turf/poly stayers can hold up better at 1 1/2 miles. I don\'t see any proof of it on dry dirt tracks, but I will be willing to bet that Master of Hounds is single digit odds on Saturday, and there is no way he should be a shorter price than some of the dirt longshots in the race IMHO.
As for Nehro, I am not negative on him, but \"hoping\" that all the development he has had this year makes him more likely for a backward move in the Belmont. (I say \"hope\" because I have no reason to believe it will). If we saw that Shackleford setting the extremely slow Derby pace and still packing it in, finishing 4th, didn\'t stop him from running huge in the Preakness, why should we hold against Nehro when Nakatani, sensing a slow pace, took this horse out of his game, and stalked that pace while extremely wide, only to be passed late by just Animal Kingdom, who apparently loved the drying out, cuppy, tiring track. Nehro lost a ton of ground, ran against his normal running style and still held off Mucho Macho Man. Now, since he did barely hold off Mucho Macho Man, and surely would NOT have held him off if the race were longer, is a good argument IMHO that Mucho Macho Man, at 10-1ish, is a pretty good play on Saturday relative to Nehro\'s 5-2 or 3-1. Putting Ramon up can only help this horse\'s chances, not to mention that the \"catbird\'s seat\", right behind Shackleford, is available, and Mucho Macho has enough tactical speed to take that seat.
Jimbo:
In general, I agree with your unwillingness to wager on turf/poly horses on dry dirt tracks. The Belmont may, however, be an exception given the quality and potential distance limitations of the so-called dirt horses. Additionally, although there are clear differences between tracks, I think there is a danger of putting too fine a point on the analysis when we try to distinguish between dirt tracks with unquantifiable differences in moisture content.
Albany
I might be way off on this, but doesn\'t Rasmussen change his Chef de Race classifications with some regularity thus changing horses\' DIs?
JR,
The Dosage is now \"backed into\" with changes after the fact.
Mike
Rasmussen, alas, is long gone. The chef-de-race listings remains Dr. Steve Roman\'s baby -- and a work in progress. Results dictate changes. Alydar was an obvious chef-de-race, but Strike The Gold was a dosage-ineligible Derby winner until the addition was made.
Good Lord...some of the people on this string are actually ignoring the sheets to find a Belmont winner...from Stay Thirsty to Monzon...excuse me? What\'s happened?
As I said before, if Irwin and Motion think their horse is ready, just settle back and enjoy the win. His workout was a tremendous move...for comparison think about Van Berg\'s training Alysheba up to the Belmont...the old \'long slow gallop\' approach. It has produced more losers than winners of this race. That\'s why Woody Stephens dominated it with speedy horses. He was a pain in the ass, but no fool.
Alm:
Do you read other people\'s posts or just skim them?
A lot of the posts I read had Stay Thirsty and especially Monzon filling out the
tris and supers.
Interesting chart from Steve Crist.Very few Belmont winners run the second half of the race(last 6f)faster than the first half.Guess if one of these slugs on Sat get home in 1.14 and change, they\'ll be tough assuming normal track speed.
First 6f Second 6f Final 2nd 6f vs. 1st 6f
.
2010 Drosselmeyer 1:15.45 1:16.12 2:31.57 0.67 slower
.
2009 Summer Bird 1:13.43 1:14.11 2:27.54 1.68 slower
.
2008 D\'Tara 1:12.90 1:16.75 2:29.65 3.85 slower
.
2007 Rags to Riches 1:15.68 1:13.06 2:28.74 2.62 FASTER
.
2006 Jazil 1:13.14 1:14.72 2:27.86 1.58 slower
.
2005 Afleet Alex 1:13.43 1:15.32 2:28.75 1.89 slower
.
2004 Birdstone 1:12.44 1:15.06 2:27.50 2.62 slower
.
2003 Empire Maker 1:13.68 1:14.58 2:28.26 0.90 slower
.
2002 Sarava 1:12.72 1:16.99 2;29.71 4.27 slower
.
2001 Point Given 1:11.95 1:14.61 2:26.56 2.66 slower
.
2000 Commendable 1:14.48 1:16.71 2:31.19 2.23 slower
.
1999 Lemon Drop Kid 1:12.68 1:15.20 2:27.88 2.52 slower
.
1998 Victory Gallop 1:14.80 1:14.20 2:29.00 0.60 FASTER
.
1997 Touch Gold 1:13.80 1:15.00 2:28.80 1.20 slower
.
1996 Editor\'s Note 1:12.60 1:16.20 2:28.80 3.60 slower
.
1995 Thunder Gulch 1:15.40 1:16.60 2:32.00 1.20 slower
.
1994 Tabasco Cat 1:11.40 1:15.40 2:26.80 4.00 slower
.
1993 Colonial Affair 1:14.40 1:15.40 2:29.80 1.00 slower
.
1992 A.P. Indy 1:12.20 1:13.80 2:26.00 1.60 slower
.
1991 Hansel 1:11.80 1:16.20 2:28.00 4.40 slower
.
1990 Go and Go 1:12.60 1:14.60 2:27.20 2.00 slower
.
1989 Easy Goer 1:11.80 1:14.20 2:26.00 2.40 slower
.
1988 Risen Star 1:12.00 1:14.40 2:26.40 2.40 slower
.
1987 Bet Twice 1:13.80 1:14.40 2:28.20 0.60 slower
.
1986 Danzig Connection 1:12.80 1:17.00 2:29.80 4.20 slower
.
1985 Creme Fraiche 1:12.20 1:14.80 2:27.00 2.60 slower
.
1984 Swale 1:13.60 1:13.60 2:27.20 SAME
.
1983 Caveat 1:13.80 1:14.00 2:27.80 0.20 slower
.
1982 Conquistador Cielo 1:12.00 1:16.20 2:28.20 4.20 slower
.
1981 Summing 1:14.20 1:14.80 2:29.00 0.60 slower
.
1980 Temperence Hill 1:15.80 1:14.00 2:29.80 1.80 FASTER
.
1979 Coastal 1:11.80 1:16.80 2:28.60 5.00 slower
.
1978 Affirmed 1:14.00 1:12.80 2:26.80 1.20 FASTER
.
1977 Seattle Slew 1:14.00 1:15.60 2:29.60 1.60 slower
.
1976 Bold Forbes 1:11.20 1:17.80 2:29.00 6.60 slower
.
1975 Avatar 1:13.20 1:15.00 2;28.20 1.80 slower
.
1974 Little Current 1;16.00 1:13.20 2:29.20 2.80 FASTER
.
1973 Secretariat 1:09.80 1:14.20 2:24.00 4.40 slower
.
1972 Riva Ridge 1:12.00 1:16.00 2:28.00 4.00 slower
.
1971 Pass Catcher 1:13.00 1:17.40 2:30.40 4.40 slower
.
Interesting that quite a few posters here like Animal Kingdom. There are not too many Derby winners on this list! HP
Alysheba ran without lasix.Pretty sure that had more to do with his flat race than how he was trained.
We know where Shack will be regardless of pace.Nehro has positional speed he won\'t be far back.Ditto for MMM given the 59 work.I\'d expect AK to be laying closer to the pace as well.This is gonna be a riders race-who moves when and how far Shack can take them the key.
Brilliant Speed can sit behind all that jockeying and punch in last similar to Summer Birds run in 2009.Got his speed work on May 23rd over the surface.The last two were for exercise.Or maybe he\'s another poly/turf horse that doesn\'t pick up his feet here.Paying to find out.
Tweet from DRF: \"Fun Formulator stat, unless you\'re Graham Motion. Last 5 yrs, he\'s had 28 starts in graded stakes w/ spacing of 21 days or less. He\'s 0-28.\"
Graham do like his spacing the way he likes it.
Any indication as to how many 2nds?
Finally a statistic that falls right into my lap and wallet ... He\'s due !!! Yikes!
I\'m confused. Every year there\'s a discussion on the Board about the tremendous toll that 3 grueling races in 5 weeks takes out of a 3 year old - the Belmont being the toughest. Can anyone who thinks AK is the most likely winner explain why they don\'t think he will bounce? (maybe the theory is he bounces, but still wins?) Here\'s a list of recent horses who had a shot at the TC and lost. I fully recognize that AK came 2nd in the Preakness, but at 30,000 feet, does that matter in determining whether to expect a bounce in the TC series? (I\'m asking). If AK\'s sheet looks like MTB - both won the KD, both came second in the Preakness, and MTB finished 3rd in the Belmont then...
Why is AK different?
I know JB has already posted about Borel\'s ride in the Belmont, but isn\'t that the same as \"stepping on a pin\"? I can\'t see playing AK to win. If he beats me than he beats me and maybe racing has it\'s next superstar, but I won\'t be playing it that way.
1997 Silver Charm 2nd (Touch Gold)
1998 Real Quiet 2nd (Victory Gallop)
1999 Charismatic 3rd (Lemon Drop Kid)
2002 War Emblem 8th (Sarava)
2003 Funny Cide 3rd (Empire Maker)
2004 Smarty Jones 2nd (Birdstone)
2008 Big Brown DNF (Da\'Tara)
I read the posts all right...for my part and I could be dead wrong, these 2 are not horses I would use in any way. They are problemmatic horses and I think it is a reach to expect them to do much. Stay Thirsty is a rooting interest for his owner...Monzon ran so badly, from my point of view, in his prep...against a group that was not particulary strong (OK, but not strong) that I place him in my Sway Away POS Award Winning category. If you think he can bump up fourth go for it. I think his entry is based on getting a program souvenier for his connections, which may not even have another one this good for the next 10 years.
Beginner:
Good question which leads to another question.
Are speed types more likely to bounce than those with an AK style of running? IMO, Shak is more likely to bounce than AK all other elements (# of races this year, spacing, 2yo campaign, top #, trainer) aside.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Shak and AK did all the running in the Preakness, the rest not too much. More juice out of those two than the others.Shak had the more gut wrenching trip, sent, contested and running all the way to the wire.Have to think Shak would be more prone to bounce than AK but thats pure speculation. Recuperative capability of every horse different.
Mike
I remember Chris McCarron being especially self critical of his ride on Alysheba that day.I think he almost ran over/into Gone West.--Jett
I\'ll tell you what, I\'ve been looking at sheets for past Belmonts and writing this one up, and I\'ve moved almost 180 degrees away from my original position. Not that I think it\'s a great betting race, I don\'t-- but I think it\'s a chaos race. The favorites are fastest, but man, I\'m not sure anybody\'s going to run well. Well, almost anybody...
Don\'t think the race is going in a big figure, certainly don\'t think multiple horses will run big.
Perret got the jump on him with Bet Twice. McCarron then ran his horse into a blind switch.
alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Monzon ran so badly, from my point of
> view, in his prep...against a group that was not
> particulary strong (OK, but not strong) that I
> place him in my Sway Away POS Award Winning
> category. If you think he can bump up fourth go
> for it. I think his entry is based on getting a
> program souvenier for his connections, which may
> not even have another one this good for the next
> 10 years.
The owners of Monzon, Sagamore Farm (now operated by Kevin Plank,
President of Under Armour), got a decent souvenir last November at
CD.
TGJB,
CAn you delete all the gratuitous Belmont talk? Alm decided that if Motion shows up the race is over, so I don\'t know what the rest of us jerks are talking about...
JB,
This was the main point of my original post on the Belmont that you yelled at me about. The Belmont is often (not always) chaos theory. It\'s seldom won by the fastest horse going in because of the distance and/or lack of spacing between races often means the fastest horse isn\'t going to run their number.
If the spacing and distance factors weren\'t such a big issue, we would have had alot more triple crown winners since many have won the first 2 legs.
There\'s a difference between that and saying sheets and/or sheets theory don\'t apply. It\'s because of sheets theory that I view things this way. If you mean it\'s not just about who\'s fast, I agree-- but that\'s the difference between sheets theory and just using speed figures.
As a horse owner myself I can assure you that that only emboldened them. My point is my point...I could name owner after owner, breeder after breeder and lots of trainers who do the same thing only to result in abject failure. The taste of glory only builds the taste for glory.
Hey, maybe you guys are right and an exceptionally slow horse will bump up for fourth. Seriously, I hope you win...I really do.
Hey, I only said that to be a wise guy, but after reading all of this, I am beginning to really like the horse.
I see zero value betting AK at 2/1 or 5/2. Reportedly a tired horse coming out of the Preakness, not finishing his feed the next day. While this is not completely unusual, it is never a good sign. Motion says he wants the horse closer to the pace and I think the 47 and change workout was intended to do that. Put a fork in him at the head of the stretch as he\'ll have nothing left for the drive. Shak runs back to the Derby and tires late. I like Nehro to run big and hope to get a price horse to run behind him.
I also don\'t see AK as a good bet...but I didn\'t see where Motion said that about the workout...his strategy is the right strategy at Belmont, that is laying close...can\'t do that or much else with a tired horse however. We will see.
Alm,
There are no horses in this triple crown series that qualify as anything close to \"special\" or \"very fast\". Animal Kingdom, to date, is the best, and his Derby was very good. That said, if he was that good, he should have went by Shackleford in the Preakness. He didn\'t and the trip was fine. (slow early horses often spot lengths).
Since there are no particularly fast horses, the statement about an \"exceptionally slow\" horse filling out the super doesn\'t make sense. Relative to the horses that will be bet on Saturday, there are only a couple of horses that are \"exceptionally slow\" and they aren\'t the ones being discussed in this thread. When you factor in that there are some legitimate reasons why the top ones might not fire their best shots on Saturday, this narrows the gap even further, and you are left with what it seems many of us are interpreting as a wide open or chaotic race. Horses like Santiva,Master of Hounds, Brilliant Speed, Stay Thirsty, etc. are not \"exceptionally slow\" in this race, whether you like them or not is your own prerogative.
In this string of comments I was referring specifically to Stay Thirsty and Monzon. I dislike their chances as much as I disliked Sway Away\'s chances in the Preakness, only to be \'talked\' into betting that one by a lot of Preakness posts that were similar to those above about ST and Mon. The really sad part and I accept full responsbility was the fact I threw out Shackleford to include Sway Away on several of my tickets. My bad.
Alm,
You could very well be right about Monzon and Stay Thirsty. They likely don\'t get a sniff. But at 30-1 on Monzon and 20-1 on Stay Thirsty, those of us that like him are using the old \"risk/reward\" equation, certainly not calling them the most likely horses to run well.
As for Sway Away, yep, he was awful in the Preakness. I liked and used him. And Was wrong. That happens a lot in this game, unfortunately.