Any real reason to be playing Uncle Mo at odds of something like 3-2 with 2 slow 3YO races and 6 average works since the sickness?
His 2YO form seems like 2 years ago. Flashpoint did not draw well but based on 3YO form he should roast Uncle Mo and hopefully end this crusade that Mo is some sort of relevant runner this season. Please win a Graded Stake first....
Mo is currently 3/5, so no thanks. I have to like both Flashpoint at 9/2 and Runflatout at 12-1. Think I will bet those two with ROI in the Travers in a double.
See nothing wrong with the 5,6,8 at 18-1,33-1,17-1 so I\'ll use them with the 4,7 in tris. Hope the others bounce. good luck
Mo , much best.
Calebs, Maragh , seconditis lately, absolutely classic ride.
Perfect set up, no excuse!
First off the layoff, Mo ran great near the speed and lost by a nostril, and should have a good forward move off that. Hope that\'s what we get to see this fall. He doesn\'t even look like he\'s matured physically yet.
What about the drifting in?
Have to see how he walks out of the stall tomorrow. They can drift because something is chronically or newly sore or injured, they are weak on one side (muscle-weak, one-sided, crooked), they are simply leg-weary/tired, the jock is unbalanced a bit in the stretch (they all ride with left stirrup longer) and they are moving over under the jock\'s weight, moving away from the whip, away from the crowd, trying to find the rail as they are taught to do in the am when they gallop (they gallop in the middle and drop to the rail to work, so it\'s instinct to go to the rail).
And I\'m sure there\'s more than that
Just like you and I, acute injuries are painful and swell up immediately, and other insidious things don\'t hurt until the next day.
The race got a 106 Beyer....the best Fig on the Card! Mo had a right to be tired and ran very very well, I thought. Better tham he ran is how he looked. He just didnt look like much of a 3YO Physically in the Spring! But I thought he did yesterday!
The Factor just ran really good in the Pat o\'Brien. Seems to have settled down a lot more early in his races than he was doing in the Spring also. These two may Meet somewhere and it would be interesting.....
The Factor looked awesome.
Uncle Mo will get a good figure, because he was 3w or 4w on the turn and they ran fast, but IMO he didn\'t run that good of a race. He got a nice trip off the hotly contested pace and then had a move to assume the lead. Caleb\'s Posse is far from a world-beater. Losing to him isnot something Uncle Moe is supposed to do, if he was truly \"right\".
The Factor, on the other hand, will likely get a worse figure than Uncle Moe, but to me ran awesome. Got outsprinted out of the gate by an extremely good sprinter in SMiling Tiger, relaxed very well, inside of that one, then put him away fairly easily. After briefly looking vulnerable to the closers, he continued on and even slightly widened late. I don\'t know what he ran, but he has to be the favorite for the BC Sprint.
So let me get this right.
If Caleb doesn\'t fire and Mo wins by daylight, then Mo is good, but not if he gets nosed out by a horse who ran big and saved ground on the turn, where the rail looked juiced vs Mo\'s extra wide trip.
Is that it?
Mo lost by a nose and ran very well. He should move forward off that in a big way. That was first off a layoff, three-year-old, off only 5 works. Nice to see the talent is still there - now lets see what he can really do.
Boscar,
Do you remember thinking the same thing when Rachel lost by a neck at Churchill Downs to the Mott horse (Unrivaled Belle), and then again when she lost at 1 1/4 to the McGaughey filly? (TGJB posted the same thing here, saying if UB didn\'t fire, and Rachel won by 7, nobody would question her).
The point is that she did lose and so did Moe.
Same story, different year.
Lots of people on this board,including the host, insisted Rachel was the same in her 4 year old year, when she kept losing. Finally, even the connections realized she wasn\'t and retired her.
Not saying they should retire Uncle Moe, but what I am saying is that he tripped out in the race and got beat by a relatively mediocre sprinter in Caleb\'s Posse. At least RAchel lost to a future Eclipse Award winner. I don\'t think we will be saying that about Caleb\'s Posse.
Glass half full or half empty re MO?
The layoff from reported illness, had \"work\" over the winter, tough 7f distance first back are the pluses for that performance(Beyer 106, a minus TG -2ish if JB agrees)
Getting run down by Calebs Posse off a perfect set up/trip while wandering to the fence are all minuses.Was he stressing off a limb or just a little tired first time back?
Maybe not the second coming he appeared to be at this point.Supposedly sounder than he has ever been and a few days following the race could speak volumes about his future. Tough race off a long layoff can be a recipe for disaster.
Tricky day with 1st race garbage can getting 7f in 1.22 flat, unimaginable when looking at later dirt races at graded stakes level.No weather and maintenance consistent so the conclusion will be that the dirt track just got slower as the day went on. Travers raw time pathetic and will get a dose of creative license with no other routes on the day.
Wish Mo\'s nose was a few inches longer!!
Mike
no, I do not.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boscar,
>
> Do you remember thinking the same thing when
> Rachel lost by a neck at Churchill Downs to the
> Mott horse (Unrivaled Belle), and then again when
> she lost at 1 1/4 to the McGaughey filly? (TGJB
> posted the same thing here, saying if UB didn\'t
> fire, and Rachel won by 7, nobody would question
> her).
>
> The point is that she did lose and so did Moe.
>
> Same story, different year.
>
> Lots of people on this board,including the host,
> insisted Rachel was the same in her 4 year old
> year, when she kept losing. Finally, even the
> connections realized she wasn\'t and retired her.
>
>
> Not saying they should retire Uncle Moe, but what
> I am saying is that he tripped out in the race and
> got beat by a relatively mediocre sprinter in
> Caleb\'s Posse. At least RAchel lost to a future
> Eclipse Award winner. I don\'t think we will be
> saying that about Caleb\'s Posse.
My comments on this race are elsewhere on the site and basically I agree Uncle Mo could have used this race. However, you\'re going to hear from Caleb\'s Posse again...this is a developing sprinter of real quality. He had been miscast by his previous trainer, trying to stretch him out. It\'s really no big deal, but Caleb\'s Posse was my best bet of the day...maybe they can really crank him and go for the BC Sprint. Don\'t be surprised.
So much for the bashing by amateurs. Yeah, I know, it was only a 4 horse race, practically a morning workout.
Physically he looks much much better than he did this Spring. Like a Real Mature horse. I doubt he would have beaten Tizway in the Met today. Crown him King if you want, I just want to see more before i start calling one of the alltime greats like so many are now.....
Boscar \"The Amateur\" Obarra,
He won a 4 horse race on a loose lead, with a slow pace, on a track with a heavy speed bias. Settle down a bit...
Check back and repost after the Breeders Cup.
I think we have an instant (tape delayed) replay of the \"Zenyatta ain\'t really a good horse\" fetish that appeared here.
Nothing changes.
PS What are you going to say when the horse gets a monster fig.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boscar \"The Amateur\" Obarra,
>
> He won a 4 horse race on a loose lead, with a slow
> pace, on a track with a heavy speed bias. Settle
> down a bit...
>
> Check back and repost after the Breeders Cup.
Let\'s do the math and see if we can speculate a fig or two here.
UM gave 0.8pts in weight to JB. He won by 3 lengths and was 1 path wider on the turn for a total of 4 lengths. 4 lengths at 8f is approx. 2.5 pts. So by subtraction we have UM running 1&3/4pts faster than JB, relatively. For absolute we\'d need the variant and wind. But just going by the horses, this is the dif.
Since JB crushed the 3rd place finisher I think it\'s reasonable to assume he paired his top of -2.75. Hard to see JB hitting a new one since he\'d just made that huge move to -2.75 . So that would mean Mo ran a -4.5.
Which just so happens to be Tizway\'s top (assuming he paired his Met number in the Whitney...), as well as Hdg\'s (with the weight break for fillies factored in). Of course Mo gets a 3yo weight break. Flat Out was at -3.5 and going through the same excercise I got him beating Stay Thirsty by 2.5 pts (0.8 pts in weight and 1.75 pts in beaten lengths and ground loss). Which means if Flat Out paired his top, Thirsty ran a 0, which fits perfectly into his range. Actually I think maybe it was, in absolute figs, half a point slower since I\'m not sure Flat Out paired, he does like to bounce a bit, but whatever.
So, again we have, for tops, with the weight break for 3yo and fillies in BCC factored in:
UM -5.5
TW -4.5
HdG -4.5
FO - -3.5
GoDude -2.5 (his top which he prob didn\'t eclipse today)
ST -2
Now obviously this doesn\'t take into account pattern at all. Which of course we\'ll have to leading up to the race. Mo last year got to his level and stayed there and seemed to like CD. Whether he can do that again this year at a much faster absolute number, we\'ll see. Last year Tizway bounced off his big number but this year he\'ll have way more rest coming in, although he has been sick but only briefly. HdG seems quite consistent (she paired last year) although she\'s in a much faster range this year but they did try to take it easy on her today. FO, if he follow\'s his pattern looks to be sitting back for his best one. Thirsty and GoDude might be a titch slow but GoDude probably will get a 1W1W trip.
Should be a fun race. Let\'s hope the ground crew at CD don\'t do to the rail what they have done the last two big race days there.
If MO gets a monster fig, give an assist to track super Kozak. Just prior to Mo\'s race the track was scratched on top, making it faster than it had been all day. Mo\'s very fast raw time 1.33.82 somewhat incongruous with all other dirt races, except the stakes sprint. The following 2 dirt races, esp the Gold Cup slower than norm, raw.Track speed up all day, until after MO\'s race.
Will be very interesting to see the differences,if any, going into the Breeders Cup with TG/RAGS/BEYER.
Mike
Let the debate begin - Sat Beyers - Mo 118, Flat Out 107, HdG 105
Very interesting.
Uncle Mo likely to be the BC Classic favorite now, off that performance, with his reputation and Tizway being out for 60 days.
Very tough call as to what to make of him IMO. He had EVERYTHING his way yesterday, with the soft lead and speed favoring track, but obviously ran fast. Quite a few folks seem to think he is a \"miler type\".
With an extremely disappointing set of key races yesterday (as far as field size and gambling opportunities), it does look like we might get an interesting next few weeks, heading into the Breeders Cup, if they can all stay healthy.
Come on, Mike, you know the track doesn\'t change speeds know matter what they do to it.
I think what you can take from Uncle Mo yesterday was that he\'s still physically maturing, and he can yet move forward off what he did yesterday. I\'d guess he was at 90%, but unfortunately yesterday didn\'t particularly tax him regarding effort - he was barely breathing by the time he got back.
Give Pletcher a TON of CREDIT with this horse. Some smart people on this Board speculated this horse might NEVER come back and now look at him.
Breeders Cup Classic victory would be one of the ALLTIME great Training Jobs if the horse can pull it off. 7 in late August, a mile in early Oct then a Mile and One Quarter aginst the World\'s best.
Won\'t be getting any of my money but \"Here Here\" if they do it!
Silver,
Not sure MO wouldn\'t be \"thanking\" the vets that cured/saved him.TAP had zero to do with MO returning to racing after he got ill.Super talented,fast, sound horses can be trained by just about anyone with a license.Those who have not watched what goes on each morning at the racetrack would be shocked how vanilla the whole pure training process really is.
Wonder how MO would be doing now if say, Tricky, brother Tony,Asmussen or about 50 other guys/gals were training him.
On a related subject,not buying 118 Beyer(TG neg -5) for MO. Seems Beyer did not know the surface was \"zipped\" before MO\'s race giving raw time a boost compared to the rest of the day.Still a new top fig for MO,like neg -3ish TG, but that also poses a tough question about the following two rather raw slow dirt races.Track speed all over the place on Sat, slow to faster to slower?Raw would seem to indicate that.
Mike
Mike-- I can\'t wait to see Ragozin\'s BC sheets. You\'re right about the day being all over the place (though I gave Mo almost what Beyer did), so Ragozin will either a) have some figures that are WAY wrong, or b) have the day changing, in complete contradiction to a position Friedman stated firmly on their board many times. I\'m rooting for a).
If they don\'t have the track changing, either Mo has to get by far the biggest figure ever given out (and Jackson Bend one of the biggest), or they have to have the Beldame and JC Gold Cup collapsing.
My sense is that the Beyer people read this board, we\'ll see if the figures for the last 2 dirt races get changed.
JB,
If you have Mo in the neg -5 range then you are discounting that the maintenance before the race made it faster than it was all day,fair enough.Not an unreasonable assumption but the fastest races ever run(raw) at Belmont are almost always on a wet fast surface, sometimes by horses that are not even at the stakes level.
It makes no sense on any racing level that the Belmont surface did NOT change speed on Sat and imo it did more than once.
So you\'ll have MO sitting on reaction off the 4 point top, I\'ll go after him for that and other reasons.
Mike
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>I\'ll go after him for that and other reasons.
Seems like the correct place to ask the experts here: will the so-called \"supertesting\" be in place for the BC races at Churchill this year?
I did have the track faster for that race than any other, and his number not quite as fast as that. It\'s plenty tricky, though-- combine changing track speeds with short fields and you don\'t have much to work with. The good news is these are high level horses who have run a bunch of times-- you get days like this with rained off grass maiden races and it\'s a bitch.
The way you handle situations like this is the same as when Quality Road ran his huge one or Midnight Lute ran his first one-- you disregard the winner and do it off the others. Phil23 had the right idea above.
Rick B,
Not much of a testing guy concerning races at the major venues but Dr Mary Scollay of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission responded to me on two occasions that BC horses are super tested.
Mike
Short fields, sloppy tracks, uncontested pace! But The Figures have value and there were several sharp winners on Saturday.
At Belmont and out West!