I haven\'t done figures yet, but I want to remind everyone there were three disparate levels of testing at CD over the last two days.
The Derby had OOC testing AND surveillance.
The Oaks had OOC testing and NO surveillance.
The other races had neither.
It is anybody\'s guess what they do in Baltimore. And anybody\'s guess what the public will know (or just \"know\").
But if the house horse is going for the TC, I would imagine it will be pretty tough for the Belmont.
Take it easy here ,he is going to have to come back in 2 weeks,personally I don\'t think he went forward and if he did he certainly will react in the Preakness.There will be some new shooters,fresher horses.Believe me,I will be looking to beat him.
Orb may be special, but I\'ll bet against a 5 race window for a 3 yo in the spring with both fists.
Good Luck
Joe B.
Vito
Can\'t blame anybody for wanting to attack him next time out, but u better find some new shooters.
One of the very few derbies where I really can\'t find an excuse horse that I can\'t wait to bet back in the Preakness.
A premature move on Normandy invasion, which makes him ok next time. Similar for oxbow. But I don\'t want either of those horses against orb. With apologies to my good friend tread head, that post u made yesterday about Verrazano was unintentionally funny. That horse was 2 percent to run back in the Preakness off how awful he ran, before they said he got hurt or banged up. This was one derby where all the wise guys were right. Every person with an opinion seemed unanimous that Verrazano would run bad. He somehow even ran below those low expectations.
Departing from the Illinois derby?
I don\'t know. This horse make have enough to break the long triple crown drought. The combination of his ability and the seeming lack of challengers with credentials
U think shug is worried about huge can of shit code west waiting to attack in the Belmont
It may be Wayne Lukas defending the triple crown jinx with anything he can find that can run
Jim
No worries Jimbo, you gave me plenty of laughs as well this spring with your comments on the Louisiana horses, it\'s all in good fun.
Horses running back off a first time mud terrible experience is something that happens all the time, and many of them do quite well. I was not aware of the injury when I posted that, and not running him back in the Preakness is obviously the right thing to do for the horse, so no worries there. If he ends up with some more serious injury and can\'t run again, so be it, but I still think he has shown a ton of talent and if ever able to put his best race together again on a certain day will not be able to be beat.
Tread,
There likely isn\'t a sum of money I wouldn\'t bet that Verrazano never wins a race beyond one mile. First off, he may not run again, based on how some of these types have been handled in the past, and secondly, if he does, he isn\'t going long. As many realized immediately after the Wood, when he could not draw off in that race, he was no distance horse.
in the \"old days\" with different connections, he would run back in the met mile, getting weight, and be formidable.
As for the Louisiana horses, I would not want any of them back in the next race. I think the wet track helped both horses that came out of that race. Both would be \"bet againsts\" for me.
Jim
do we give goldencents another shot?
Sheesh guys, anybody care what they ran?
Jim not sure what page you are on here when you post that \"many realized after the Wood he (verazano) was no distance horse\"?
Horses that win grade ones at nine furlongs are by definition able to get a distance. bbb
I think Departing is imminent danger to Orb in the Preakness. IMLD didn\'t do too much running, if they brought him back he would be worth a look as well.
Let me put it this way if Orb went forward in the derby he regresses in the preakness.If he backed up in the derby (who knows)he backs up again with 2 weeks rest,that\'s the way I look at it.
I am with you plus 4 weeks rest.
Orb is not the only horse who will get a number in the Derby. I\'m planning on giving out 19 of them.
I understand that but there will be plenty of dropouts.I think any horse coming back in 2 weeks is at a disadvantage and if there is someone coming into the race with a decent line that\'s who i WILL play.
I have taken that position and may again, but if you look at the last 30 or so runnings of the Preakness I would guess 20 have been won by horses coming back on 2 weeks rest.
I will wait for the Preakness thoro-patterns, especially after considering all of the resounding endorsements.
Mylute looks most interesting to me. Probably moved forward a point or two. Not impossible to pair up in two weeks. Don\'t think he\'d be a huge price though with Rosie at Pimlico. Oxbow probably didn\'t outrun himself either. If they decide to run IMLD, I\'ll be paying very close interest to his training next week.
Amos not sure if he\'s running back.Looks as if no Pletcher and of course D Wayne will be there with WTC and Oxbow.
Looks as if NI is definitely out and GC will try again.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
From Mike Welsch on Twitter:
Plesa says Itsmyluckyday came back 100 per cent did not handle track on way to Monmouth 60-40 to run in Preakness.
JB you\'re exactly right. The Preakness is consistently the most formful race of the year to the Derby form run 14 days prior. These horses run the race of their life at a distance too far and come right back and do it again in 2 weeks sometimes with even higher figs. The new shooters generally don\'t make an impact. How can that be? Why don\'t the Derby horses bounce to the moon?
IMO it\'s because we\'ve all forgotten what the old time trainers knew - when you get a horse right you run them. I have horses in England and I can assure you they have not forgotten it there. When horses win they often run right back in 2-14 days. Why? Because if you wait too long they go out of form. We call it \"bouncing\" or \"reacting\" but what we\'re really talking about is form cycles. Of course many horses do react to a big fig but it\'s NOT immediate. Look at the Keeneland meet. The \"repeater\" angle has been tried and true for decades. There were 3 in one day including the Lexington stakes this past meet.
The reason the Preakness is so formful is if you run them back quick enough they don\'t bounce. And that\'s why there are so few Triple Crown winners. They can\'t hold that form for 5 weeks. If you want more Triple crown winners run them over a shorter time period - say 7 and then 14 days.
Now you will probably point out that many Derby winners don\'t run new tops. It would be interesting to see of Derby starters who run new tops and go back in the Preakness how many bounce. I think you\'ll see a lot of pair-ups. My unscientific observation is that when you run them quick they run the same.
bloodline
BBB,
Perhaps I could slightly alter the words I used, but he isn\'t a distance horse, and if he runs again, my bet will be that his connections won\'t even try him long.
Really talented horses, with distance limitations, can go longer if they get a great trip, such as stalking a 50 pace. This is very much what Verrazano did in the Wood. Despite some good heated debate on this board, it is pretty clear the general public correctly disagnosed the Wood as a definitive sign the horse had distance limitations. Before the Wood, if you would have told me that he was going to win the Wood, I would have said he would have been a solid 5-2 favorite to win the Derby, with plenty of support. Instead, he stands at double digit odds early, before getting some moderate late support. He has to stalk a fast pace and packs it in before the mile mark.
hoping GS ran in the 1 territory. re-check sire profile possible 5pts from 2-3.
trying to think forward here. most dead money will see GS as a fluke and possibly get double digits for a live horse. If he does earn a 1 for the Derby
i can\'t see not betting him back. Lightly raced with a two year old foundation
and imo sitting on a very possible pair with a slight possible slight new top.
Well here are the 2 new shooters Gov. charlie and departed,both with nice rest and Charlies line was nice going in to the derby.
Bloodline-- this is an interesting subject, no doubt.
First off, it\'s a little different in England because they race (mostly) on grass. For whatever reason horses are far more likely to pair good efforts on grass, and in general bounce a lot less. Explanatory theories include slower pace on grass (especially relative to the \"speed\" of the track, generally much faster on grass) allowing horses to run more evenly (no explosive bursts), and a more forgiving surface.
But yes, even on dirt there are lots of examples of trainers getting paired big efforts on short rest-- many times in the Preakness, and on some famous occasions much less than 2 weeks (Onion beating Secretariat, Comquistador Cielo romping in the Belmont 5 days after winning the Met, Dutrow fairly often).
Having said that, a) it doesn\'t always work, and b) the horse almost always pays a price. It took Onion over a year to run again, for example, and there\'s the record of horses going for the TC-- which I don\'t think is a function of having too much time before the Belmont.
CON/CIELO had run a met mile In 133 and change and caught a track that was as sloppy as it could get. I can still see the rain pouring down.Stopped cold in the Travers mot a true 1-1/4,1-1/2 horse by any stretch.
You may be right. OR... he was cooked by then, by running those big ones close together.
I just think he caught a perfect track in the Belmont.In those days it just seemed on sloppy days that the speed was deadly.I think he won by 15 lengths.
Jim I guess we will agree to disagree.
By any measure, Verrazano is extreme quality at least up to nine panels.
Your raising the Wood as reason why he is NOT a distance horse is not
helping your puzzling opinion. Verrazano\'s last three furlongs in the Wood time wise is as fast as sophomores can run.
bbb
And dismissing a horse\'s distance ability because he had a poor race over a track surface where the jockey described as the horse\'s action as having to \"overwork\" is equally puzzling. Of course he tired quickly in the race, he had to run twice as hard as he normally does early on because he couldn\'t grip the surface.
He may fail at 10F for injury reasons, or as some have said, never even run another race. But there is nothing in his prior figures or pace/energy distribution to suggest that he could not run a negative number at distance over a track he can actually run over with normal action/effort if he can get to another race in one piece. Whether or not that will be good enough to win will depend on how much further some in this crop improve.
For all the beating Verrazano has taken on being fragile and over-extended, that discussion will be turning directly to Orb as soon as these figures come out. If one negative can knock Verrazano out, will be interesting to see what opinions surface about Orb\'s run of figures.
>
> For all the beating Verrazano has taken on being
> fragile and over-extended, that discussion will be
> turning directly to Orb as soon as these figures
> come out. If one negative can knock Verrazano
> out, will be interesting to see what opinions
> surface about Orb\'s run of figures.
The key difference possibly being Orb\'s 2YO foundation,
and Verrazano\'s lack of one...
Does 2yr old foundation matter when we start talking about sequential -2s or better in a spring 3yr old season? And does running in a couple maiden races really count as \"foundation\"?
I\'m not saying he\'s going to bounce out of the Preakness, with the group coming to meet him he can regress and win. But if he does fire a 3rd negative, like many in his position have done in the past decade, you have to start wondering if he comes out of the Belmont ever able to race again, because there are many that have been down a similar path and suffered the same fate.
Huge factor Richie.
Years ago a sixty day vacation allowing juveniles to \"grow up\" was a good elixir for what ailed them and many Derby winners had such a rest. Orb had not one but two such benchings.
Another was ownership pressure; Shug had none while TAP had a bunch.
For me, only four possible horses could win Saturday and they ran 1,3,4 and Verrazano. Three of those were undefeated around a couple of bends and Normandy Invasion certainly had had some troubles.
As for the Preakness Orb surely bounces and while he may still win it is tough to take short odds given that hypothesis. bbb
He also ran in 2 Allowance races at Laurel the preceding Saturday\'s to the Met Mile. 4 races in 3 weeks; then syndicated for a record 48 million dollars.
BBB and tread,
We can certainly agree to disagree.
But u both post like my views on Verrazano\'s distance ability and wood memorial are outlandish. Right or wrong, I am in the majority with those views and u two are the outliers.
This horse\'s bandwagon emptied almost completely after the wood, with most questioning his declining figures as the distances got longer.
We can revisit this if and when the horse races again. I doubt we see him over 1 mile and would offer 5-1 on him running in the travers.
Now, just to clean up someas past opinions tread head, one of us liked Verrazano to win the derby and one of us went on this board in march with orb as the winner. Our respective batting averages are not the same right now.
Good luck
Jim
TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does 2yr old foundation matter when we start
> talking about sequential -2s or better in a spring
> 3yr old season? And does running in a couple
> maiden races really count as \"foundation\"?
Orb ran four times as a 2YO. To get ready for the first of those starts,
he undertook stamina building gallops and a progression of slow works
which got increasingly longer. All in all,between training and racing, there are
probably a lot more miles on Orb\'s odometer than some of his later starting rivals.
No horseplayer or horseman could say with any seriousness that a 2YO foundation
(racing and training) is not an advantage for a 3YO who is tackling a series of 3
demanding races in 5 weeks. Go back to the \"Decade of Champions\": Secretariat,
Affirmed and Spectacular Bid were all multiple Graded Stakes winners as
2YOs; Seattle Slew was relatively lightly raced as a 2YO (three starts), but he
did win the Champagne Stakes.
> I\'m not saying he\'s going to bounce out of the
> Preakness, with the group coming to meet him he
> can regress and win. But if he does fire a 3rd
> negative, like many in his position have done in
> the past decade, you have to start wondering if he
> comes out of the Belmont ever able to race again,
> because there are many that have been down a
> similar path and suffered the same fate.
Look back at Easy Goer\'s 3YO campaign: Won the Swale at GP, won
the Gotham, won the Wood, second Derby, second Preakness, wins Belmont. He was
probably a tired colt after the Belmont, and he always had ankle issues, but he
came back to win the Whitney, the Travers, the Woodward and the Jockey Club Gold
Cup before finishing second in the BC Classic to arch rival Sunday Silence.
Let\'s see what Shug can do here.
While all that may be true Jimbo, your track record for successful opinions this spring (and others) hasn\'t exactly been stellar outside of this one example. We don\'t need to bore others on this board by rehashing your opinions on any of the Louisiana horses this spring, or the whole \"never passed horses in the stretch\" discussion, but for you to make this post about the one time you were right without acknowledging the many things you were wrong about this spring or other springs is pretty laughable.
I don\'t ever remember being asked to provide a formal selection prior to the race, and while I clearly like Verrazano a lot and continue to like him a lot going forward, I am not so stubborn as to not be able to adjust my views when I hear all the training reports and other backside feedback closer to the race. I had Orb and Verrazano as my only \"A\" horses in the race, and like many others had (in order) Revolutionary, Normandy Invasion, IMLD, and Overanalyze as by \"B\" horses.
You are welcome to read the pre-race analysis I put together every year for a large group of friends, which is largely based on Thorograph figures and knowledge gained from reading this board over the last 15 years, but some other things as well. Send me a DM if you are interested. These were the comments I made about Orb and Verrazano in that writeup.
KEY WIN CONTENDERS
16 Orb
I had to promote this horse into the first tier after mud came into the picture and after reading all the reports of how well he has been training at Churchill Downs. His pedigree is loaded with ability to handle mud and is also reasonably suited for the extra distance here, at least compared to most of the other horses. There are some concerns about his large jump-up in performance figures early this spring, which sometimes have a tendency to knock horses out for a bit.
But all indications based on training are that he is in as good a shape as he's ever been, and if he can duplicate his Florida numbers from this spring, he will be right there at the end. The fact that he's never run a big number outside of Gulfstream Park is another potential negative, which is why I had given an edge to Verrazano off his winning races at 3 different tracks already, before seeing Verrazano's training. After seeing how hot Orb's jockey, Joel Rosario, has been riding lately, I had to make the full switch over to making Orb a top co-contender.
Some people incorrectly label this horse a closer, he does not drop to the back of the field and close like Normandy Invasion or Java's War. He is a pace presser and actually has run his fastest splits in the earlier part of a route race on more than one occasion, it is simply an optical illusion when the front-end speed dies off and he is still moving at a good enough rate to go by them. This pressing style means the possibility for traffic problems is a bit higher than an earlier horse like Verrazano, but he is more likely to work out a good trip than some of the dead closers, which makes him a relative positive compared to those horses as well. As soon as the weather forecast made it appear that slop or mud is a virtual certainty and after Verrazano galloped less than ideally (showing signs of rankness and being washed out), I decided that leaving Orb as my top choice was the right thing to do.
14 Verrazano
I was ready to key this horse as my only win contender until the possibility of rain entered the forecast. On a fast, dry track, I didn't think there is any beating this horse. He has a huge Thorograph figure he ran several months ago and his connections have done a great job of keeping him wrapped up since then and not doing too much. He did end up winning his other Derby prep races in spite of that, but his last 2 were not nearly as impressive as a race he ran in February. If he duplicates his race from February he is a clear winner. He has everything I'm looking for in a running style and pedigree, abundant tactical speed and plenty of stamina on the female side.
He is a very relaxed horse, getting to top speed very easily and is extremely physically imposing. This leads me to believe that he will be able to last longer than some of the smaller horses under tiring/long distance conditions. With his tactical speed, he should not get caught up in any of the traffic issues that many of the horses further back are likely to encounter, and this is a huge plus in this field full of so many closers. I would have thought he is a clear winner here under normal circumstances.
But after turning in some nice workouts here last week, he has shown up somewhat agitated and overly sweaty (a.k.a washed out) during his gallops this week, and that is out of character for this horse. While the trainer doesn't seem too concerned, I'm wondering if he might be a step off his best, and sometimes you have to let real-world appearance override what you see on paper. Another potential negative in his pedigree is ability to handle mud. While his pedigree isn't necessarily bad for it, it isn't that great either and there are many others that should definitely like it. Several other people might try to give you other negatives on this horse, like they won't think he can get the distance, he keeps winning races by a shorter margin, but those are all red herring excuses. Though I'm not going to completely shift my opinion on him due to the questionable appearance, I learned my lesson last year and if things to not appear to be 100% going into the race, it is time to call an audible and also consider the best looking horse. I'm not getting off Verrazano completely, and still think it's very possible he will run well, but Orb (and his jockey) are just doing too well right now and these are my co-choices for now.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if you want to go ahead and claim some sort of victory based on what has been posted only on this board, if the contest is purely picking the winner in the Derby, you certainly have that right. But I think the one thing we can all agree on is, truly honest horseplayers have more than their fair share of incorrect opinions on a fairly regular basis.
As for Verrazano, I was more thinking something like the Haskell for him, again, there is absolutely nothing on the record that indicates he would have any sort of trouble at that distance. The Travers would largely depend on whether or not he can get back to his Feb form and who else is in the race. If the field ends up as poor as last year\'s was, I have absolutely no problem saying he would have a really good chance winning that race (assuming no physical issues).
But graded stakes winners at 2 dont win the Derby much any more, times have changed. I think I posted this last week, 14 of the last 24 horses making up the super the past 6 years never even attempted stakes races at 2 yrs old.
Easy Goer is Easy Goer, but I\'m not sure his sheet contained multiple races of negative 2 or better so close together (maybe it did, I have no idea). But I do know that whether a TC contender has \"solid foundation\" at 2 yrs old or not has not made a bit of difference during recent TC runs where the contender had multiple very large figures.
You\'ve got Big Brown who had very little foundation, was lightly raced, and using the argument that frequently pops up in the seminar, being lightly raced had as good a chance as any to try to put that many big figs together. On the flip-side you have Smarty who won several stakes at 2, had more of the \"old-school\" approach you are talking about, and he couldn\'t get it done in the Belmont either.
I don\'t know if your implying that \"because it\'s Shug\" you think there is something he does that makes the big figures hurt less, but if you are, I would love to hear more about it. Multiple big figures hurt, and this horse is going to have lots of them by the time he hits the Belmont.
TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But graded stakes winners at 2 dont win the Derby
> much any more, times have changed. I think I
> posted this last week, 14 of the last 24 horses
> making up the super the past 6 years never even
> attempted stakes races at 2 yrs old.
I do not bet superfectas; I basically go the horizontal route.
I used the example of the Champions to show that, unless the
breed has absolutely fell apart in 40 years, these 2YO stakes
winners were prolific at three and went on to more glory as 4YOs,
especially Spec Bid, whose 4YO season might have been as impressive
as any campaign by any horse of any age.
> Easy Goer is Easy Goer, but I\'m not sure his sheet
> contained multiple races of negative 2 or better
> so close together (maybe it did, I have no idea).
> But I do know that whether a TC contender has
> \"solid foundation\" at 2 yrs old or not has not
> made a bit of difference during recent TC runs
> where the contender had multiple very large
> figures.
I would really suggest that you look at the archives. It might
be difficult to translate the TG#s from the 80s and 90s to
today\'s #s, though JB might provide a meter. Monarchos I think
was the first Derby winner to go negative, lots of 80s and 90s
Derby winners with TG#s between \"5\" and \"2\"
If we are having a discussion where we take different sides of
an issue, also known as a debate, please understand I am not
claiming that there is no such thing as a knock out number, or
that \"multiple very large figures\" will have a long term effect
on some horses.
What I am saying is that (my opinion) is that horses with 2YO foundation
(not necessarily stakes races, as you pointed out in your previous post
the lasix free Orb ran strictly in maiden races as a 2YO) are less likely
to be affected by \"multiple very large figures.\"
> You\'ve got Big Brown who had very little
> foundation, was lightly raced, and using the
> argument that frequently pops up in the seminar,
> being lightly raced had as good a chance as any to
> try to put that many big figs together. On the
> flip-side you have Smarty who won several stakes
> at 2, had more of the \"old-school\" approach you
> are talking about, and he couldn\'t get it done in
> the Belmont either.
Smarty Jones only ran twice at 2, not a good example for the
point you or I am trying to make. The colt I like to consider
is Looking at Lucky. After six starts as a 2YO over synthetic,
he was very unlucky in the Derby but went on to bunch together
some negative numbers later in his 3YO season.
> I don\'t know if your implying that \"because it\'s
> Shug\" you think there is something he does that
> makes the big figures hurt less, but if you are, I
> would love to hear more about it. Multiple big
> figures hurt, and this horse is going to have lots
> of them by the time he hits the Belmont.
Tread,
It was great reading your May 7th prediction of the Kentucky Derby. Quite a contract with the weeks before where you trumpeted Normandy Invasion, and then when I pressed you on that opinion, you flipped to Verrazano. May 7th is excellent timing to switch to Orb.
What is your view of Wise Dan\'s chances in the Woodford Reserve? Any ideas on who might finish underneath him, so I can make exactas and triples?
I look forward to your May 21st view on the Preakness. It should be interesting reading.
Treadhead wrote today: "I don\'t ever remember being asked to provide a formal selection prior to the race, and while I clearly like Verrazano a lot and continue to like him a lot going forward."
Treadhead how quickly you forget. This (text below dated April 27, 2013) was written to you then and then you told JB "No worries TGJB, I am keeping my comments about the horses and my opinions on how they should be best analyzed, not getting sucked into stupid betting contests."
So what is it you are doing now Treadhead? Hmmm.....
As for Verrazano, he is a classic Pletcher 3yo. Either he will be retired real soon or he will run a race or two more. Like him all you want but he is another Pletcher Gulfstream Winter Wonder that can't transfer his form outside Hallendale Beach muchless in the Derby. You might look for him in next year's Gulfstream Park entries if you (he) is lucky.
And you honestly stated you didn't remember being asked to provide a formal selection?? Wow.
________________________________________________
Date: April 27, 2013 09:28PM
Fairmount1 wrote to Treadhead regarding Verrazano:
Is he your choice to win? Don\'t give me post position nonsense and the draw as far as speed inside and outside of him.
Is he your win selection? As favorite or second choice at worst? You planning on keying him or not? Let\'s hear it.
If you want to critique my opinion that\'s fine. But I say he isn\'t winning, I posted why. So are you saying he is winning? Let\'s hear it. If you don\'t now, then I want to hear a final decisioin after the draw but let\'s hear it now.
If I may offer my opinion, I am of the thinking that while Orb may bounce, it won\'t be as bad as some might anticipate...vague statement I know, but what I really want to offer, is that I absolutely believe it is Mr. Shug\'s program that will make a benificial difference in how Orb will react to his big numbers. Yes, it\'s what he does, like give time when time is needed, they feed very well even boiling the horses\' flax, etc...but it is also what he doesn\'t do. There are no tricks, no gimmicks, no fillers, no air pumps used in that barn. The horse is real.
(The corollary to that statement is that it is the overuse allowed drugs that do as much harm as the ones that are not allowed.)
And I definitely agree that traditional winter turnout for 2yos before their 3yo season is KEY. Not only does it give their young bodies a freshening, it is good for their minds, equally imo I have seen enough young horses turned out for a couple of months in the 2yo winter to know that when they are bored with their turnout and want to get back to work, they will let you know. In my experience, any time from 6-9 weeks and you can see their behavior change. Their mind is not so much on grass, somewhere from inside of them they are craving action. They are young and fresh and far more often than not, return to training with a new enthusiasm. So yes, I for one believe firmly, Shug\'s way will make a difference in how Orb will react to his big numbers.
Yes, and you will notice that I never replied to your post.
Jimbo, my analysis was posted on my twitter feed 24 hrs before the race, I\'d be happy to provide you, or anyone else, a link. And I never, ever, stated that Normandy Invasion would WIN the Derby, just that he might be a factor in it, which he was.
And as a matter of fact, the tri I gave out for the Woodford (after scratch of the 5) was 8 lone in first over 1,3,7 only, which paid $70
Jimbo and Tread--
Anyone remember the old Saturday Night Live routines with Jane Curtin and Ackroyd?
\"Jane, you ignorant slut...\"
By \"can\'t transfer his form\", I\'m sure you mean to include, \"except in graded stakes in Tampa and New York\".
Flowers.....
Plumber ma\'am .........
Candygram ........
You\'re that clever shark aren\'t you?
I\'m only a dolphin ma\'am
Let\'s Go Stables tweeted today that Verrazano is doing fine and they are targeting the Haskell for him, and possibly a prep prior. So all the haters can start saving their lunch money to bet against him.
I see what you are saying Richie, and maybe you are right that we are about to see a TC run from a horse with more foundation than any of the previous ones we\'ve had the last decade or so.
But I do fail to see the relevance of looking at any of the horses from 20+ years ago, unless you are telling me that the conversion for those older figures is so much that Easy Goer had actually run negative numbers prior to and in the Derby (in defeat). I\'m not in a position one way or another to argue this (I don\'t see his sheet in the archives anywhere, I\'m a frequent visitor to that page), but even if it WERE true, I\'d be of the opinion that it had more to do with the horse that the fact that Shug is handling him.
Maybe foundation was the reason he was able to run two -2s instead of Verrazano only being able to run one, and there is certainly historical precedent for him to be able to run a third (or something close to 0) in the Preakness. If he does, he would have to be some kind of special horse to win the Belmont, because there look to be some pretty formidable shooters lined up for that one in terms of number power, it would take another negative in the Belmont I would think.
Not saying it can\'t be done, just that it\'s unprecedented in my generation (40). Guess we will see what happens. Right now my money is on victory in the Preakness and a bounce in the Belmont enough to not allow him to win, but hopefully nothing as pathetic as Big Brown was.
Speaking for at least some of us, we\'re not haters, we\'re realists.
Re the conversation you and Richie had about foundation, see my Vrrazano seminar comments about not running at two and making the Derby.
If he does make it back this summer he may well be tough, but that\'s a whole different thing than handicapping the Derby.
I don\'t want to rain on anyone\'s parade but if this horse has had the development that I believe he has,then a bounce is coming in 2 weeks.It can be 2 points,it can be 4 or 5 but it is coming.Horses just don\'t keep going forward and the pair up of a very fast number is the telltale sign.Anyway that\'s one man\'s opinion.
JB, didn\'t Easy Goer run a hole in the wind in a prep? I\'m thinking the Gotham in late March, because I seem to remember something like a 1:33 mile. If you have it handy, how did that race compare to his 3 TC races?
The only stuff that\'s in the system is 92 on, when we \"computarized\". We recreated some earlier Derby winners manually. EG and everything else from the 80\'s is in boxes in storage, if you want to go wading around in there we\'ll be glad to give you a key. I\'ve never been there but I\'m thinking the storage facility from Silence Of The Lambs.
From memory, EG\'s Wood was a big disputed figure. I split the one and two turn races and gave him a zero (I think), very big for a 3yo back then.
That time was aided by one of those drying out wet tracks where anyone runs 108.
As inviting as you make it sound I think I\'ll try my own archives first, this weekend.
you did give EG a 0 in the wood
TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see what you are saying Richie, and maybe you
> are right that we are about to see a TC run from a
> horse with more foundation than any of the
> previous ones we\'ve had the last decade or so.
>
> But I do fail to see the relevance of looking at
> any of the horses from 20+ years ago, unless you
> are telling me that the conversion for those older
> figures is so much that Easy Goer had actually run
> negative numbers prior to and in the Derby (in
> defeat). I\'m not in a position one way or another
> to argue this (I don\'t see his sheet in the
> archives anywhere, I\'m a frequent visitor to that
> page), but even if it WERE true, I\'d be of the
> opinion that it had more to do with the horse that
> the fact that Shug is handling him.
>
> Maybe foundation was the reason he was able to run
> two -2s instead of Verrazano only being able to
> run one, and there is certainly historical
> precedent for him to be able to run a third (or
> something close to 0) in the Preakness. If he
> does, he would have to be some kind of special
> horse to win the Belmont, because there look to be
> some pretty formidable shooters lined up for that
> one in terms of number power, it would take
> another negative in the Belmont I would think.
>
> Not saying it can\'t be done, just that it\'s
> unprecedented in my generation (40). Guess we
> will see what happens. Right now my money is on
> victory in the Preakness and a bounce in the
> Belmont enough to not allow him to win, but
> hopefully nothing as pathetic as Big Brown was.
Tread: I will take advantage of what you seem to be portraying as a generation
gap. Respect your elder (me) and complete the following brief homework assignment:
Research Spectacular Bid\'s race record. 9 starts at 2, 7 wins, 2 track records. At
3, he prepped for the Triple Crown series by winning 5 stakes races (Hutcheson,
Fountain of Youth, Florida Derby, Flamingo, Blue Grass). He then won Derby and
Preakness, injured himself in the Belmont. Two months after the Belmont, he set a
track record at Delaware at 1-1/16th; later in the Fall he set a track record at
the Meadowlands. As a 4YO he went on to have what to me was the greatest single
year of any horse in my nearly 40 years of following Racing; I\'ll let you read
about it.
Is Orb Spectacular Bid? Nyet, Comrade.
Maybe a better comparison from what you call \"your\" generation might be Smarty
Jones, whose sheet is available in the Archive. SJ was a late starter, running in
2 sprints as a 2YO, both in November, not much foundation there. SJ began his 3YO
campaign on AQ\'s innercourse, winning a small stake, earning a TG # of
02. Sent to Hot Springs for Oaklawn\'s Ky Derby prep series, Smarty
reeled off TG #s of 0, -33, and -13.
Smarty paired his Ark Derby - 13 at Churchill in the Derby. If I am
reading you correctly, you are telling me that Orb is an iffy proposition to go
forward off his pair of (negative) deuces in the Fla Derby and the Ky Derby.
The second part of homework assignment is to visit the archive and see how Smarty
performed TG wise in the Preakness.
This is all a bit of a moot point, because I have it on information and belief
that Shug, Stuart Janney and Dinny Phipps all read the TG board and are at this
moment engineering a slight regression in the Preakness to increase the chances of
Orb being Triple Crowned on Belmont Day.
Uncle Richie,
Please tell us another story; one before the internet and cell phone were invented please!!!!!!!!!
LMAO
Another avuncular moment for my cellmate.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Speaking for at least some of us, we\'re not
> haters, we\'re realists.
>
> Re the conversation you and Richie had about
> foundation, see my Vrrazano seminar comments about
> not running at two and making the Derby.
>
> If he does make it back this summer he may well be
> tough, but that\'s a whole different thing than
> handicapping the Derby.
Prelimary target is Haskell, so we\'ll see how that goes . . .
I don\'t think it is a question of foundation,I think it is a question of development and ORB has developed quite a bit in the short term.He is going to bounce next time out(at least he is supposed to).The 2 weeks is certainly not going to help him.Could he go forward again?Sure he could,anything is possible, but he is not supposed to.AS far as bouncing and winning,I am not in that club.
vp612 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don\'t think it is a question of foundation,I
> think it is a question of development and ORB has
> developed quite a bit in the short term.He is
> going to bounce next time out(at least he is
> supposed to).The 2 weeks is certainly not going to
> help him.Could he go forward again?Sure he
> could,anything is possible, but he is not supposed
> to.AS far as bouncing and winning,I am not in that
> club.
. . . not to mention how much he might be stinging after pounding over that that paved-road portion of the CD main . . . not looking to toss him, but not sold he\'ll be worthwhile @ 4-5.
Vito,
Agreed that 9 times out of 10 I\'m betting bounce and as another longtime sheet user regardless of the brand;( I used Rags quite a bit in the 80\'s) overall its a winning proposition. We are out to beat a short priced horse and by patterns, speculation and odds we do not have to be correct all the time to profit. Especially betting into pick 3\'s or 4\'s using multiple horses and the take out divided by 3 or 4. IMHO it\'s one of the few advantages we as players have in this game.
I think Richie\'s point is as much Shug related as it is old school 2 yr old foundation related. He doesn\'t rush his horses, let\'s them develop, used appropriate spacing coming into the Derby. What is wrong with a healthy developing 3 yr old going forward off of pairs? IMHO again he doesn\'t need to go forward, could regress slightly and still win. Does that mean I won\'t try to beat him? Hell no!!!!!!
If you look back to a post I made the day after the Fountain of Youth; I stated that Violence and Orb were the only 2 that looked the part of contender on the first Saturday in May. In addition that under Shug\'s careful handling he would bring him there ready to fire his best shot.
There isn\'t a whole lot to scare me off in the Preakness as of yet. Itsmyluckyday I\'ll give a non effort to in the Derby and Departing is a bit intersting.
We will see?
Good luck,
Frank D.
It is not a question of going forward off pairs but it is my opinion he developed a lot BEFORE he got to the pairs and this last one could be the end of the road for now.I don\'t know the TG numbers but let\'s say they are 8,4,-2.-2, no matter how you look at it that is 8-10 points development.What about Bafferts horse if he is healthy?
Uncle Frank:
Thanks for dropping me a post on the way to the ritirata. Don\'t forget to wash your hands!
Richiebee
(The \"Uncle Drew\" of the TG board)
Speed at the Hill Top and not as stringent testing gets him a double look for sure
if he is healthy?
Your point on development is a great case; again with a different trainer we probably would not be having this conversation. I don\'t want to come off as a Shug groupie but he\'s old school and the horse comes first before his ego and 15 minutes of fame.
Vito:
You\'re half a Tgenerate now, a member of the crew. Uncle Len and Uncle Jake won\'t
mind. You can go in to the archive/ROTW and get all the Derby runner\'s #s...
You don\'t even have to crack the code...
If you are looking at how much Orb developed between 2 and 3, do you factor in the
fact that he ran without Lasix as a 2YO?
FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uncle Richie,
>
> Please tell us another story; one before the
> internet and cell phone were invented
> please!!!!!!!!!
>
> LMAO
>
> Another avuncular moment for my cellmate.
You young guys crack me up.
I still use their product but that is not part of the discussion.Orb has made major development at 3 yrs old.Look Shug is a great trainer, everyone knows that but I am looking at numbers and patterns and they tell me he is backing up in his next race.
I think the Lasix issue is significant. Shug mentioned it in a few different interviews and talked about how he does not like to use it but did use it with Orb. Definitely could have affected his 2yo numbers. Big jump 2nd Lasix.
Yes, the lasix thing hasn\'t gotten enough attention. I would point out that the owners (who I respect from working with them on the drug stuff with the JC) are among those pushing to ban it.
Vito-- at the top of this page you can click on the ROTW section to see the Oaks/Derby day sheets, with the figures they ran.
Orb\'s numbers prove the point, he improved 6-1/2,then 3 points and paired that ,well that\'s 9-1/2 points and 2 weeks rest coming in and that equals bounce.I don\'t care who the trainer is.Now if you say that around 2-3 months time he can inch forward again that\'s okay ,not now.
\" I would point out that the owners (who I respect from working with them on the drug stuff with the JC) are among those pushing to ban it\".
Don\'t get that even a little bit. Like efforting to control aggressive driving, yet wanting to remove airbags from cars. Not to mention it\'s in the face of
SCIENCE.
I\'m with you on this. One would hope what happened with this horse might change their minds.