P-Dub,

I think it certainly is possible.  But even if asked to take a horse off the pace, the MANNER in which Rosario did was incredulous to me.  He literally pulled him so hard that it looked like the horse bobbled or took a bad step.  jockeys ease horses off the pace as per instructions seemingly pretty regularly.  

What Rosario did was a butcher job.

Who knows, not saying he could have won or anything like that.  Just strange.  This horse ran his top sitting second, right off a legit speed horse in the CD race.  Why it would be brilliant to be 10 off, instructions or not, is well beyond me.

Jim

Lot of posts from people, some claiming to have even bet on Roca Rojo.  Mostly not mentioning the most important fact in the race.  

Not sure what race people were watching but there was no UNFORTUNATE start.  The horse broke fine.  Rosario, hack that he often is, pulled hard on the horse two strides out of the gate, yanking the horse well off the pace.  That seemingly awkward stride about 4 strides out of the gate, was not a bad step or a bobble, it was purely jockey error.  He pulled on the horse very hard.  

After all, when you have a horse with a modicum of early positional speed and you have a 5 horse field with absolutely no speed in it, what else would you do with a horse that breaks alert but pull his head off, yanking him 10-12 lengths off a slow pace.

The replay is all over youtube/bloodhorse, etc.  Watch it.  Just a purely ridiculous move by Rosario.

Hellersorr,

Do you have a sheet in front of you when you ask this question?

If you do, it is a horrendous question.  The horse finished last year, pairing 5\'s.  He has come back this year and ran an 8, a bad figure, and then backed up to a 14 last time.

If you discount the \"dead rail\", the horse is deceased and can\'t be bet in any way in any slot.  

Now, he did have excuses in both races, not just the dead rail, so today was the decision day \"deceased or valid excuses\".  Turns out it was the latter.

But 8 and then 14, with tops of 5, is not \"rounding into form\", it is \"falling off a cliff\".

Richie,

Gotta try to be fair.  First off, statute of limitations on the disgusting ride he gave Union Rags in the Derby is almost up.  

And Frenchie has been riding better in the last year.  For whatever reason, he always rides OK in Kentucky, but has been better elsewhere.

That said, I would \"sell him short\" at Saratoga.  He has saved some of his most disgusting rides/meets for Saratoga.  Wasn\'t he 3 for the meet a few years ago. Something like that.

Well, we know from the Preakness that Classic Empire has the early speed, when asked, to stay right on the lead.

If IWC runs and IF he hooks up relatively early with CE, then it COULD set up for a longer priced horse.

Of course, that would require Frenchie to ride aggressively two races in a row, which seems highly unlikely, especially in light of the fact that the race is 1 1/2 miles and he got a bit of criticism for moving too early in the Preakness (none from me - thought that was monday morning QBing and that Frenchie rode perfectly in the Preakness, but he will never be popular with the gamblers, a poor man\'s Pat Day)

Jim

Satire?

I would categorize his posts more in the \"greek tragedy\" bucket........

Yes Sekrah,

Distance not a factor.  Just like bias not a factor.

Completely irrelevant.

Sekrah,

I don\'t care much about patterns going 1 1/2 miles in the Belmont.

Patterns achieved going a mile to a mile and eighth or even mile and a quarter mean less to me going 1 1/2 miles.

So, if I am going to bet a slow horse \"on the come\" in the Belmont, I don\'t want the second choice, which Tapwrit may be if IWC doesn\'t run.

Richie B,

I guess we will agree to disagree on trainer intent with IWC.  I read the fact that Motion is EVEN CONSIDERING the Belmont as an extreme sign of confidence.  

I assume we all know that the owner is the daughter of Amory Haskell, for whom the HAskell is named after.  Their target for the Jersey Bred, Haskell family owned horse, is the Haskell.

The best way to win the HAskell is likely skip the Belmont and run fresh in the Haskell or prep in early July in some Monmouth race.  Not to run 1 1/2 miles in the Belmont.  I am sure Motion thinks/believes this, which is why I am guessing they won\'t run in the Belmont.

The fact that he feels compelled to consider the Belmont, in light of the Summer target, to me is a sign the horse has to be tearing down the stalls.

If he runs, he won\'t run poorly.

Jim

Yes Sekrah,

They are all several points too slow.

So, as I said, handicapping the race starts with CE.  If he runs a 0 to negative 1, he wins.  Nobody besides IWC is likely to go there.

If you think CE bounces off the 4th effort in 8 weeks, then the race is wide open and I think I would look for even longer prices than Tapwrit will be.  Tapwrit is about as fast as a few who will be double his odds.

Jbrown,

I can understand a negative position against the horse.  And I can\'t really argue strongly against it.  It is possible that I am sticking too long with a horse that I liked in the Derby and putting too much faith in a trainer who I think is one of the best.

I would not worry about the distance.  He has as much distance breeding in the bottom of his pedigree as any in this race.  

Saying he ran \"good overall race\" in the Wood is not an accurate statement.  He ran an EXCELLENT race in the Wood, faster than any race anybody in the Belmont has run.

These \"in and outers\" who seem to alternate good races are tough to gauge.

I haven\'t seen the sheets of any of the other new contenders in the belmont.  But handicapping the race starts with Classic Empire. While I won\'t argue with the \"math\" of the TG figure in the Preakness, the performance of CE in the Preakness was no \"pair up\" of his Derby.  That just isn\'t reflective of how he ran.  He buried a talented horse on the front end, through pretty fast fractions and then got run down late by a horse that tripped out, who also happened to be a fast/young/rested horse trained by the 2nd best trainer in our game.  CE was much the best in the Preakness and took a big step forward in that race, when you factor in pace and race dynamics.  So, those saying that \"he still hasn\'t broken through his 2 year old top\" being a reason to bet against him, I am not buying that.  (nor do I recommend anybody else).  That said, this will be the horse\'s 4th race in 8 weeks and if I buy my own logic that the Preakness was a forward move, then that makes it a bit more likely that it took something out of him.  Not sure the 1 1/2 miles does CE any favors (also not sure it hurts him, wouldn\'t mind some breeding experts taking a stab that question).  If 14 horses go, CE figures 2-1.  Eh.  Most likely winner, but potential reasons to bet against.  The problem for me is that while I would be comfortable taking 4-1 on IWC if he runs, because I know his best race is faster than CE\'s best, who else can we say that about.  Lots of love on this board for Tapwrit.  I don\'t know.  A few points too slow.  A forward move needed. What odds do we get on the early nominee for \"wise guy horse\" of the Belmont?  I would need 10-1 to get excited.  I don\'t think I get it, especially if IWC doesn\'t run.  Offshore is insane with the stupid odds I saw on the Japanese horse.  That horse isn\'t going off 4-1.  Maybe higher than 14-1.  There aren\'t enough stupid people betting to make this horse that short of a price.  (insert multiple punch lines there)

Jim

Alright Rich,

I hear the definitive statement.  But why?

The horse ran big in the first Florida start when he trounced Classic Empire.  Regressed badly in the next outing off the big number.  Then got rest and ran even bigger in the Wood.  As many predicted, he bounced in the Derby, but he was against it, racing wide against a strong inside bias.

Now gets 5 weeks.  If his trainer decides to run him, that would be a strong move by a strong trainer, especially in light of the fact that he has NJ connections and the big goal (besides the Derby of course), is the Haskell.  

if he runs, he is very very dangerous.   And he won\'t be a particularly short price.  Won\'t be long, but 4-1 to 9-2 seems about right.

Jim

That keeps happening to Baffert....

To be fair to him, Baffert had no idea that American Freedom had no shot - as he was given out by Frank D. as a mortal lock, killing all chances....

On a more serious note - just how ridiculously good is Baffert.  You want him to bring them back off 6+ months and go 1 1/4 miles off the layoff - he will do it.  Bring them back on 2 weeks rest in the Preakness - he can do that too.  

Just the best by a long long ways.

MJ,

I am often in agreement with what you post, but I guess I don\'t see the value in your point, if you don\'t mean the horse is \"live\".

YEs, in a couple of paceless Belmonts, Pletcher sent a few horses with minimal speed like Dunkirk and Commissioner.  I would disagree with Materiality being sent.  The horse was so disgustingly prepared and over the top, he couldn\'t get near a 48 and change half, despite having 46 speed.  Destin took a perfect pocket trip.  A Castellano special until the last damn stride.

As for this year\'s Belmont, there is enough speed that Tapwrit being sent or not is irrelevant.  If irish War Cry runs, he is way quicker.  Meantime is very quick.  Patch, Gormley and Conquest Mo Money all have more speed as well.  

Whether Tapwrit is sent or not, I don\'t see it affecting how the race gets handicapped.  Now, whether Tapwrit can run a big figure here, that is a question worth looking at.

Joe B - on a related point, not sure how the heck you come to a conclusion that IWC is distance challenged.  Distance Challenged horses don\'t run negative 2 at 1 1/8 in April of their 3 year old seasons.  The horse bounced off his first big figure in Florida and then bounced again in the Derby off the negative 2.  (as many predicted - me not being one of them, I used the horse).  HE has no distance challenges, at least none that we can see evidence for.  As a matter of fact the dam side breeding is awfully robust for distance.

MJ,

You could say more, but you are being too nice.

It was another in a long line of uninformed posts by Sekrah.  (that was me being nice, \"uninformed\" is not the right word)

Rail was bad in that Derby.  Yes, brilliant statement, if the rail was bad that would have to mean that Shackleford would run poorly in the Preakness.  Because facts and results in horse racing are extremely binary and not open to other variables.  It is that kind of game.

Sek,

You not being able to fathom a bias is your choice, but plenty of the rest of the population understands it.  That time period at Churchill Downs was particularly gruesome and was discussed ad nauseum on this board at the time.  CD somehow managed to mess up 3 or 4 straight big days with bad rails.  Two successive Breeders Cups along with 1 or 2 Derbies.  IT was bad.  

I think you should perhaps author a book, \"Track biases, global warming, men landing on the moon and other myths perpetrated on the public......\"