Manhatten is Freak Show

[Silver Charm]

Other than a Breeders Cup race this is the strongest race I\'ve seen in long time. The Manhattan/Belmont Double will pay good

[johnnym]

Off the top of my head thought Flintshire may be a single in horizontals.

[Silver Charm]

That may be the case but he sure didn\'t scare anybody away! $200,000 for 2nd doesn\'t hurt much either....

[albatross]

I notice CCB is listed as trainer. I don\'t recall,is this his first for Juddmonte? Always figured, being RFL\'s assistant he would eventually be their choice, was just too young when Bobby passed.

[jimbo66]

Silver,

will hold off until I see the TG sheets, but I think you managed to pick one of the worst betting races of a great card.  Flintshire is rock solid and going to take a lot of beating.  Most of the races before and the race after all better betting opportunities...

But let\'s see.  Maybe the TG sheets will have Flintshire a bit vulnerable.

Jim

[albatross]

I agree he is rock solid and has won 5 races, some very strong races, but I go along with Silver since Flintshire also likes to run second, 10 times, which works playing against him in the multis but we will see soon enough.
Best of Luck

[richiebee]

I\'m all for beating short priced favorites in the horizontals, BUT

1) Flintshire was DOMINANT in his only US start, and

2) Flintshire says \"Hello Lasix\" on Saturday.

I can afford to use Flintshire in the Pick whatever, because the Preakness winner
will not be on the ticket.

[trackjohn]

Agreed...could be a single...BUT...If memory serves...Flintshire has run 2nd ten times...comments??

[magicnight]

Flintshire did run 2nd in his first US appearance at the Breeders\' Cup, but I think Albatross\'s point would be more accurate if he said that Flintshire likes to run 2nd in the toughest turf races in the world. The Manhattan is not one of those.

[trackjohn]

Didn\'t see that post... thanks

[SoCalMan2]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'m all for beating short priced favorites in the
> horizontals, BUT
>
> 1) Flintshire was DOMINANT in his only US start,
> and
>
> 2) Flintshire says \"Hello Lasix\" on Saturday.
>
> I can afford to use Flintshire in the Pick
> whatever, because the Preakness winner
> will not be on the ticket.

I, too, am all for beating short priced favorites in the horizontals, but I, too, share RichieBee\'s concerns.

Flintshire has had more than one U.S. Start, but his effort at Saratoga last summer was mighty impressive.  A repeat of that should be good enough notwithstanding the weight differentials (barring trip issues).  By the way, while perhaps unlikely, a case could still be made that the horse is going to make a new top on Saturday.  He gets a new trainer (who some might call a super trainer) and he gets Lasix the first time and he is first off a long layoff. While it is hard to make it a fair comparison, the only time the horse had a layoff like this was between the 3yo and 4yo years and his first time back off the layoff was a major jump forward.  Of course,  a lot of that had to be the difference between 3 and 4.......but with new trainer, new medicine, and first off the layoff, I would have to think this horse is very solid to run his top and there is a chance he does even better.  You could poo poo that saying he is six years old, but it is not unheard of for super trainers to get new lifetime tops out of six year old horses.  If you believe the American trainers can use things that Europeans cannot, this horse is first time all that stuff as well as first time Lasix.

I think one of our sadly departed board participants used to be critical of the tendency to knee jerk throw out favorites.  I like betting against favorites sas much as the next guy, but I also know it is not something you can automatically always do, and you should be choosing the spots where you do it.  I think Flintshire is a perfect example of this.  I am not going to let him beat an otherwise good ticket.  BTW, I am not suggesting singling him (although I may load up a few extra times on him versus the others in the horizontals as you wont need as much fire power if you beat him).  Also, I will look at the verticals in the race -- if there are nice prices to catch underneath, a super with him singled in the top spot and catching something under should be rewarding notwithstanding the short price in the top spot.

[miff]

Marcus Hersh DRF:


Was as impressed as anyone with Flintshire\'s Sword Dancer but foes there since gone 16-1-0-3 in stakes. The 1 was Messi\'s nose win in a G3.

[Silver Charm]

Correct. It was a weak field....at that time. Horses going bad etc. This is a fresher group he faces, some of them are improving, and come in with much better resumes. Multiple Grade One winners on grass.  

Flintshire drew the 10 post and hasn\'t been out in 6 months. He is 6 so staying in condition isn\'t a major issue or maybe it is. Both Brown horses who ran in the Woodford on Derby Day needed a race. There are a couple of horse inside who are as fast with tactical speed and position to make this interesting. I\'m  not singling a 6/5 here. This isn\'t Nijinsky...

[SoCalMan2]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Marcus Hersh DRF:
>
>
> Was as impressed as anyone with Flintshire\'s Sword
> Dancer but foes there since gone 16-1-0-3 in
> stakes. The 1 was Messi\'s nose win in a G3.


And right after that race, Flintshire went off at 7-2 against 16 other horses in the Arc De Triomphe and ran second to Golden Horn while giving that horse 8 pounds.

In cases like this one, I am more inclined to believe the number than I am to call it into question.  I have seen numbers that look crazy before, but that number doesn\'t look crazy to me. I want to bet against the horse (and I will not be singling him in the horizontals -- although I may put extra on him in the horizontals)......but I think anybody going into this race has to be ready for the chance that this horse is legitimate. There are plenty of times I am ready to let a horse beat me and so be it.  I am going to feel like a fool if I do everything else right and the only reason I lose is because this horse is the real thing.

[SoCalMan2]

SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> miff Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Marcus Hersh DRF:
> >
> >
> > Was as impressed as anyone with Flintshire\'s
> Sword
> > Dancer but foes there since gone 16-1-0-3 in
> > stakes. The 1 was Messi\'s nose win in a G3.
>
>
> And right after that race, Flintshire went off at
> 7-2 against 16 other horses in the Arc De Triomphe
> and ran second to Golden Horn while giving that
> horse 8 pounds.
>
> In cases like this one, I am more inclined to
> believe the number than I am to call it into
> question.  I have seen numbers that look crazy
> before, but that number doesn\'t look crazy to me.
> I want to bet against the horse (and I will not be
> singling him in the horizontals -- although I may
> put extra on him in the horizontals)......but I
> think anybody going into this race has to be ready
> for the chance that this horse is legitimate.
> There are plenty of times I am ready to let a
> horse beat me and so be it.  I am going to feel
> like a fool if I do everything else right and the
> only reason I lose is because this horse is the
> real thing.

No offense to Marcus Hersh, but he must have missed the Grade 3 race won by Guardini at Randwick on April 16 (Maybe it doesn\'t count because it was Australia?).  Even if you adjust his statistics for truth, they are still misleading.  Imagining and Fixador (two of the 7 vanquished foes) were Grade I winners and they never ran again.  Flintshire shellacked the Sword Dancer field.  Does anybody say Secretariat\'s Belmont figure wasnt as good as it seemed because Sham didn\'t run again?  The horses that went on to win Grade IIIs after the Sword Dancer finished 7th by 18 lengths and 8th by 22 lengths in the Sword Dancer.  Rather than saying the Sword Dancer figure is overrated because the horses did nothing coming out of it, maybe they should consider that Flintshire beat subsequent Grade III winners by 18 and 22 lengths respectively and what does that say about the number?  I understand not blindly adhering to a number, but by the same token you shouldn\'t blind yourself when attacking a number.  I have looked at a lot of sheets.  I think anybody who discounts Flintshire\'s Saratoga number is doing themselves a disservice (unless there are better arguments to do it than what Marcus Hersh says).