Uncle Mo and GP

[joekay]

It looks like TAP is going to go to Tampa and Aqu for the preps.  I think that\'s a good move, not so much for the timing, but for the track.  I just didn\'t trust horses repeating their GP performances on other tracks last year (like QR for example), and I think Mott\'s colt, especially with his style of running would be well served prepping somewhere else too.

[covelj70]

I agree that avoiding the GP preps are generally a good idea but for a slightly different reason.

I don\'t think the times or biases are the problem in repeating performances after a GP race but I think that track is absolute murder on the horses.  It\'s so hard that so many horses come down with feet issues or other joint problems.  As you say, QR is one that I think suffered from that.  I think Big Brown\'s feet issues had the same root cause.  Ice Box only really ever ran 1 more race after his big Fla Derby.

That track takes its toll on the horses. There are some exceptions but generally speaking, the last few years, alot of the 3 yr olds that have prepped in Flordia haven\'t stayed on for a full campagin.  Now, it\'s hard to isolate the variables because it could just be that they are being pushed too hard to make the Derby regardless of where they are prepping but there has been a very high indidence of issues on that GP surface.

I am scheduled to run a bunch at GP over the next month but only on the turf and I am ok if the races come off the turf onto a sloppy track but I won\'t run one at GP if its a \"fast\" main track unless we absolutely have to.

[Silver Charm]

Cove good luck!

The prepping distances can be a bit of a problem also. There is no mile and 1/16th at GP. So a more logical one step at a time, for 3YO\'s at least, isnt really there. Since Tampa itself can have its own ship in ship out issues it may be better to run their more than once.

Dont you just love the time of year where we can have these kinds of conversations.....

[ajkreider]

You may be right, but this seems like the kind of thing that needs a serious study, to avoid the temptation of cherry picking examples.

BB had two dirt races at GP, and one was taken off the turf.  That enough to cause his foot issues that seemed to be there from early on?  Went on to a decent season, as I recall - including the Derby.

QR didn\'t make the derby, but he did come back to win a graded sprint later in the year.  Went on to win the Met and Suburban after his two at GP last year.

Jackson Bend looked pretty good in the Preakness.

First Dude, Fly Down, A Little Warm did just fine after running over the GP dirt - all on the board or better in graded stakes.

Barbaro?  Okay.  But he certainly wasn\'t ruined for the Derby.

Esky?  Looked good in the Wood.

And so on.  Not saying you\'re wrong, just not sure.

[covelj70]

a few points,

First, I totally agree that a real study would be the right approach which I obviously haven\'t done.  Beyond doing that, this is all just opinion and fun stuff to talk about.

Second, I said \"while there are some exception\"

Third, I actually would highlight horses like Barbaro, Esk, Ice Box, JB, Big Brown and Quality Road as exactly the issue I am highlighting.  You run on that surface and it causes at least the beginnings of a physical problem.  We all know from following this game that those problems take different amounts of time to manifest themselves depending on the horse and the specific issue.  Point I am making is that you run a race or two over a \"bad\" surface and a problem begins to develop and not until the next race or two after that does it really become an issue that prevents the horse from running or running well again. For some of those horses, the issues improved over time as they moved away from that surface, for others, it may have hurt them permanenty.  

One spefici example of this from last year is Ice Box. I saw Ice Box the day before the Derby and the horse looked like an absolute mess physically. No way to prove it was the Gulfstream surface that caused this but it\'s at least possible. Several horseman I was standing with all agreed.  Then he runs huge the next day and that\'s it for him.  One (and again I totally conceed that there are other explanations) explanation is that the surface at GP did him in.

Fourth, I very much agree with Silver that the lack of a 1 1/16th mile config is a bad thing and that contributes to the issue.  Very few horses want to go 1 1/8th in their 2nd or 3rd start.  It\'s very difficult to isolate the variable of the surface or the distances, etc.

[joekay]

On Cove\'s 4th point,  isn\'t amazing that no one on Stronach\'s staff had the onions to say...\"now wait a minute Frank, you\'ve got to be an idiot to reconfigure a Mile track that is famous for it\'s 3yo Derby preps, to a 1&8th oval...if you want a one turn mile, put a chute on it.\" Unbelievable.

[Michael D.]

covelj70 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> a few points,
>
> First, I totally agree that a real study would be
> the right approach which I obviously haven\'t done.
>  Beyond doing that, this is all just opinion and
> fun stuff to talk about.
>
> Second, I said \"while there are some exception\"
>
> Third, I actually would highlight horses like
> Barbaro, Esk, Ice Box, JB, Big Brown and Quality
> Road as exactly the issue I am highlighting.  You
> run on that surface and it causes at least the
> beginnings of a physical problem.  We all know
> from following this game that those problems take
> different amounts of time to manifest themselves
> depending on the horse and the specific issue.
> Point I am making is that you run a race or two
> over a \"bad\" surface and a problem begins to
> develop and not until the next race or two after
> that does it really become an issue that prevents
> the horse from running or running well again. For
> some of those horses, the issues improved over
> time as they moved away from that surface, for
> others, it may have hurt them permanenty.  
>
> One spefici example of this from last year is Ice
> Box. I saw Ice Box the day before the Derby and
> the horse looked like an absolute mess physically.
> No way to prove it was the Gulfstream surface that
> caused this but it\'s at least possible. Several
> horseman I was standing with all agreed.  Then he
> runs huge the next day and that\'s it for him.  One
> (and again I totally conceed that there are other
> explanations) explanation is that the surface at
> GP did him in.
>
> Fourth, I very much agree with Silver that the
> lack of a 1 1/16th mile config is a bad thing and
> that contributes to the issue.  Very few horses
> want to go 1 1/8th in their 2nd or 3rd start.
> It\'s very difficult to isolate the variable of the
> surface or the distances, etc.


hi Jim,

they want their horses to run a mile and a quarter the first week in May, 1 3/16 two weeks later, and a mile and a half three weeks after that, but are that concerned with an extra 1/16 of a mile in March??

7f, 1m, to 9f is a fine way to prep a horse for the Derby. if they want more two-turn experience, run two 9f races at GP. they card plenty of them. if your horse is unable run two 9f races at GP, he most likely won\'t be ready to run in the 3 triple crown races, or even the 10f Derby. and the way the trainers fine tune 3 yr olds these days, getting a similar amount of conditioning from a 1 1/16 or 9f race really shouldn\'t be that big of a problem. but, hey, the trainers know more than I.

GP has produced the outstanding 3 yr old racing since the change. last year\'s Fla Derby wound up being a deep race, with horses like First Dude, Ice Box, Game on Dude, Pleasant Prince, Miner\'s Reserve, and Soaring Empire all proving to be relatively good horses in a weak 3 yr old division. it really isn\'t broke. sure, I\'d like to see a 1 1/16 config, but there\'s no run-up in the 1m races, so I doubt they had the space. and the 1m turf oval and 9f dirt oval are things that should not be messed with, certainly not for the sole purpose of running 1 1/16 dirt races. by the way, anybody notice that they have distinct inner and outer turf courses at GP? I knew they moved the rails a lot, but didn\'t think they ran on two different courses in one day. that would have been nice info to have.

as for the track, I would like to see a deeper surface. I have not, however, seen any stats from GP that would suggest an injury problem (could be, I just haven\'t seen them). prepping the fastest 3 yr olds in the land, which is what GP gets, to make the Ky Derby is a risky proposition. that level of speed, stress, and competition is likely to lead to a higher rate of injury, regardless of the surface.

anyway, really looking forward to this meet. yesterday was a great opening day for the track and Village, and the weekend racing looks strong.

good luck with your turf runners, Jim.