2 important points from last year's Belmont archives

[Uncle Buck]

Covel. Instead of telling us all about how you\'re going to take a big shot against Big Brown in 20 different threads over the past two weeks, tell us exactly what you\'re going to do, how much you\'re gonna spend doing it and then actually walk up to the window and take off the rubber band. That\'s what I want to read about.

If you want Brownie you got him brother. He will be served up on a silver platter with an apple in his mouth this Saturday. This will be your last chance. Call your shot.

As Dirty Harry said..\"Right now, you\'re wondering if Brownie fired five or six shots from his pistol. It\'s a .44 magnum and can blow your head clean off. Do you feel lucky? Well do ya punk?\"

[fkach]

Joe,

I tend to agree with you. Some handicappers associate a deep closing running style with stamina, but that\'s not always the case. A lot of those deep closers are dead tired by the time the real running starts and don\'t have near enough kick to make up all the ground.

[dpatent]

Jerry:  I\'ll save you the dime.  There are 13 races on the card so hopefully there will be some better betting opportunities than the Belmont.

I will have $2 win on BB just for a souvenir.  I will probably key him in a Super on top of every horse not named \"Casino Drive\".  If I bet more than 10% of my day\'s bankroll on the Belmont than I am in big trouble!

Opinions are cheap (mine included). As Harvey Pack used to say -- \"That\'s why they make you run around the block.\"

[fkach]

TGJB,

I agree that it\'s difficult to keep a horse at his peak for three tough races. However, I don\'t think it\'s very wise to dismiss legitimate excuses for specific horses that won\'t be applicable in this case when you are trying to determine what the probabilities are this time.

I guess horses players can debate which excuses were legitimate and which were nonsense suggested by people that don\'t know what they are talking about or nonsense promoted by the connections trying to save the reputation of the horse.

However, to me, some of the horses that lost had little or no edge over several horses going in. They were no better than 2-1 or 3-1 to win. One or two may not have even deserved to the be favorite despite winning the first two.  

On the flip side, IMO, Smarty\'s trip was more like a mugging. I think he was clearly best despite the loss. He ran a huge race. That kind of thing is way less likely to happen to BB than Smarty because of running style and jockey.

Holding BB together (especially considering the lost training) is a legitimate incremental risk, but on sheer ability, he has a much bigger edge and fewer question marks related to running style than most of the other recent horses that tried and failed. Weighing it all is the tough part.

[fkach]

dpatent,

I think you have it exactly right by pointing out that BB is NOT like some of the other horses that failed. He may fail himself, but the probabilities have nothing to do with the probabilities of horses like Charismatic, War Emblem, and others.