Always negative

[covelj70]

sure, it was posted as the ROTW on May 19th, 2007 so its in the ROTW archives for that date.

I can\'t figure out how to paste the link once again proving I am a moron!

[smalltimer]

cov, you\'re way too hard on yourself!!  Calling yourself a moron?  Isn\'t that best left to some of the board bullies?  Some of them are quite good at it.....

[TGAB]

Thanks.

[covelj70]

hah, this is great.

I am used to getting called a moron in my day job so I am good at it!!!!!

[smalltimer]

Cov,
What a stupid response!!  lol

[ronwar]

Bernardini did put a few -3 together and retired injury free I believe

[rosewood]

Ron,

I think all Street Sense ever did after the Derby was to get beat a half head by Curlin and then win the Travers and Jim Dandy....

[Lost Cause]

covelj70 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree that I would like to see the race between
> those 2 on traditional dirt but Zenayatta ran the
> same number at Oaklawn on the dirt that she ran on
> the poly so I don\'t think Z is just a poly horse.
>
> RA has already run alot faster than Z ever has but
> it would still be a very fun race.


It\'s amazing the best three year old in America and the best older horse in America could possibly be female..I don\'t think I\'ve ever seen that before.
Is there an older male horse i\'m forgetting..The three year old crew left from last year are no good, Curlin is gone..

[covelj70]

Einstein is pretty special but its debatable about how he would fare against the two big fillies.

[Cartman]

That was an excellent summary. I would add one thing.

I don\'t think running fast is what takes a toll on a horse. It\'s running hard. It just so happens that running fast and running hard are often the same thing, but that\'s not always the case.
 
This is the kind of effort that takes a toll:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgj9LeZEUpo
 
This is the kind of effort that does not: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNkBuJtds58

I don\'t know the psychological term for it, but when people have a theory they tend to look for evidence to prove themselves right and ignore evidence against themselves. They also tend to data-mine.

Those that saw Big Brown as vulnerable in the Belmont will point to the Preakness and say he had an easy race but still bounced. But they are ignoring the fact that he missed training because of a RECURRING hoof problem that was totally unrelated to the Preakness.

In my opinion, Rachel Alexandra has no chance of duplicating her -4 in the Preakness (assuming she goes), but it won\'t be because that effort drained her. She won\'t get nearly as easy a trip in the Preakness as she got in the Oaks. I don\'t mean to diminish her excellence, but she sat off a vastly inferior rival, galloped past her, and was never challenged at any point in the race. I think that says almost as much about the quality of her competition as it does about her potential greatness. In the Preakness, she will face quality competition on the front end and then have to repulse multiple challenges late. That\'s the race that could take a toll because she\'s  well into this campaign and already at her short term peak.

[HP]

Big top filly + short rest for Preakness = bet against.  

HP

[TGJB]

Miff-- take a look at what has happened to the horses Jerkens has run back on short rest the last few years.

[TGJB]

Jimbo-- Einstein, Midnight Lute and others have gotten very big figures on synthetic, compression or no.

[TGJB]

You are going to get a chance to win your drink back, Jimbo. If Rachel runs in the Preakness and makes more than 2 other starts by Nov first, you win.

You guys are great. I made the point about Eight Belles before the race. I made the point about IWR before the race. I said it was no sure thing QR wouldn\'t get to the gate a month before the race. None of these seem to count.

Yes, some hold on for a while, a few (Curlin) more than a while. But this game is all about percentages. A very high percentage of young horses that run really big figures are set back or injured after running them, much higher than with the general horse population. Time afterward helps-- as I have said before, if a horse is slightly uncomfortable and slightly changes his stride, the results can be disastrous with the weight and speed issues involved. the more chance they have to get comfortable again, the better-- I think the 5 weeks after the Fla Derby helped Big Brown hang on as long as he did later in the year. If he had put that effort and the huge Derby 3 weeks apart, the Preakness might have been the Belmont.

[miff]

JB,

I\'ll assume you looked at Alan Jerkens and the quick returners don\'t do well. His point, on more than one occasion was, you run them when are appear to be doing well,rest them when they need it.

I\'ll have some data to share with you in the coming weeks re spacing(two years worth of stats from NYRA tracks). Without going into detail, dirt horses than ran back within 21 days or less won at a far higher percentage than horses that run back with more than 21 days.Not talking about what figs they ran or tops or anything like that.

Trying to get them to filter the data by levels/frequency( claimers, allowance stakes),and eliminating long layoffs,90+ days.Right now, it\'s just one big pot which I feel skews the results.Stakes runners might also be skewed cause guys just don\'t run back quick anymore.

Have you ever ran such a search from your data base re spacing?


Mike