Terrific result today for those of us who like Honor and Serve in the Derby

[Footlick]

It seems to me that you build up stamina with works longer than 6 furlongs.  Jaycito has 3 7 furlong works so far.  I think he was undertrained and Mr Mott knew it.  He hoped THAS\'s class would carry him farther.  I\'ll still wait for his next race and see.

[jimbo66]

Michael,

The X-ray argument is crap, at best.  Which races were affected by the condylar bruising?  Every race but the Derby?  We are to assume he got the bruising in the Derby, and therefore the miserable Preakness, Haskell and Travers are excused?  Do you have the x-rays before and after each race?  

The horse ran 5 races as a 3 year old and in one of them he ran well, the Derby, which was run over a wet track (which he was bred for).  You want to get rid of the words \"wet track wonder\" and replace them with \"moved up on a wet track\", so be it.  

He was 1 for 5 as a three year old, and the win was in the slop.  That is enough \"data\" for me.  

You can point to his numbers and pattern, but there is more to a race than the final TG number.  His \"1 point off his top\" race in the Arkansas Derby was not a good race.  

As for TG and RAgozin getting the Derby figure wrong, I didn\'t say that.  What I said was that his Derby was slop-aided.  That horse doesn\'t race off the lead for the first time in his career, rate kindly, pass horses and then pull away in the stretch, on a dry track.  He proved that to me with his subsequent 3 races, which abyssmal.  D\'Tara and Commendable-like.

[Michael D.]

jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael,
>
> The X-ray argument is crap, at best. Which races
> were affected by the condylar bruising?  Every
> race but the Derby?  We are to assume he got the
> bruising in the Derby, and therefore the miserable
> Preakness, Haskell and Travers are excused?  Do
> you have the x-rays before and after each race?  


There is no x-ray argument. There is an scan fact. The horse got the scan after the Travers, and the news was not good. He was obviously hurt. The Ark Derby, Ky Derby, and Preakness look to have taken their toll, but we don\'t know for sure. SS may have bounced to the moon in the Preakness, and may or may not have been sound for the Haskell. Nobody knows exactly when the horse got hurt, but he was certainly not a sound animal by the end of the summer. From the DRF: "A bone scan revealed marked activity in all four cannon bones," said Bramlage. "The left front fetlock has the most radiographic change with a major bruise on the cannon bone.  [/i]


> The horse ran 5 races as a 3 year old and in one
> of them he ran well, the Derby, which was run over
> a wet track (which he was bred for).  You want to
> get rid of the words \"wet track wonder\" and
> replace them with \"moved up on a wet track\", so be
> it.  


Wrong. You can type that in a thousand more times, and it will be wrong every time. The Ark Derby was only a point worse than the Ky Derby. Calling the Ark Derby not good, then telling us the horse was a wet track wonder because he ran a single point better in the sloppy Ky Derby is laughable. 2 of SS\'s previous 3 races, all run over dry tracks, were similar in performance level to his Derby run. The Derby was a point better, and that point was a perfectly logical condition move. And I\'m not cherry-picking the TG\'s because they fit. Rags actually had the Ark Derby and Ky Derby the exact same.

And I can not get rid of the \"wet track wonder\" tag Jim. You are going to have to do that by simply stating \"I was wrong\". If you wanted to argue that SS took to the slop well, thus giving him a pretty good shot vs some of the others who didn\'t, then you should have just said that to start, instead of making the erroneous case you\'ve made. A lot of people think SS enjoyed the slop that day. There is a huge difference between that and a one race \"wet track wonder\".


> He was 1 for 5 as a three year old, and the win
> was in the slop.  That is enough \"data\" for me.  


I\'ll ignore the \"that\'s enough data for me\" comment, because I know you know better Jim, and I\'m not looking to pile on, but the slop race was a single point better than the next race, and 2 points worse than the following CD race, the \'2.25\' while setting a stakes record over a dry track.


And yes, there is more to a race than a number, a lot more. But do you really think we should be trusting your judgement on this particular set of figures? You really botched this race badly (apparently taking a fellow forumite down with you). I know when I botch races, and that happens every time I sit down to handicap, I certainly don\'t pop in here and try to tell others how to decipher a set of figures I just read incorrectly. I read what others write, and try to figure out why I was wrong.

[jimbo66]

Michael,

The horse ran 6 races as a 3 year old, and ran faster than his 2 year old top exactly once.  On a wet track.  Lucky for you, that was in the Derby.  

Yep, I mucked up the Derby bet, which is far from unusual.  That proves nothing.  Does the fact that my biggest win in 2010 was in the Travers make me right about Super Saver?  No, it doesn\'t.  It made me right for one race, the same way the Derby loss made me wrong about one race.  

I am done with the topic.  You can have the last word.

[Michael D.]

jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael,
>
> The horse ran 6 races as a 3 year old, and ran
> faster than his 2 year old top exactly once.  On a
> wet track.  Lucky for you, that was in the Derby.



Jim, that doesn\'t change the fact that the two year old top was a fast race run over a DRY CD surface. A \"wet track wonder\" doesn\'t put up a \'2.25\' over a dry track at age 2, setting a stakes record in the process. It also doesn\'t change the fact that the wet track Derby run was only a point faster than both the 2 yr old race and dry track Ark Derby, proving further that SS was not a one race wet track wonder.

And you keep pretending that injury thing never happened.


> Yep, I mucked up the Derby bet, which is far from
> unusual.  That proves nothing.


Of course it proves something. It proves you handicapped the race incorrectly. I handicap most races incorrectly, and will probably handicap this year\'s Derby incorrectly. I could very well handicap all three triple crown races incorrectly. It\'s happened before, and will happen again. If/when I do, I\'m going to learn from the mistakes rather than rationalize them. And I\'m definitely not going to preach to the winners as to how they should have interpreted the figures.


> Does the fact that
> my biggest win in 2010 was in the Travers make me
> right about Super Saver?  No, it doesn\'t.
> It made
> me right for one race, the same way the Derby loss
> made me wrong about one race.  



No. Super Saver had a career ending injury that none of us knew about, and I don\'t think he was a factor in the wagering.

And I didn\'t see the Travers post. I wish I had. I would have learned something. Completely misread that one.

[Michael D.]

he was holding 75-1 at this time last year on a horse that probably would have won the Derby by 5 lengths, maybe the triple crown.

any futures action this year, Michael?

[ajkreider]

Honest question.

Pattern-wise, would you rather have a horse with a huge regress off a big figure and a layoff, or a horse with a marginal regress off a similar big figure while racing/training?

Point is that Soldat also did exactly what his fans would like at this point in the campaign - regress off a big effort.  Except that he didn\'t regress as much and looked much better doing it.

[jimbo66]

Having misguided so many people on Super Saver, I am hesitant to answer, but it strikes me that Soldat may be sitting on 0-2 and be in line for an \"x\" next time out, which would make him a reasonable play to bounce back the following race in the Derby, if he does indeed \"x\" in the Florida Derby.  THe old \"Thunder Gulch\" pattern, from what I remember.  And you would likely get value on Soldat in the Derby in that scenario, as many will question his pedigree as not being 1 1/4.

I guess the next race will be the litmus test for To Honor and Serve.  Healthy 3-year olds should get back to their top in the first or second race off the layoff.  If THAS doesn\'t get back to a \"0\" in the next race, he would be a toss for me.  If he runs big, his fans will have something to hang their hats on in the DErby, albeit likely at shortish odds, pending Uncle Mo\'s comeback.

[miff]

Soldat greatly improved this year but....His neg TG -1.5,although a brilliant performance,is incongruous with any of his prior performances and Saturdays FOY. Soldats neg -1.5 was earned on a wet track which should never be believed until it is somewhat matched on a dry surface which he did not do on Sat.I do not believe he reacted from his prior effort,I think he just excelled on that wet surface.

Both of his wins this year have been on speed favoring tracks where he made the lead from the inside, dynamics he probably will not get if he gets to the gate in the derby.He will also have much tougher animals to contend with beside Gourmet Dinner,a decent but rather harmless TC entrant.

Re THAS,unless he shows up next time with something close to his 2 yr old brilliance, he\'s toss number 1.THAS was my early pick to pass Uncle MO in development at three,better body, better breeding,better trainer.


Mike

[big18741]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/sports/01racing.html?_r:2

Pass me the Koolaid.

[Footlick]

The thing Soldat has going for him is that he can capitalize on things like taking the lead when he has to do so, like in the FOY when he broke from the 1 hole.  I don\'t feel he needs the lead.  I feel that he can rate, like he did in the BCJF.  To me, that is his strength.  Is he my Derby favorite?  No, as I feel it is too early.  Is he dangerous, probably because he is versatile and that is always a plus in the Derby.

[Footlick]

I agree that the FL Derby is make or break for THAS.  Johnny V said he reminded him or R Heat Lightning\'s first race, so we will see.

[sekrah]

Winner by devastating knockout:  Michael D.

[sekrah]

Was his Nashua fig inflated too?   When Johnny geared him down the final 150 yards?

I haven\'t seen another horse in this 3yo crop put up a 1:12 6f fraction with the ease THAS has.   His cruise control is light years above everyone else I\'ve seen so far.   Eagerly awaiting 15-1 in Pool 2.

His form looked as perfect Saturday as it did in the Remsen and Nashua.   The only thing he was missing was conditioning.  It\'s been a long time since I\'ve seen a horse set up to peak perfectly come May.   Fortunantely for Mott, THAS has developed ahead of Bernardini\'s schedule.

This is a special race horse.

[miff]

\"I haven\'t seen another horse in this 3yo crop put up a 1:12 6f fraction with the ease THAS has. His cruise control is light years above everyone else I\'ve seen so far\"


Sek,

Check out a horse named Uncle Mo, you might be impressed.


Mike