Derby Trail Forums
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   SCORECARD: Weekend of Parity (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17214)

King Glorious 10-07-2007 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Why is that?
I'm wondering if it's because of the same reason I think the JCGC and the Arc are not good preps. Those races for so many years have been the major objective of 2yo's and it's often going to take a peak performance in order to win it. It's hard to return a few weeks later and repeat it. I wonder also how much the fact that the Belmont races are one-turn races compared to most of the BC Juveniles being two-turns has to do with it?

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 03:34 PM
I don't have rules. I handicap the races and look for horses that make sense to me. I'm obviously in the minority.

King Glorious 10-07-2007 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
I don't have rules. I handicap the races and look for horses that make sense to me. I'm obviously in the minority.
I do that as well. Rules go out of the window when I think a horse is the best for a race (love Surf Cat today for example). But there have only been two horses that have won the Champagne and Juvenile and four that have won the Frizette and Juv Fillies even though quite a few of them have gone off at pretty low odds.

SentToStud 10-07-2007 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
I don't have rules. I handicap the races and look for horses that make sense to me. I'm obviously in the minority.
Most people I meet are badly dressed liars. Walk it off...

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SentToStud
Most people I meet are badly dressed liars. Walk it off...
Yes, but are they balding as well?

Kasept 10-07-2007 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Why is that?
I sense that it's because of the requirements for success in a one turn mile versus the (generally run at) two-turn mile and a sixteenth.. Utterly different and on a short turnaround between the events, the horses coming out of successful Champagne-Frizettes have gone too fast early and been punchless late in BC Juvies.

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
I sense that it's because of the requirements for success in a one turn mile versus the (generally run at) two-turn mile and a sixteenth.. Utterly different and on a short turnaround between the events, the horses coming out of successful Champagne-Frizettes have gone too fast early and been punchless late in BC Juvies.

I'm not endorsing War Pass for the BC Juvenile, though obviously at this time he is as strong as anyone, but I think it is fair to say that he could well be at a stronger tactical advantage in the Juvie at Monmouth than he was at Belmont. It is easier to bottom a field out going two turns there than it is at Belmont.

I am loathe to bet one way speed horses, and the fact that War Pass has not shown an ability to rate as of now is certainly a cause for pause, but tactically he may well be stronger next time. Or not.

Kasept 10-07-2007 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
I'm not endorsing War Pass for the BC Juvenile, though obviously at this time he is as strong as anyone, but I think it is fair to say that he could well be at a stronger tactical advantage in the Juvie at Monmouth than he was at Belmont. It is easier to bottom a field out going two turns there than it is at Belmont.

I am loathe to bet one way speed horses, and the fact that War Pass has not shown an ability to rate as of now is certainly a cause for pause, but tactically he may well be stronger next time. Or not.
The Monmouth factor is a GREAT point.. Although someone, may have been Hammerle, was saying this week that MTH trackmen have been working over the surface at Oceanport considerably after BC-NTRA officials voiced their concerns from the Haskell visit.

The reason I brought up the non bet-back topic harkens to researching Champagne winners BC Juvy histories after a discussion with Lansdon Robbins in reference to First Samurai. Since the advent of the BC, their have only been a couple standouts in the Juvy after winning the Champagne... Think I may still have the notes I made as a matter of fact.. I'll look for them as they were surprising.

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 09:10 PM
Yeah, if you disect Champagne winners that ran in the BC I think you will find they didn't necessarily underperform...at least dramatically. It feels a little like the ridiculous Juvie/Derby jinx.

I have no idea right now what the Juvenile field will look like when assembled, and the posts are drawn, and right now I tend to favor Tale of Ekati, but considering the overall ineptitude we have seen, I can't dismiss any horse because it won a big race. Who are all the hidden horses out there this year?

Kasept 10-07-2007 09:30 PM
Since 1990... Champagne Winner in BC Juvy

13/2-0-2 (And since Timber Country.. 9/0-0-2)

06 Scat Daddy - 4th @ 7-2
05 First Samurai - 3rd @ 3-2 (At Belmont)
04 Proud Accolade - 6th @ 5-2
03 Birdstone - DNS
02 Toccet - 9th @ 8-1
01 Officer - 5th @ 3-4 (At Belmont)
00 AP Valentine - 14th @ 5-2
99 Greenwood Lake - DNS
98 The Groom is Red - 6th @ 3-1
97 Grand Slam - 8th @ 2-1 (eased with cut)
96 Ordway - 3rd @ 3-2
95 Maria's Mon - DNS
94 Timber Country - WON @ 5-2 (At Churchill)
93 Dehere - 8th @ 3-4
92 Sea Hero - 7th @ 5-2
91 Tri to Watch - 8th @ 5-1
90 Fly So Free - WON @ 3-2 (At Belmont)

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 09:36 PM
Point Given was a very hard luck second to AP Valentine and then an even harder luck loser of a photo to Macho Uno. Henny Hughes arguably ran better than First Samurai two years ago and came back to do the same in the BC.

Honestly, looking at that list only Dehere's failure surprised me.

My point is that solid handicapping will make the right decisions and going into your handicapping with a preconceived bias will harm you in the long run.

Kasept 10-07-2007 09:43 PM
Updated
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
15 graded stakes have been run since Friday's kickoff at KEE... (Granted the races are far flung with regions represented widely (BEL-MED, LRL, KEE-HOO, SA), but the success is still being remarkably spread around..

15 different trainers have won the 15 races, (including Rusty Arnold, Lynn Whiting, Ben Perkins Jr., Frank Brothers and John Glenney)..

An interesting sidelight? No Pletcher-Velasquez.. No Mott-Desormeaux.. No Biancone-Leparoux.. And mercifully, only one Asmussen..

13 different riders on board, (including Jimmy Graham, Larry Melancon and Jamie Theriot)... with only Corny Velasquez (MED Cup, Jamaica) and Robby Albarado (Breeders', IN Derby) gettings pairs..


The winning trainer-jock combos through Sunday:

ALCIBIADES (Gr. I): Frankel-Bejarano (Country Star)
MED CUP: Dutrow-C. Velasquez (Diamond Stripes)
IN OAKS: Brothers-M. Smith (Tessa Blue)
SYCAMORE: Glenney-Graham (Transduction Gold)
SHADWELL (Gr. I): Proctor-Theriot (Purim)
BREEDERS (Gr. I): Arnold-Albarado (Wicked Style)
CHAMPAGNE (Gr. I): Zito-C. Velasquez (War Pass)
FRIZETTE (Gr. I): Baffert-Gomez (Indian Blessing)
HIRSCH (Gr. I): Drysdale-Talamo (Artiste Royal)
IN DERBY: Asmussen-Albarado (Zanjero)
FIRST LADY: Clement-Nakatani (Vacare)
TCA: Perkins-Dominguez (Wild Gams)
JAMAICA: Tagg-Castellano (Nobiz Like Shobiz)
PHOENIX: Whiting-Melancon (Off Duty)
SAFELY KEPT: M. Mitchell-J. Rose (Sindy With an S)
Updated through Sunday...

JEROME: McLaughlin-Luzzi (Daaher)
SPINSTER (Gr. I): Pletcher-Gomez (Panty Raid)
LADY'S SECRET (Gr. I): Baffert-Espinoza (Tough Tiz's Sis)
OAK TREE MILE (Gr. I): Frankel-M. Baze (Out of Control)
ANCIENT TITLE (Gr. I): Sise-Flores (Idiot Proof)

20 stakes...

18 different trainers (Only Frankel & Baffert with pairs of winners..)

17 different jocks (Only C. Velasquez, Albarado & Gomez get 2 each..)

miraja2 10-07-2007 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Glorious
I'm wondering if it's because of the same reason I think the JCGC and the Arc are not good preps. Those races for so many years have been the major objective of 2yo's and it's often going to take a peak performance in order to win it. It's hard to return a few weeks later and repeat it. I wonder also how much the fact that the Belmont races are one-turn races compared to most of the BC Juveniles being two-turns has to do with it?
This is the point that you (and others) make all of the time that just makes absolutely no sense to me. Really good horses string together good races in a row quite often. By this logic it seems like a horse such as War Pass would be a more likely winner of the Juvy if he had run considerably slower in the Champagne and finished third.
That is completely illogical.

Kasept 10-07-2007 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Point Given was a very hard luck second to AP Valentine and then an even harder luck loser of a photo to Macho Uno. Henny Hughes arguably ran better than First Samurai two years ago and came back to do the same in the BC.

Honestly, looking at that list only Dehere's failure surprised me.

My point is that solid handicapping will make the right decisions and going into your handicapping with a preconceived bias will harm you in the long run.
Agree 100% on Point Given's Champage as I recall the rail opening miraculously for Chavez on AP Valentine.. The loss to Macho Uno was agonizing as PG wins with the wire 3 inches further away.. And point well taken on the capping notion..

Andy.. Who was Tri to Watch? Have not one iota of a recollection of that '91 Champagne winner.. None. A Fred Hooper runner trained by Carl Domino.. but what else did he ever do?

paisjpq 10-07-2007 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

My point is that solid handicapping will make the right decisions and going into your handicapping with a preconceived bias will harm you in the long run.

which is reinforced by the payouts of the BC Juvie....the betting fav has won 8 times and we have only had double digit payouts 4 times (three in the past few years)....so while the Champagne winner might not have been winning, logical horses were.

miraja2 10-07-2007 09:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
Agree 100% on Point Given's Champage as I recall the rail opening miraculously for Chavez on AP Valentine.. The loss to Macho Uno was agonizing as PG wins with the wire 3 inches further away.. And point well taken on the capping notion..

Andy.. Who was Tri to Watch? Have not one iota of a recollection of that '91 Champagne winner.. None. A Fred Hooper runner trained by Carl Domino.. but what else did he ever do?
I don't think he ever did anything else. He ran second or third in the Futurity that year I think, won the Champagne, and that was it.

blackthroatedwind 10-07-2007 09:55 PM
I have very little memory of Tri to Watch, and was surely at that Champagne, so he must have been pretty nondescript.

miraja2 10-07-2007 09:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Yeah, if you disect Champagne winners that ran in the BC I think you will find they didn't necessarily underperform...at least dramatically. It feels a little like the ridiculous Juvie/Derby jinx.

I have no idea right now what the Juvenile field will look like when assembled, and the posts are drawn, and right now I tend to favor Tale of Ekati, but considering the overall ineptitude we have seen, I can't dismiss any horse because it won a big race. Who are all the hidden horses out there this year?
I hope you are right about Tale of Ekati. I'm a big Sunday Silence fan, and I don't get much of a chance to root for his progeny over here. It is nice to have a promising 2yo with some Sunday in him to follow. He has certainly looked pretty nice thus far.

Kasept 10-07-2007 10:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by paisjpq
which is reinforced by the payouts of the BC Juvie....the betting fav has won 8 times and we have only had double digit payouts 4 times (three in the past few years)....so while the Champagne winner might not have been winning, logical horses were.
Interestingly, since 1999, Champagne non-winners have fared very well.. Chief Seattle, Point Given, Afleet Alex and Henny Hughes (all runners up in the Champagne), all finished 2nd in the Juvy, and Chapel Royal (2nd, 2003) was 3rd in the BCJ. High Yield and Sun King both were 3rd in the Champagne and BCJ...

Cannon Shell 10-07-2007 10:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasept
Interestingly, since 1999, Champagne non-winners have fared very well.. Chief Seattle, Point Given, Afleet Alex and Henny Hughes (all runners up in the Champagne), all finished 2nd in the Juvy, and Chapel Royal (2nd, 2003) was 3rd in the BCJ. High Yield and Sun King both were 3rd in the Champagne and BCJ...
How has #2 done at Keeneland so far?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:36 PM.
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.