Originally Posted by DonGuido (Post 1041577)

Problem? AP is not "normal". Wrong on both accounts but no biggie.

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi (Post 1041581)

It would be interesting to know what exactly was Lezcano's game plan with Frosted. Was he simply targeting American Pharoah or was he trying to make the lead (perhaps thinking AP would sit just off the frontrunner ala the AK Derby, KY Derby, and Haskell)?

From a running style standpoint, Frosted is fairly versatile. He showed solid early speed in Florida and in his maiden breaker at 2. In the Wood, he seemed rejuvenated with an off-the-pace style (although I believe he also had corrective throat surgery at the same time). In the Derby, he came from well out of it and closed stoutly, yet ultimately made no impression on the top two home. In the Belmont, he stalked and let American Pharoah dictate the running, then made a strong move at him (while having to steady slightly on the far turn) in the stretch, but could not get even within a length of him. So unless his connections were resigned to running for second money, sending him to the lead made a lot of sense. It was the only tool they had yet to use to reverse form on AP.

Of course, it still didn't work. But what it did do was force Espinoza to ride the race as if it were 9f and not 10f. As Baffert himself said, AP won the Kentucky Derby "on guts" and "got away with it". Many people suggested, despite winning the Derby, that AP had come back down to earth. The rest of the Triple Crown, which was practically scripted for AP's ascension (a torrential downpour minutes before the Preakness, a paceless Belmont) brushed away all those nagging concerns about AP and distance limitations. The facile manner of the subsequent Haskell further solidified the mantle of invincibility bestowed on this horse. But in the end, like many a brilliant racehorse, AP will always be vulnerable at the classic distances, especially when there is an honest pace scenario.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 1041689)

NYTimes article- Baffert's preference is to train up to Breeders' Cup. Joe Drape's writing can make me crazy sometimes, but this is a nice piece.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/31/sp...tion.html?_r=0

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi (Post 1041581)

... So unless his connections were resigned to running for second money, sending [Frosted] to the lead made a lot of sense. It was the only tool they had yet to use to reverse form on AP.

Originally Posted by Dunbar (Post 1041703)

According to Bloodhorse, it was not Kiaran McLaughlin's intention at all: "Frosted's trainer Kiaran McLaughlin said he didn't expect for his colt to press American Pharoah."

see http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...m-team-pharoah

Originally Posted by Merlinsky (Post 1041702)

I figured that would be Baffert's take. I didn't think he'd shy away from doing that at all, esp. because it didn't seem like they were too excited about the timing of the other options, esp. ones the facing elders, pre-Classic. I wouldn't doubt they've got Beholder in the back of their mind right now.

Originally Posted by MaTH716 (Post 1041720)

Not sure why people are killing Lezcano, I thought he gave Frosted a terrific ride. If he doesn't go, everyone is bitching and moaning how they all let AP waltz on the front end. He never got in front of AP in the past with the tactics that were used, so why not switch it up?

As far as Victor goes, I thought I heard him say in an interview that he knew at the half pole that he didn't have the horse that he was use to having. That being said, he kept him engaged and AP deserves some credit for digging in and putting Frosted away.

Then there is Keen Ice, who is getting zero credit. Sure Javy let Lezcano and Frosted do all the dirty work, but I do think this horse is improving. I honestly didn't expect him to win, but he was on my pick 4 ticket (that was dead after the first leg), just cause he was the only horse that I remember on Haskell day that seemed to make up any type of ground on the Monmouth freeway (regardless of AP being geared down at the end), plus the added panel.

I just don't get all the complaining. Zayad gave us what we wanted and he got beat. That's what makes this game so great. Let's just hope they decide to run him in the Breeders Cup, that would be fun.

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk (Post 1041719)

I thought it funny that right after the race Zayat was, "Maybe we should retire him. I think we should retire him," and the next day Baffert was just, "Yeah, we'll train him up to the Classic."

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 1041723)

my only concern is did he ride frosted to win or get him the best possible finish? that's a jocks job. they're only supposed to ride one horse, not two.
if he only rode to pressure ap and they both get beat, than i can see why there'd be complaints

Originally Posted by MaTH716 (Post 1041725)

But it wasn't like he quarter horsed him out of the gate to get the jump or pressure AP. He stalked for the first half in what was a sensible pace, cause no one else went. Then he made a move and put a nose in front at the top of the lane. A better horse just dug in and put him away. Where does he finish if he doesn't stay near the lead? He certainly doesn't win, does he finish second?

I just dont understand it. If you want to kill someone, how bout Kent? What exactly was his gameplan on Texas Red? Or did something happen with the horse that I am unaware of?

Originally Posted by jms62 (Post 1041727)

My 2 cents. At that point of the day the track was extremely favorable to the front end. I can see where Lezcano would think if he let AP get the jump the game was over for him. I can also see where Espinoza saw the same thing and felt the only way he could lose is let Frosted barrel ahead on the lead and let the track carry him. Hence a classic duel ensued. If Pharoh holds on we are talking about an incredible effort for the ages that he gets headed but courageously battles back to win. No one did anything wrong in my opinion. It was a classic horse race and that is why they run em cause the 1/5 favorite can get beat.

One negative I take away is the constant whining from Bafferts camp. It seems like he thinks it is his divine right to have his super horses be uncontested for the lead. Think back to the whining with Game On Dude after his losses.

Originally Posted by JimmyEllis (Post 1041728)

Lezcano didn't do anything wrong. Espinosa did have the option of stalking. Why the focus on Lezcano rather than Espinosa? Johnny V wins on AP. Espinosa not only let an inferior horse, that did essentially ZERO running, win a coveted race but he also gutted his horse in the process. Did he actually think that Frosted would beat him (unlikely) or was he more concerned with winning by open lengths - without regard to the cost to the horse?