Come on, Chuck, it's a little far fetched to use his pedigree as a reason for his loss yesterday. You may have felt he was not bred for 10 furlongs prior to yesterday's race. However, he had no chance to get 10 furlongs with Revolutionary's pedigree with the ride he was given.

The idea to get him more involved early pre-supposed a moderate pace. Castellano has two major flaws as a rider. He is a HORRIBLE judge of pace and he has patented the ill-timed far turn move. Both of these flaws were exposed yesterday. The pace was MUCH faster than most expected, but there he was on Normandy Invasion, shoulder to shoulder with Goldencents just before the half-mile pole. He then asks him for a huge move at the 7/16ths pole and collars Palace Malice and Oxbow, who are not passed by another horse for at least another furlong.

Of course it does, but since I watched the race it is pretty obvious to me that under the right circumstances he can get the distance. Moving as he did between the 1/4 and 1/2 mile calls was a bit silly, and he still hung on for a good fourth. If that was the trainer's plan, as it seems, it was a dumb plan.

Mylute is Midnight Lute out of a Valid Expectations mare. He was about a length and a half behind Orb and following him wide the entire way.

He was only beaten 3.75 lengths and finished in a photo for 4th with Normandy Invasion.

Ideally, Chad Brown would have somehow had the foresight to know Palace Malice would run off in blinkers and the race would be a +30

Shackleford and Comma to The Top can be grabbed and dragged along by their riders through a half in 48.63 in the 2011 Derby... but certainly no speed of their caliber was in this field, BUT all it ever takes is for one horse to completely run-off and the others will chase for their position.

The mediocre Make Music For Me (Bernstein out of a Carson City mare) was 20th and last by more than 28 lengths after a half mile behind the 46.16 half mile in 2010. Make Music For Me closed 24 lengths in the Derby to finish 4th. Why? Because he liked the added distance? It sure didn't prove that way in the Belmont when he was 10th at every call the whole way around behind a slow pace.

Whenever you have a +30 race ... the further back you are the better off you are. Even being 28 lengths back, like Make Music For Me, is much preferable to being 8 lengths back.

There are no absolute truths in this game.

We don't know what happened to make the horse finish the last 1/4 slow. Could be premature move, could be pedigree, could be physical issue considering he is now off after a grueling 3 race campaign.

If he gets trapped behind the collapsing speed you'd kill him for that.

Midnight Lute sprinted because of airway issues not pedigree

I've heard that said many times now.

It's still early, but Midnight Lute offspring have won 19% of their sprints (111) and finished in the money in 48% of them.

They've won 12% of their routes (71) and finished in the money in 39% of them

Meanwhile, Valid Expectations was a pure sprinter who never even raced beyond a mile in a racing career that spanned 27 starts.

Well he was a pretty good sprinter himself no? Aren't the route numbers better than you'd expect for a sire who was only a sprinter? Especially considering that his oldest foals are 3? His best horses have mostly run well in routes.

You make it sound as if those were his only two options. Staying outside of the collapsing speed but not hard sending NI after them at the 1/2 pole was completely plausible. Riders get beaten with premature moves every day, it just so happens that this one came under the microscope of the Derby. I don't think it's debatable that Castellano's ride cost NI any chance at the win though.

Any horse can clunk up and run well at a distance beyond their best if there is an insane pace and the race falls apart.

I remember a horse that Skiffington had called Hollywood Handsome. He was by Groovy out of a His Majesty mare who won grass races at 1 3/8ths coming from last. There are exceptions and things that dont make sense in breeding/racing.

I hardly paid attention to the Derby run up and didnt bet a cent on the race. Someone whose opinion I respect didn't like NI because of the pedigree. After watching the race it is hard to say he was wrong that a slight horse out of a Boston Harbor mare would have trouble making the 1/1/4.

This years half mile has been called "the 4th fastest in Derby history" but it's really a three-way tie for being the 2nd fastest in history, because both Groovy and Top Avenger ran a generic 45 1/5.

Here's a recap of the top finishers in these meltdown years:

Fastest Half in Derby History: Songandaprayer 44.86

Monarchos rallied from 16 lengths back to win this Derby.

Point Given, was 2nd by 1.5 lengths after a mile, but he faded badly in the stretch to finish 5th beaten 11.5 lengths.

Point Given won the Preakness, Belmont Stakes, Haskell, and Travers in his next four starts. His 12+ length victory in the Belmont Stakes over both Monarchos and Invisible Ink helped prove conclusively he was too close to the Derby pace.

Co 2nd fastest Derby half: Top Avenger 45 1/5

Pleasant Colony rallied from 18 lengths back to win. The top five finishers raced 16th, 19th, 12th, 18th, and 20th after a half mile. Pleasant Colony was off at 3/1 odds. The 2nd place finisher was 34/1. The 3rd, 4th, and 5th place finishers were all part of the mutual field.


Co 2nd fastest Derby half: Groovy 45 1/5

Ferdinand raced dead last early in 16th position and won this Derby from 20 lengths back at 17/1 odds. Snow Chief made the first middle move and faded to finish 12th. He won the Preakness by 4 lengths over Ferdinand next time out. Broad Brush raced 6th after a half mile, led after a mile, and finished 3rd.

Co 2nd fastest Derby half: Palace Malace (45.33)

19 horse field, the top five finishers raced 16th, 15th, 18th, 7th, and 17th after a half mile.

It is debatable, that is the crux of the issue. If there were absolutes it would be a lot easier to win. IMO his move was visually enhanced by the other speed stopping. Don't the internal fractions show that?

How many of you bet on him?

I picked him 2nd and needed him for some nice money in bets tied into Princess of Sylmar on Friday ... I also made myself look like a bigger fool than ever with continual downplaying of Orb ... which I couldn't resist until watching Authenticity and Take Charge Indy both run huge on Friday.

Still ... if the roles were reversed ... and Orb ran the race Normandy Invasion did and Normandy Invasion ran the race Orb did ... I'd say without hesitation that Orb was too close to the pace and arguably best.

How about trackus ground loss?

The move was eerily similar to the move he put Bernardini through in the BC Classic. It was too early. I'm surprised there is debate about it. He was pushed-on for his bid outside the quarter pole in a race where the winning move is almost often after they straighten away.

If I'll Have Another was pushed into the pace on the far turn, he doesn't win. Obviously not every race is the same, but how many times is the Derby winner moving into contention as they near the quarter pole, and then taking over in the straight versus a big move on the turn? There are only so many Big Browns.

He ran 40 feet less than the Orb. What is that 2 or 3 lengths?

That stat would matter if he was far back as Orb, versus moving into the teeth of a wicked pace many lengths ahead of Orb.

NBC did a pretty cool segment with Donna Barton walking the track.

It came right before the Kevin Krigger piece.

The inside path and 2-path both were firm. As she walked across the track, her foot started to sink down in the 3 path, 4 path, 5 path. She said "the track is much deeper here" But from about the 6 or 7 path outward, the ground was suddenly firm again.

It's tricky to account for ground loss when the rail and 2 path look good, the 7 path and out look good ... and everything in between them looks deeper, and according to Donna Barton, was deeper as she walked over it.

The piece was with 2 hours and 42 minutes left in the 4 hour broadcast if you DVR'd it. She's standing in the stretch.

Maybe next time it rains, they could have Dickinson walk the course in ladies shoes like he used to when he'd train.

She did a very similar segment when Super Saver won. In fact, she might have even mentioned the perfect path was right where Calvin Borel liked to be.

So ground loss only matter based on pace?

No, of course not. The race completely collapsed. Normandy Invasion made a premature move in my opinion worth more than the x number of feet he traveled less than Orb. Let's be real. Orb won, but Golden Soul was second. The race was an utter meltdown. If Normandy Invasion waits, I think he wins, or comes very close.

In hindsight, it was foolish for Javier to make that move during the second quarter, but perhaps Javier was just following orders, albeit orders that were given with the thought that the pace wouldn't be as fast as it was. If Chad Brown's strategy was to have Normandy Invasion actually be in the lead in the stretch (something which NI hadn't done in a long time) and make the others catch him, then the strategy worked as planned.

Even if he moved a little later, he still doesn't beat Orb.

but he has to promise to stick a finger down into it as well.

So assuming they were side by side in Orb's position for the first mile you believe NI would have out finished Orb and won the derby? It's not a preposterous position but it sure doesn't have much evidence behind it. Now lo and behold this colt that is still eligible for 1NX is going to out run the Fountain of Youth and Florida Derby winner who is on the improve? Lot's of very smart people think NI is a very good colt and he obviously was given a suspect ride but IMO he only beats ORB Saturday if Orb fell. Currently Orb is quite a bit faster and more importantly handy enough for a good rider to adapt to changing race dynamics.

This is as indefensible an absolute as someone that says Normandy Invasion would definitely have won had he been ridden well.

There are a lot of misconceptions in racing, but to me, few things are as misunderstood as how seemingly minor events in a race can dramatically affect the outcome. The ride on Normandy Invasion was far from a minor event.

Let me pose a question that hasn't been asked....if Orb had gotten the same ride/trip that Normandy Invasion did, and Normandy Invasion had gotten Orb's trip and ride, what do you think the outcome would have looked like?

modern breeding for distance has pretty much lost its relevance in handicapping. A horse like Beholder would have been an auto-toss in a race like the Oaks 30 years ago.

Any number of horses win with Orb's trip. Very few, if any, win with NI's trip.

I had him in the Pick 5, but I also had five other horses including the winner, so it's not as if him not winning ruined my day.

If his early move was an optical illusion based on others stopping, how come there was no one even close to moving with him? If taking on the leaders that early was just a natural progression of the race's dynamics, shouldn't there have been other horses following his move then? But there were none. It was just Javier, hard-sending after speed that was about to collapse and then getting passed over the top by more patient riders.

According to the equibase chart (which obviously isnt as accurate as trakus data) he actually lost ground during that quarter.

How does one go about calculating this? I'm being serious. When a horse "moves" is basically a visual interpretation of the race considering virtually all dirt races are slowing down when the moves occur. How do you measure that against 40 feet?

It was a 19 horse race. 3 finished ahead of him. When he made his move he passed 4 of them. What happened to the other 11?

Maybe, but he passed five horses while doing so. That is pretty rare at the distance, that early in the race.

I don't understand. Are you saying he wouldn't have passed those 4 horses had he not moved when he did? And the fact that only 3 beat him is a credit to the horse, not some kind of retrospective justification of a ride almost every serious handicapper agrees wasn't good.

Flower Alley did something similar.

In fact I think that should go down as one of the all time worst Derby rides, think it was Chavez.

To be fair there are 19 horses in the race so passing 5 is like passing 2.5 in a field of 10 and you see that plenty.

Frankly all but a few of the horses moved to early. I guess the NI supporters are of the opinion that if the jockey had the were with all to rate 4 or 5 lengths further back and then make a move 2 or 300 yard later that NI would have beaten the two that finished ahead of him. I guess that is fair but I really dont get the point other then NI could have been second with a better timed move.

Does anyone believe NI is a better horse then Orb or just that he still should be looked at as a viable option the next time he races? Shoot Goldenscent is a viable option so is Palice Malice and Revolution for that matter.

Isn't the 2nd quarter at 1 1/4 run partially around the 1st turn? Him being on the inside may have more to do with that.

I saw the piece and it was pretty clear there was some very deep paths. Orb appeared to be on the good part out in the center of the track, and Revolutionary closed on a good rail.

Just that 11 horses didn't manage to finish ahead of him despite his riders egregious mistiming. Perhaps some of those may have done better had then laid closer? And if NI's ride was egregious then what do you call Mike Smiths or John Velasquez's or Trujillo's or Kriggers?