Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Bailey vs. Azeri (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16813)

The Indomitable DrugS 09-18-2007 11:46 PM

I obviously don't hold the fact that Azeri wasn't beating tough fields against her - I just don't think she was on the same level as the other superstars from a decade and two prior.

She was very good and very consistant - and didn't run for hop trainers - but being the best filly or mare of this decade is a lot like being the prettiest girl at the fat camp.

Coach Pants 09-18-2007 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
I just went back and watched Magnificience's first 2. God, I hope she comes back.

She's trained by Heady Lamarr.

Antitrust32 09-19-2007 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell


1:45 4/5th is an insane time. Go for wand was awesome!

King Glorious 09-19-2007 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
1:45 4/5th is an insane time. Go for wand was awesome!

2/5's off of Secretariat's track record. And this came after a Saratoga meet where she won the Test in 1:21 and came back nine days later to win the Alabama in 2:00 4/5.

Indian Charlie 09-19-2007 12:23 PM

lakeway went 145.4 going 9f both earlier in her 3yo season and on a track that was a 2 turn 9f race.

King Glorious 09-19-2007 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
lakeway went 145.4 going 9f both earlier in her 3yo season and on a track that was a 2 turn 9f race.

She went 1:46 4/5 in the Hollywood Oaks. She went 1:46 2/5 in the Mother Goose. That Hollywood race was brilliant.

justindew 09-19-2007 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Bailey tried to win the race, period. He knew he had one chance to win and that was to wire them. If anyone is at fault it would be Pat Day who pressed the pace even though it obviously was fast. What was Bailey supposed to do? Shout over to Day, "Hey Pat I'm gonna slow it down a little. Please dont pass me."? Watch the race and tell me where the opportunity was for him to back the pace up?

And Justin you must not be too old because Azeri, while a good horse, was not in the same class as many of the good filliy and mares of the 80's like Lady's Secret, Winning Colors, Personal Ensign, Go for Wand, Bayakoa.....

I'm 31, for the record. I never saw any of the above in person. Nor was I a fan of the sport then.

Indian Charlie 09-19-2007 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious
She went 1:46 4/5 in the Hollywood Oaks. She went 1:46 2/5 in the Mother Goose. That Hollywood race was brilliant.


oops! thanks for the correction. are you sure it was only 46.4 for the oaks though?

and yeah, her hollywood oaks win was electrifying.

King Glorious 09-19-2007 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
oops! thanks for the correction. are you sure it was only 46.4 for the oaks though?

and yeah, her hollywood oaks win was electrifying.

I'm almost positive. I was there. I had bet Sardula, another really underrated filly. It takes a pretty talented filly to be able to run fast enough to go 1:21 and change and win a grade two race (now grade one) and also be able to win the Kentucky Oaks.

Danzig 09-19-2007 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants
She's trained by Heady Lamarr.


that's headley!:D

v j stauffer 09-20-2007 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
that's headley!:D

"I didn't get a harrumph from that guy!"

Danzig 09-20-2007 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by v j stauffer
"I didn't get a harrumph from that guy!"

harrumph!:D

disappearingdan_akaplaya 09-20-2007 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Bailey rode Roar Emotion exactly as she figured to be ridden. It was Day's job to deal with it, and Lukas's, and they failed to do so.

Smarty Jones lost the Belmont because eventually Stewart Elliot was forced to make actual riding decisions on that horse. Not surprisingly he failed miserably.



well this debate will never end but i think elliot made the right choice that day, he couldnt just sit out wide all the way around, smarty woulda been beaten by more had he done that

blackthroatedwind 09-20-2007 11:00 AM

The Triple Crown offers a myriad of challenges to any horse and that is the real reason why it is so elusive and difficult to win. Inevitably in a challenging three race series even the best horse will be faced with situations that prevent it from overcoming the obstacles. More often than not the Derby is the toughest race due to the extreme field size. Smarty Jones's Derby was dramatically compromised by the thunderstorms that turned the track into a quagmire and prevented a true race from being run. But, ultimately he was unable to succeed in all three races, whether it was rider error or a more fairly run race that eventually did him in. Much like Afleet Alex and Point Given, Smarty Jones was most likely the best horse of his generation, but not good enough to win the Triple Crown. That doesn't diminish his talents....it is merely the reality of the situation.

The Indomitable DrugS 09-20-2007 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Much like Afleet Alex and Point Given, Smarty Jones was most likely the best horse of his generation, but not good enough to win the Triple Crown.

IMO, compared to the rest of their crops, all three of them were easily good enough to win the triple crown, they just didn't do it.

blackthroatedwind 09-20-2007 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
IMO, compared to the rest of their crops, all three of them were easily good enough to win the triple crown, they just didn't do it.

They didn't " just not do it. " They lost becuase they weren't so vastly superior to their opposition to overcome all the obstacles the Triple Crown presented.

Sure each could have won the race they lost if they ran it ten times....but each would have lost another leg had they run that one ten times.

The Indomitable DrugS 09-20-2007 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
They didn't " just not do it. " They lost becuase they weren't so vastly superior to their opposition to overcome all the obstacles the Triple Crown presented.

I hear ya.

But, each of them were good enough to do it. In one case (PG Derby) a horse just didn't fire - and in two cases (AA Derby & and SJ Belmont) I think they both clearly ran the best race of anyone - albiet in losing efforts.

You look at a horse like Real Quiet - who was smoked by Indian Charlie in the SA Derby and had embarassing losses in Northern California and at Santa Fe Downs earlier on....with a highly criticized Belmont ride, he came within a nosebob of a triple crown sweep.

I do understand your point, however, contrary to recent history and all the stats, I'm not really sure you have to be so vastly superior to your opposition to sweep the series. It just seems that way.

King Glorious 09-21-2007 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
I hear ya.

But, each of them were good enough to do it. In one case (PG Derby) a horse just didn't fire - and in two cases (AA Derby & and SJ Belmont) I think they both clearly ran the best race of anyone - albiet in losing efforts.

You look at a horse like Real Quiet - who was smoked by Indian Charlie in the SA Derby and had embarassing losses in Northern California and at Santa Fe Downs earlier on....with a highly criticized Belmont ride, he came within a nosebob of a triple crown sweep.

I do understand your point, however, contrary to recent history and all the stats, I'm not really sure you have to be so vastly superior to your opposition to sweep the series. It just seems that way.

Same with Silver Charm. A lot of people speculated that, because of the type of heart he had, if he had seen Touch Gold coming up on him in the Belmont, he might have dug in and held him off. What people forget is that had it not been for horrible racing luck in the Preakness, Touch Gold would have won that race too and he, not Silver Charm would have been the dual classic winner. Instead it was SC that got the honors. I think in his case, not only was he not vastly superior, I don't even think he was superior at all.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39 AM.

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