Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smuthg
....I tend to put a lot more "faith" in the beyer figures when it comes to comparing horses over generations (I think he estimates big red's Belmont at a 139) because I think the focus on "speed" and raw talent tends to get clouded when human judgment attempts to add or subtract points for the horse's "trip"...
|
Come again
****
Speaking of the Belmont, I just watched Smarty JOne's Belmont again and one thing I got out of it was a bit more respect for Stuart Elliot. Rock Hard Ten basically challenged Smarty from the 1/2 mile pt. onto the 1 mile and it's hard to see how he could have pulled back on Smarty. Smarty turned back challenges from 3 contenders at that pt. before finally succumbing.
Plus, Elliot was real gracious in defeat doing two interviews with dignity.
THe other thing that got me, was the annoying comments from Randy Moss on the Wire to Wire show the following tuesday. First he says Smarty basically walked through the first 1/2 mile..True, the went 48+. Then he says Smarty just didnt have it in him, he wasnt good enough because Pt. Given's Belmont, he was ahead of Smarty at all points of call in the race; mentions a couple of others that were, and Go for Gin's Belmont, he was ahead of him at nearly all pts of call.
Yeah, they were ahead of him on time precisely because the first half was run so slow. What Moss doesnt mention is that after a 1/2 mile Smarty ran a 23 sec. quarter and then a 23 4/5 quarter. he runs the middle half mil in 46 4/5! That's why he lost, or one of the reasons he lost.
THe way Moss puts it, it's like pace has nothing to do with racing. Or that pressure has nothing to do with it, or that running an incrementally faster fraction means nothing. His analysis makes elapsed time the only factor.
This is clearly an incorrect analysis, pressure in the internal fractions, or just having to run slightly faster is crucial to these races. Moss totall overlooks all that.
Sometimes, Moss really annoys the hell out of me.