I completely disagree.
First of all, my friends who properly evaluated him were NOT betting against him in the weak fields he faced, as it's all about relative ability.
Secondly, he didn't just fail the ONLY time he met even a reasonably tough field, he was drowned.
As for this year, he lost in essentially a match race in his return this year, as the third and fourth finishers in that four horse field are not even competitive in 25 claimers. Hardly an excusable loss for the supposed best sprinter in the country.
As for his Churchill race, it was a decent performance at best, as all he did was stalk a very slow pace set by an overmatched horse and hold off an established mediocrity ( one who failed after having the race wrapped up in his previous start to the aforementioned overmatched mediocrity ). He did what he had to do, which is his greatest quality, but it was simply nothing close to a " huge " effort.
And, let me go back to your opening paragraph and your comments about the people I know. These people are some of the most recognized names in handicapping in the game and, believe me, I have talked racing with them for years and respect their opinions greatly. I am not somebody who is even close to assuming someone is sharp because they write for a paper....I know these individuals are sharp because I have seen their results over many years. They are hardly the " I told you so " kind of people.
|