[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by CSC

I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but the bases seem to be loaded(covered)with this post. True his races in Canada were not overly impressive it is also fair to say at that stage of his career he was not the horse he is today. While I agree to a point he still has to prove he can run at as well at a mile to a mile and an eighth, today was not the day to make that determination.

One question. How do you know it wasn't? If it's because he didn't run to expectations, I'd like to know how those expectations were reached. Were they expectations or assumptions? I had seen no reason going into the race that he would be able to handle the conditions today and therefore, I had no expectation of him winning. I will admit that I didn't think he'd finish as bad as he did but to be honest, and I realize that this won't be believed, his finish today surprised me less than a win would have. I went in thinking one of two things would happen:

-he'd vastly improved, would take on the challengers, run them off of their feet and would dominate the race and prove his recent form was not just due to circumstances being in his favor but that he was really that good.

-he still was the same horse that had had previous troubles trying stakes company and going two turns and would be nowhere to be found at the end.

I was betting on the latter scenario. I didn't figure on anything in between. It was inconceivable to me that he could handle the conditions and still get beaten by a better horse.

When I handicap, or at least try to, what I try to always go against is a horse that's favored to do something because it's assumed he can do it when facing other horses that have proven they can.