Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
There's no chance that Cacique or EC would have beaten The Tin Man even if the pace was faster. The Tin Man does not need to run the half in :50 to win. That made his job easier but I think he could have gone :48 3/5 and still won. He doesn't even need the lead to win. In the San Marcos at Santa Anita, they went the half in :47 1/5. The Tin Man sat 1 1/2 lengths off the lead and won the race race pretty easily. You know who he beat that day? He beat Milk It Mick. Milk It Milk came back in his next race and barely lost to English Channel and Cacique. Milk It Milk had a lot of trouble that day too. He had nowhere to run the final 1/16th of a mile. He may have actually beaten Cacique with a clean trip that day. It would have deinfitely been a photo.
So The Tin Man beat Milk It Mick a lot easier than Cacique did and that was even when The Tin Man rated in 2nd off a :47 1/5 half.
Cacique and EC were not going to beat The Tin Man no matter what today. Letting him run the half in :50, made it much easier on him but hey weren't going to beat him any way. Neither one of them were closing any ground. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't have expected them to be closing too much ground with those fractions. However, I would have expected them to close a little bit. EC was actually losing ground in the stretch. Cacique was actually losing ground too. If you watch the replay, you will see that Cacique was actually within a length of The Tin Man at the head of the stretch. By the time they got to the 1/16th pole, The Tin Man had pulled away by 3 lengths. You can't use the pace as an excuse when your horses are losing ground in the stretch. That's ridiculous.
|
I think you can use the fact that racing a minimum of 3 wide the whole way around vs right on the rail....how many lengths does that equate to in a race of that distance?