Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Travis Stone
Nothing.
What is driving me nuts in the entire debate is no one takes into consideration the dynamics of pace. Pace can make any horse look good, or bad.
Does anyone really think Dare and Go was better than Cigar? Of course not, but the pace killed Cigar. Only truly amazing superstars, of which we've probably only seen one in the past decade, can overcome it.
As for the Woodward, Macho Again, regardless of how he finished in the Clark, was a good horse at Saratoga this summer. He was given the Woodward trophy on a platter when they turned for home and he still couldn't grab it. For Rachel to be pressured and pressed like she was and still find enough to hold-on late is remarkable.
The Clark says nothing to the Horse of the Year debate. It is a non-starter when you consider the dynamics, which no one seems to want to do.
|
Was the pace of the clark particularly slow? I didn't think so. They ran a 47 and 3 half. Regardless of time, it was pretty well contested and two horses that were on the lead finished dead last and second to last and one of those horses was a top betting choice. Einstein managed to rally from the clouds to get a minor share.
Saying that Macho again was a "good horse at saratoga this summer" seems like you are implying that Macho Again particularly relishes that track. In fact, Bullsbay and Macho Again both had done very well previously at churchill downs.
So what happened to the second and third place finishers of the woodward in this race?