![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Agreed. It seems to me that there have been years in the past where a horse with International Star's connections, PPs, and pedigree would have been one of the top two or three choices. This year he probably won't be in the top six or seven.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() And still with the ark derby upcoming. Been a great spring.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Looking at Lucky, anyone?
__________________
Tod Marks Photo - Daybreak over Oklahoma |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Looking at Lucky was the favorite at 6:1
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() That was the point. This year, he wouldn't be just as International Star will have longer odds.
__________________
Tod Marks Photo - Daybreak over Oklahoma |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Deep in what sense? I think that's more a function of fields in recent memory being such low standard than anything else. In terms of Beyer figs, this anticipated field is not dissimilar to that of last year, which has been denounced as a weak crop. Some of these may turn out to be great in the future without having a chance to win the Derby, e.g. Materiality, if that's what you mean? There's a few of the more favoured runners that I would be very surprised to see win.
I can only see five of the horses with any points whatsoever having any chance of winning, but only really like one, maybe two out of that five. There's two more extreme longshots that can potentially join that list of five if they have positive showings that fit my criteria at Oaklawn this weekend. Subjectively, liking one or two of twenty to win doesn't make it "deep". |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I'm not exactly sure who that member is (no offense to PG1985) but at least you didn't call me RockHardTen so I guess that must be a compliment.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Those two posts might be the best consecutive posts ever!
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Be thankful that you can handicap horses far better then you can handicap DT Posters.
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
that would be a blast. 20 posts / 20 posters, who remain anonymous,try to match one list with the other. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I fluke out winners. My handicapping methods sway from the norm and my racing opinions are generally derided.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
It's all downhill from here.
__________________
"I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'." |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
PG1985 IS RockHardTen!! new name after banishment |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]() No there haven't been. He is way too slow to have ever been one of the first three choices. Plus, there is absolutely nothing sexy about him whatsoever.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Wasn't Friesan Fire the post time favorite in his race? Do you really think International Star looks that much worse than FF did coming out of Louisiana?
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I like horses that aren't overtaxed in their last prep (the Upstart love is great - keep it up) and saw how easily IS managed the LA Derby field first hand. Will be very interested in how Far Right responds over fast dirt tomorrow, and hesitant to dismiss anyone based on "being way too slow" in preps where they weren't really stretched. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
My point wasn't that people should bet on International Star. My point was that in this Derby people probably won't bet on a horse like him because there appears to be a considerable number of very talented colts in the race. That hasn't always been the case in past years. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
His Risen Star was similar. He galloped out strongly in both efforts and really only needed to run the last 3/8ths or so. Additionally, he should definitely get a more favorable pace scenario in Kentucky and is a must use IMO. To toss the horse based on presumed slowness is a bit perplexing, is all. |