Street Sense Derby Beyer: 110

[10 pnt move up]

the rail was gold saturday, watch the races and fractions all day and how middle closers did in general, either the entire card was a bunch of hangers or it was the rail.....street sense wins regardless, but hard spun was carried by the rail

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

street sense wins regardless, but hard spun was carried by the rail

Both horses raced on the inside pretty much throughout---but Hard Spun earned the right to have the rail position by setting strong fractions to get it.

Street Sense--a deep closer---only had his rail position and got to pass 16 horses without leaving it because of misjudgements by other riders (Zanjero mainly) and because of a fearless and historically great ride by Borel.

If Hard Spun was carried by the rail...so was Sedgefield....and to a much greater extent Street Sense---because unlike HS and Sedge, Street Sense got the favorable pace to go with the rail position.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Street Sense--a deep closer---only had his rail position and got to pass 16 horses without leaving it because of misjudgements by other riders (Zanjero mainly) and because of a fearless and historically great ride by Borel.

If Hard Spun was carried by the rail...so was Sedgefield....and to a much greater extent Street Sense---because unlike HS and Sedge, Street Sense got the favorable pace to go with the rail position.

Was the pace favorable to SS? THey went 1:11+ for 3/4 which is good for front runners. The early pace was fast, not brutally fast. Do you see this differently?

Also I thought SS passed 18 other runners?

[The Indomitable DrugS]

he went around the final two he passed...and lugged back into the rail.

Yes, the pace was certainly more favorable to SS than HS---but, it's the Derby, and the pace is very often too fast. The nature of the race.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

he went around the final two he passed...and lugged back into the rail.

Yes, the pace was certainly more favorable to SS than HS---but, it's the Derby, and the pace is very often too fast. The nature of the race.

Tell me something...What pace do you think would have been favorable to front runners? 1:12? 1:13??

They hit the 3/4 in 1.11+ Isnt this ideal for front runners????????

[philcski]

Originally Posted by easy goer

Tell me something...What pace do you think would have been favorable to front runners? 1:12? 1:13??

They hit the 3/4 in 1.11+ Isnt this ideal for front runners????????

They went 46 1/5 to the half. That is NOT favorable to frontrunners at a mile and a quarter.

The rest of the pace was beaten 37, 45, and 52 lengths. 'Nuff said.

Originally Posted by philcski

They went 46 1/5 to the half. That is NOT favorable to frontrunners at a mile and a quarter.

The rest of the pace was beaten 37, 45, and 52 lengths. 'Nuff said.

I mentioned the early pace was fast in my original post; should have referenced that to the 1/2 mile time. But it was not brutal, such as 45+ would be. And that is why I asked him if he looked at pace differently that I.

Is the 1/2 mile time more important than the 3/4? Or vice versa? Or they both are? How do you look at this? That is why I asked it the way I did. Still not getting much of a response on this.

[sumitas]

The pace was way fast enough to knock most of the horses out of the race in the stretch. It was a fearless run and ride. It's gonna take a lot of horse to beat SS the next two.

Originally Posted by sumitas

The pace was way fast enough to knock most of the horses out of the race in the stretch. It was a fearless run and ride. It's gonna take a lot of horse to beat SS the next two.

A non sequiter. What does SS ride have to do with the pace?? The fact that the pace was moderate means that SS did quite well to win this coming from behind.

So yes, its gonna take a lot of horse to beat SS. And this is MAKING MY POINT!

[cmorioles]

That was not a moderate pace by any means. Comparing fractions from year to year is futile, as the track can be vastly different. Sure, the Derby is usually run at a faster clip, but the horses in front usually finish way, way, way behind.

What was War Emblem's pace? That should give you an idea of the type pace needed to win up front.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by easy goer

I mentioned the early pace was fast in my original post; should have referenced that to the 1/2 mile time. But it was not brutal, such as 45+ would be. And that is why I asked him if he looked at pace differently that I.

Is the 1/2 mile time more important than the 3/4? Or vice versa? Or they both are? How do you look at this? That is why I asked it the way I did. Still not getting much of a response on this.

Both are obviously important, but it always seems like the no-hope frontrunners burn up after 4F (the most recent examples being Songandaprayer, Brancusi, and Keyed Entry.) It's more important to see what the other horses around him did than the ACTUAL time, b/c the track obviously differs from year to year. He was the only frontrunner still breathing at the end, and the other 3 in the top 4 came from wayyyyyyyy back.

Originally Posted by cmorioles

That was not a moderate pace by any means. Comparing fractions from year to year is futile, as the track can be vastly different. Sure, the Derby is usually run at a faster clip, but the horses in front usually finish way, way, way behind.

What was War Emblem's pace? That should give you an idea of the type pace needed to win up front.

:47 and change or something if I recall?

Originally Posted by cmorioles

What was War Emblem's pace? That should give you an idea of the type pace needed to win up front.

47+, if memory serves. I think so, because I recall the Preakness went notably faster in like 45+. I think his derby 3/4 was 1.11 but just guessing. Its an easy look up obviously.

Only one front runner has won w/ a sub 1.10 that is Spend a Buck. There are a few that have won with 1.10+. From my recollection 1.11+ is just about ideal for a front runner.

If this pace was so torrid why did HS finish well? He finished up in 25.4 which is fairly strong for a front runner.

Part my thinking is that DrugS is right about one thing: This is a poor class. I mean, most of them died after going a mile under a pace that was fast-then moderate. Cowtown, Teuf, Liquidity....These horses obviously are not meant for 10f. So I think he's right about the overall crop in general.

His beyers at Churchill are just much faster than anywhere else. May just be a Churchill loving horse. If he can run a big number elsewhere I will be a believer, but he has never done it. His 108 and a 110 were both at Churchill, where he appears to be a different horse.

[tector]

46 and 1 is a moderate pace in 1.25 mile race NOT run on the old asphalt tracks of SoCal? You're kidding, right?

[tector]

DrugS--I thought Sedgefield was a real surprise, since, while not nearly as impressively as HS, he was basically the "next horse" anywhere near the front that managed to stick around at the end. I don't know if the Preakness is the best move for him--I think if they pick their spots, he could be a nice horse. Coming back in 2 weeks against the top three, plus the new shooters, doesn't seem like a formula for success, however.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by tector

DrugS--I thought Sedgefield was a real surprise, since, while not nearly as impressively as HS, he was basically the "next horse" anywhere near the front that managed to stick around at the end. I don't know if the Preakness is the best move for him--I think if they pick their spots, he could be a nice horse. Coming back in 2 weeks against the top three, plus the new shooters, doesn't seem like a formula for success, however.

he rode the rail the WHOLE way, I hate him next time he runs

[10 pnt move up]

the pace was quick early and then slowed down, pretty typical of the senario for a closer to win, hard spun ran very well, i think he is a pretty good horse. I dont think however that on the square he will beat street sense.

[tector]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

he rode the rail the WHOLE way, I hate him next time he runs

Well, as my comments indicate, I wouldn't use him either. I don't think, however, that the rail was as almighty as you suggest, turning a turdball into a horse that bested many much more highly touted horses. Curlin, unlike most, managed to finish well ahead of Sedgefield, and without the gift of The Great Rail--but he's likely a superiour animal. My point was that Sedgefield might be a nice horse--but not of the quality of the top three, and would likely be better off dodging them and the new shooters in 2 weeks.

[jjf1031]

Originally Posted by sumitas

The pace was way fast enough to knock most of the horses out of the race in the stretch. It was a fearless run and ride. It's gonna take a lot of horse to beat SS the next two.

I agree. Believe Hard Spun might take a backward step after strong work Derby week and hard run in race itself. FFC will also make the pace lively in Preakness. SS will be tough to down and from a wagering standpoint while Chelokee intrigues me I feel he will be seriously overbet due to being a new face and the semi-tough trip in Florida derby.

I liked NBLS and see no excuse for his Derby run as if he had any horse he could have kept SS pinned down during his run near quarter pole. Is Tagg bringing him back for the Belimont? Likes the track and maybe pace scenario we usually get in Belmont will help him be a threat to SS