A new poll - for men only

[Antitrust32]

2:07 final time... really Brian, even those dogs should be able to run faster than that.

the poly is crap! at least cushion seems to be ok, hopefully if other tracks switch, it will be to cushion and not poly.

Del Mar, Woodbine, and Arlington should throw that **** out and get a refund.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

2:07 final time... really Brian, even those dogs should be able to run faster than that.

Yep.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Yep.

Star of Cozzene and John Henry won their Arlington Millions in 2:07 and change, I believe. Dogs.

Uproar, please.

[boswd]

Some facts from the Pac Classic

Poly was the reasone for the slooooww time - Fact

Despite the size of it the field outside of LavaMan was weak - Fact

Lava Man did not handle the poly well - fact

Student Council is a non deserving GI winner who benefited from the Poly -
we don't know yet. We will have to see how he does in his next few efforts. It's not the first time a longshot bomb (mule) has won a major race.
Hmm Giacomo, Lemons forever ( I think that's the one - KY Oaks winner last year) Sarava in the Belmont, Volponie in the BCC. just to name a few.

Let's see what he does the rest of the year.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Star of Cozzene and John Henry won their Arlington Millions in 2:07 and change, I believe. Dogs.

Uproar, please.

Not sure I would compare poly to turf...

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Not sure I would compare poly to turf...

Neither would I, except to make this incredible point I'm in the middle of making.

See my last post -- so why are you comparing final times on poly to an old dirt track?

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Neither would I, except to make this incredible point I'm in the middle of making.

See my last post -- so why are you comparing final times on poly to an old dirt track?

I see your point, but the fact still remains that it was run probably an average of 7 seconds slower than it ever has been. That's kind of scary... why would we want to change racing in that kind of manner?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

I see your point, but the fact still remains that it was run probably an average of 7 seconds slower than it ever has been. That's kind of scary... why would we want to change racing in that kind of manner?

what is scary about it? its just a time.

what should the time have been? what is the optimum time for a 10F race on poly in your opinion?

if its too slow why can't I also make the claim that 2:02 is too slow and claim that the dirt tracks be sped up? why not 1:59 or 1:57? Lets make it a speedway.

when you go to a Nascar race do you care about the elapsed time or who the winner was and how the race was ran? I don't know but I'm asking because I think the time is irrelevant.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Apples and oranges again.

Only slightly, and you know it.

Sure the turf was slow those days. Poly at Del Mar is slow.

Turf, and poly are apples and oranges, as you choose to say.

However, using final times on surfaces that are obviously slower than their traditional counterparts as a sole reason to discredit a performance is a silly notion. Ie, what basis are you using for finding the final 2:07 time to be slow? Traditional dirt? Del Mar's poly?

No fruit comparison needed.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Brian you are being pretty ridiculous right now...again. Without looking it up, I think the turf was probably soft or yielding, which might explain the slow times. Unless the turf at Arlington has gotten 5 seconds faster.

I'm not being ridiculous, I'm trying to make a point.

What is the par time for ten furlongs on Del Mar's polytrack? Based on how slow the rest of the races are being run on the surface, something tells me it's closer to 2:07 than it is to 2:00.

So anyone complaining about them going 2:07, and using that as an indicator that the race was necessariliy tainted, is actually comparing apples to oranges, to borrow an expression.

2:07 seems slow because people are comparing it to......dirt, which I may take a moment to remind you, Del Mar's surface is not.

In the same way, John Henry or Star of Cozzenne running a 2:07 does not discredit their performance because the turf they were running over was an inherently different surface from a traditional, firm, turf course that would produce times closer to 2:01. So to discredit their performances using the standard of a faster turf course would be silly.

So why are we doing it here?

What is so ridiculous about that question?

[Antitrust32]

So Brian, your point is that Student Council is a deserving, $1 million dollar Grade 1 winner. DaHoss feels otherwise.

I happen to agree with Hossy and feel there is no way student council would be the pac classic winner if the race had not been on poly. It was an terribly weak race with a bunch of nobodys and Lava Man. If the race had not been on poly, hopefully a few better horses would have run in it, and there is no way student council wins. If the race had not been on poly, tiago would have run, and i feel would have crushed student council. (just mentioning tiago.. but I feel a handful of horses would have crushed SC) Student Council will be lucky to finish 5th or 6th in a Grade 1 on the dirt ever.

Therefore, the reason Student Council is a Grade one winner ..... Ding Ding! Polytrack!


So, on to a different point. Do you really like this poly crap and the blazing fast times they are running on it? I cant even watch that ****. Bring on a 385lb stripper.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So Brian, your point is that Student Council is a deserving, $1 million dollar Grade 1 winner. DaHoss feels otherwise.

I happen to agree with Hossy and feel there is no way student council would be the pac classic winner if the race had not been on poly. It was an terribly weak race with a bunch of nobodys and Lava Man. If the race had not been on poly, hopefully a few better horses would have run in it, and there is no way student council wins. If the race had not been on poly, tiago would have run, and i feel would have crushed student council. (just mentioning tiago.. but I feel a handful of horses would have crushed SC) Student Council will be lucky to finish 5th or 6th in a Grade 1 on the dirt ever.

Therefore, the reason Student Council is a Grade one winner ..... Ding Ding! Polytrack!


So, on to a different point. Do you really like this poly crap and the blazing fast times they are running on it? I cant even watch that ****. Bring on a 385lb stripper.

ArlJim brought up some points, as did Cannon -- that on paper, purely from a numbers perspective, Student Council was officially "faster" than just about everyone in that race. I didn't even handicap the race beforehand because I wasn't playing it, so I can't say how I would have felt beforehand.

But it's not like Student Council was some nag that happened to run the race of his life, and one that was way out of line with other races he had run. According to TG, Student Council was basically the second fastest horse in the race, and faster than Lava Man's last two races.

I don't think Tiago would have necessarily beat Student Council.

And as for watching it, I don't play Del Mar anyway, but I watch most of the races afterwards -- and I haven't really had a problem watching it. I love horse racing. Period.

However, I haven't had a better time watching racing anywhere than I have watching Arlington this meet, so I guess my answer would be, yes, I do enjoy watching it.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

If the race had not been on poly, hopefully a few better horses would have run in it.

Ps -- amazing, I've never seen anyone redboard the entry box in such a way before.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So Brian, your point is that Student Council is a deserving, $1 million dollar Grade 1 winner. DaHoss feels otherwise.

I happen to agree with Hossy and feel there is no way student council would be the pac classic winner if the race had not been on poly. It was an terribly weak race with a bunch of nobodys and Lava Man. If the race had not been on poly, hopefully a few better horses would have run in it, and there is no way student council wins. If the race had not been on poly, tiago would have run, and i feel would have crushed student council. (just mentioning tiago.. but I feel a handful of horses would have crushed SC) Student Council will be lucky to finish 5th or 6th in a Grade 1 on the dirt ever.

Therefore, the reason Student Council is a Grade one winner ..... Ding Ding! Polytrack!


So, on to a different point. Do you really like this poly crap and the blazing fast times they are running on it? I cant even watch that ****. Bring on a 385lb stripper.

everyone keeps saying it was such a weak bunch and that there is no way Student Council was a deserving winner. He had just equalled a Churchill downs track record in his prior start. What else must a horse do to give you the impression that he might be ready to win a stakes race?
No one has given me the name of a more deserving winner in that field. I can accept someone saying Lava Man or perhaps Awesome Gem, the rest are eyesores that don't belong winning a GR1 race either. People betting Lava Man in that race were betting more with their hearts than their brains.

name a horse in that race that was coming off of a sharp performance that would indicate a good effort was expected. I came up with three names in my prerace analysis, Awesome Gem, Student Council, and Sun Boat in that order.

tell me how you ranked that field prior to the race. Seriously, did you have Student Council way down at the bottom of that group having no shot whatsoever? Even if you did, having now read what has been posted regarding how sharp Student Council was going in to the race, how would you rank them after the race? you seriously feel he was moved way up because of the poly?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I don't believe I used the time as to why I think the race is tainted. I am almost positive I didn't. I said the surface is.

I know, and this whole time thing began in a response to Lori's post about how those "dogs" should be able to go faster than 2:07, to which Jamie agreed, and at which point I brought up the Million, at which point you called me ridiculous for doing so, at which point I explained myself, at which point you said you weren't talking about the time.

Whew. That's how we got here. You just got caught up in the conversation I was having with Jamie.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I know, and this whole time thing began in a response to Lori's post about how those "dogs" should be able to go faster than 2:07, to which Jamie agreed, and at which point I brought up the Million, at which point you called me ridiculous for doing so, at which point I explained myself, at which point you said you weren't talking about the time.

Whew. That's how we got here. You just got caught up in the conversation I was having with Jamie.

LOL

This is what happens when women come in here uninvited.