Early Top Twenty Derby Hopefuls

miraja2 · #1 01-08-2008, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

None of the horses in her pedigree are running in the race so they don't matter. She is.

Come on KG, you are better than that. You know nobody is saying she can't win because of her pedigree, or that a horse with a less than impressive 10f pedigree can't win the Kentucky Derby.
Her pedigree is just one of the many knocks against her. In this case, it also seems to be confirmed by what we have seen from her on the track. She appears to have definite distance limitations.

King Glorious · #2 01-08-2008, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

Come on KG, you are better than that. You know nobody is saying she can't win because of her pedigree, or that a horse with a less than impressive 10f pedigree can't win the Kentucky Derby.
Her pedigree is just one of the many knocks against her. In this case, it also seems to be confirmed by what we have seen from her on the track. She appears to have definite distance limitations.

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

miraja2 · #3 01-08-2008, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

I know you didn't start watching the game last week, which is why I think it is a bit unusual that you don't think she is probably limited in terms of her ability to get 10f effectively. Look at her Frizette and BCJF races. Did she win them both impressively? Yes, but she sure looked like she was dead spent at the end of both. Now, we all know that this fact in and of itself is not enough to dismiss a horse's chances when stretched out, but when you couple the way she has looked on the track with her pedigree, there is really no logical reason to think she CAN do it effectively enough to win a race like the Kentucky Derby.
What is it about her that makes you think she WILL be effective at 10f? You seem to be taking the position that we should assume she will be able to do it, because she hasn't proven otherwise. I don't think that makes good handicapping sense.

Oh and by the way, I hate making predictions this far away from the race, but if I HAD to make a selection now I would probably put Anak Nakal at #1.....despite the fact that he only ran an 86 BSF in his last.

Linny · #4 01-08-2008, 09:26 PM

My list starts out
1. Anak Nakal
2. Colonel John
3. Into Mischief
4. War Pass
5. Pyro

On the "3yo's to watch" side I would look for include:

Cassoulet ~ Graham Motion trainee won a Laurel allowance in style, training at Palm Meadows.
Denis of Cork ~David Carroll colt was an impressive maiden winner at Churchill Downs. He’s at the Fair Grounds for the winter.
Imaginary Sailor ~Jerry Hollendorfer always has a good one or two at his NorCal base
Mad Flatter ~ Jeff Thornbury colt won a CD maiden then a Fair Grounds allowance in style. Entered in the Lecompte
Riley Tucker ~ Hasn’t run since a 2nd in the Arlington Futurity, may turn up at Mott’s FL base.
Globetrotter ~ Son of Street Cry won the G3 Grey BC last fall for Graham Motion.
Legacy Thief ~ Won a fast allowance at Gulfstream on Saturday for Wayne Lukas

King Glorious · #5 01-08-2008, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

I know you didn't start watching the game last week, which is why I think it is a bit unusual that you don't think she is probably limited in terms of her ability to get 10f effectively. Look at her Frizette and BCJF races. Did she win them both impressively? Yes, but she sure looked like she was dead spent at the end of both. Now, we all know that this fact in and of itself is not enough to dismiss a horse's chances when stretched out, but when you couple the way she has looked on the track with her pedigree, there is really no logical reason to think she CAN do it effectively enough to win a race like the Kentucky Derby.
What is it about her that makes you think she WILL be effective at 10f? You seem to be taking the position that we should assume she will be able to do it, because she hasn't proven otherwise. I don't think that makes good handicapping sense.

Oh and by the way, I hate making predictions this far away from the race, but if I HAD to make a selection now I would probably put Anak Nakal at #1.....despite the fact that he only ran an 86 BSF in his last.

I don't take the position that she will be great at 10f. That's not how I evaluate things. I don't think Groovy would be a great 10f runner either. However, if his competition was Meafara, Safely Kept, Very Subtle, and Pine Tree Lane, I'd increase his chances of winning at 10f. For me, it's about the competition that they will face more than their ability to handle a certain distance or surface. If she were facing true 10f horses, I might look at things different. But I don't see any horses that I think are true 10f horses in the entire crop. Well, let me ammend that. I see some but I think they are too slow. I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her. I'm not sure what is the best way to try to handicap things. If she was trying to do something against horses that had already proven they could do it, that would be different. But at this point, she's gone as far as any of them have and looked better, at least to me, than most of them have. I have never fallen into the camp that says that the way a horse finishes a race at one distance is a sure sign as to how they'll finish at another. I've seen 100's of late running sprinters that people think will relish the stretchout to 7f or a mile and they fail. I've seen many that finish well at 9f and people think that they are crying out for the 10th furlong of the Derby and they fail. I think that what we've seen is a horse that was trained and raced at 8.5f and she ran that distance.

ArlJim78 · #6 01-08-2008, 11:01 PM

There is no chance Indian Blessing races in the derby, much less win. NO CHANCE. I'm hard pressed to come up with a horse more unsuitable.

Cannon Shell · #7 01-08-2008, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't take the position that she will be great at 10f. That's not how I evaluate things. I don't think Groovy would be a great 10f runner either. However, if his competition was Meafara, Safely Kept, Very Subtle, and Pine Tree Lane, I'd increase his chances of winning at 10f. For me, it's about the competition that they will face more than their ability to handle a certain distance or surface. If she were facing true 10f horses, I might look at things different. But I don't see any horses that I think are true 10f horses in the entire crop. Well, let me ammend that. I see some but I think they are too slow. I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her. I'm not sure what is the best way to try to handicap things. If she was trying to do something against horses that had already proven they could do it, that would be different. But at this point, she's gone as far as any of them have and looked better, at least to me, than most of them have. I have never fallen into the camp that says that the way a horse finishes a race at one distance is a sure sign as to how they'll finish at another. I've seen 100's of late running sprinters that people think will relish the stretchout to 7f or a mile and they fail. I've seen many that finish well at 9f and people think that they are crying out for the 10th furlong of the Derby and they fail. I think that what we've seen is a horse that was trained and raced at 8.5f and she ran that distance.

Groovy would lose in your hypo Derby because everytime he was hooked he lost and he would most certainly would have got hooked in there. He did actually run in the Derby and did about as well as Indian Blessing would.

miraja2 · #8 01-09-2008, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't take the position that she will be great at 10f. That's not how I evaluate things. I don't think Groovy would be a great 10f runner either. However, if his competition was Meafara, Safely Kept, Very Subtle, and Pine Tree Lane, I'd increase his chances of winning at 10f. For me, it's about the competition that they will face more than their ability to handle a certain distance or surface. If she were facing true 10f horses, I might look at things different. But I don't see any horses that I think are true 10f horses in the entire crop. Well, let me ammend that. I see some but I think they are too slow. I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her. I'm not sure what is the best way to try to handicap things. If she was trying to do something against horses that had already proven they could do it, that would be different. But at this point, she's gone as far as any of them have and looked better, at least to me, than most of them have. I have never fallen into the camp that says that the way a horse finishes a race at one distance is a sure sign as to how they'll finish at another. I've seen 100's of late running sprinters that people think will relish the stretchout to 7f or a mile and they fail. I've seen many that finish well at 9f and people think that they are crying out for the 10th furlong of the Derby and they fail. I think that what we've seen is a horse that was trained and raced at 8.5f and she ran that distance.

Well I guess we have reached the heart of the disagreement.
I simply have no idea how you could watch those two races and come to that conclusion.

Cannon Shell · #9 01-08-2008, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

Well maybe out of those 20+ years you can point us to a horse that tries to run off every step of the way, as Indian Blessing does, relaxing enough to win the KY Derby.

brianwspencer · #10 01-14-2008, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her.

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

King Glorious · #11 01-14-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

brianwspencer · #12 01-14-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

I'm not trying to use that race as a blanket way to say that I think that 7 furlong races are the best indicator of 10 furlong races in the future.

It was just another race that shows me that the horse has no chance of lasting at ten furlongs given her style and her (lack of) stamina. That makes three in a row that lead to that conclusion for most people watching closely.

King Glorious · #13 01-14-2008, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'm not trying to use that race as a blanket way to say that I think that 7 furlong races are the best indicator of 10 furlong races in the future.

It was just another race that shows me that the horse has no chance of lasting at ten furlongs given her style and her (lack of) stamina. That makes three in a row that lead to that conclusion for most people watching closely.

I don't know how that makes three in a row though. After the Frizette, people said she was walking home and would get caught the next time but the next time, with another turn and added distance, she won by more. People wanted to say it was because of the track and nobody else liking it but to me, that doesn't really make sense. How come only one horse liked it? Also, one of the horses that she had beaten in the Frizette, Backseat Rhythm, came back to hit the board in the BC too so it appeared she was ok with the track. This race yesterday has no bearing on what she'll do later. It was a sprint, she was trained for a sprint and she ran fast. If one was to look at yesterday's race, they would conclude that she couldn't last past 7f but we know that's not true because she's already won grade ones at 8f and 8.5f.

Who knows how far she will run? I don't know. I'm not saying she will run 10f. But I haven't seen any reason to believe yet that many others have a better chance of running it better than her. But then again, maybe I haven't been watching closely or just don't know what I'm looking at. We'll see.

brianwspencer · #14 01-14-2008, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't know how that makes three in a row though. After the Frizette, people said she was walking home and would get caught the next time but the next time, with another turn and added distance, she won by more. People wanted to say it was because of the track and nobody else liking it but to me, that doesn't really make sense. How come only one horse liked it? Also, one of the horses that she had beaten in the Frizette, Backseat Rhythm, came back to hit the board in the BC too so it appeared she was ok with the track. This race yesterday has no bearing on what she'll do later. It was a sprint, she was trained for a sprint and she ran fast. If one was to look at yesterday's race, they would conclude that she couldn't last past 7f but we know that's not true because she's already won grade ones at 8f and 8.5f.

Who knows how far she will run? I don't know. I'm not saying she will run 10f. But I haven't seen any reason to believe yet that many others have a better chance of running it better than her. But then again, maybe I haven't been watching closely or just don't know what I'm looking at. We'll see.

Not to belabor it -- but to me, it's the way she's coming home. Sure, nobody got close to her in the Frizette, and nobody got close to her in the BCJF. But she certainly appeared to get leg-weary far too early in the stretch of both races to be able to hang on at a distance like 10 furlongs.

The fact that Backseat Rhythm can't catch her at 1 1/16 when she's falling apart in the late stages isn't exactly a fiery endorsement of her potential to stretch out further, let alone against males.

There is nothing to suggest she can rate. There is nothing to suggest she can back a pace up. Factor those two negatives with her inability to stride out impressively going just 1 1/16, and throw 19 other horses behind her at the three-eighths -- someone catches her.

Not only someone, but likely about 15 someones.

IrishofNDMan · #15 01-14-2008, 05:52 PM

Golden Doc A had Indian Blessings on the ropes, and with another few feet would have won the race. If I was a big fan of Indian Blessings that would scare me a little bit.

Cajungator26 · #16 01-14-2008, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.

So now you're comparing Indian Blessing to Smarty Jones? WTF?