Pricing the Derby

[JJP]

Who is a "synthetic star"? Is there such a thing? Just because Tiago and Heatseeker ran 1-2 in the Oaklawn Cap and Gayego won the Arkansas Derby, it has no bearing on whether Colonel John will handle real dirt. Tiago HAS run on real dirt before so he can't even be included.

I contend that fall Churchill is now unplayable due to the heavy diet of 2YO racing and the majority of them have run all their previous races at Keeneland, Arlington and Turfway over Polytrack. I remember seeing some very chaotic results there last November and the underlying reason was so many horses who'd never run on real dirt and nobody really knew if they'd handle it.

Synthetic racing is certainly closer to grass than dirt and one cannot use grass form to project how a horse will run on converntional dirt.

BTW, I did think of a "synthetic star": Dominican. How has he done on dirt since the 2007 Blue Grass?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by JJP

Who is a "synthetic star"? Is there such a thing? Just because Tiago and Heatseeker ran 1-2 in the Oaklawn Cap and Gayego won the Arkansas Derby, it has no bearing on whether Colonel John will handle real dirt. Tiago HAS run on real dirt before so he can't even be included.

I contend that fall Churchill is now unplayable due to the heavy diet of 2YO racing and the majority of them have run all their previous races at Keeneland, Arlington and Turfway over Polytrack. I remember seeing some very chaotic results there last November and the underlying reason was so many horses who'd never run on real dirt and nobody really knew if they'd handle it.

Synthetic racing is certainly closer to grass than dirt and one cannot use grass form to project how a horse will run on converntional dirt.

forget synthetic stars then, name ANY prominent horse. i contend that synthetic to dirt is nothing at all like the consideration for turf horses going to dirt. far more synthetic horses run just fine on dirt compared to turf horses.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

I'm always curious why people say things like this.
why don't we have any idea if Colonel John will be able to handle dirt? Can you name one synthetic star that has bombed on dirt because of not being able to handle it?

shippers from California pretty much owned the big stakes at Oaklawn this year. I can think of numerous examples that have handled the switch (synth to dirt), but I can't think of any who failed big time.

they did a lot of work on oaklawns surface after last season. the change has been remarkable, since a year ago not one horse won at oaklawn who made their previous start on an AWT.
will it translate to churchill? i don't know. they claim that the hot springs and louisville track are remarkably similar. we'll see.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Danzig

they did a lot of work on oaklawns surface after last season. the change has been remarkable, since a year ago not one horse won at oaklawn who made their previous start on an AWT.
will it translate to churchill? i don't know. they claim that the hot springs and louisville track are remarkably similar. we'll see.

I think the surface at Oaklawn is top notch. I just wish the meet was a little longer.

[smuthg]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

empire maker was the biggest recent favorite i can recall and he was 5-2.

anyone who thinks there is someone in this field with more steam than him going into the 2003 derby is wrong.

bb is talented and will do big things. but 2 horses out of 56 have won off 2 starts at 3 and both of them had more foundation at 2.

my guess is despite street sense last year, people figure this out.

7-2. maybe even 4-1

Weren't Empire Maker's feet his undoing in the Derby? could be the same with Big Brown...