Smooth Air

ateamstupid · #1 04-23-2008, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

I can't believe there is an 8-page thread about this colt.
For those that are (for some strange reason) impressed with his race at GP, how do you explain away his previous race? It wasn't Big Brown blowing by him in the stretch that day.
The main knock against him that I see is that he has never done a single thing in any of his previous races that indicates he has any shot to win the race. That strikes me as rather important.

The reason this thread keeps going is because people like you keep making ridiculous statements like that.

He's run just as well as, or better than, anyone in the field (save Big Brown and Pyro) on figures, and he's got the versatility to adjust to different pace scenarios. What the hell are you talking about?

miraja2 · #2 04-23-2008, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The reason this thread keeps going is because people like you keep making ridiculous statements like that.

He's run just as well as, or better than, anyone in the field (save Big Brown and Pyro) on figures, and he's got the versatility to adjust to different pace scenarios. What the hell are you talking about?

Oh, I disagree. This thread keeps going because after I make all of my brilliant points, people like YOU foolishly choose to disagree with me instead of merely bowing to my superior wisdom.....which is always the best course of action.

Although I don't know how I am going to play the race at this point, I can think of at least six or seven horses - in addition to Pyro and Big Brown -that strike me as much more likely winners than Smooth Air.
He is a one-turn closer if ever there was one.

hockey2315 · #3 04-23-2008, 08:58 PM

Well since he's not really a closer and his best race was around two turns. . .

miraja2 · #4 04-23-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Well since he's not really a closer and his best race was around two turns. . .

If you want to call him a stalker instead of a closer fine. I can see that. But the point remains that he is almost certain to do his best work from off the pace in one-turn races (you know, like the one he actually won this year).

The larger point is that.....THIS HORSE HAS NO CHANCE!!!
I'm done trying to talk people out of betting him. For those of you that insist on playing him, it will be a very nice payout, so I genuinely wish you the best of luck.

hockey2315 · #5 04-23-2008, 09:41 PM

I'm not playing him on top. . . But the way things have been going this year he has an OK shot to hit the board. . .

ateamstupid · #6 04-23-2008, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

If you want to call him a stalker instead of a closer fine. I can see that. But the point remains that he is almost certain to do his best work from off the pace in one-turn races (you know, like the one he actually won this year).

The larger point is that.....THIS HORSE HAS NO CHANCE!!!
I'm done trying to talk people out of betting him. For those of you that insist on playing him, it will be a very nice payout, so I genuinely wish you the best of luck.

This is the argument of everybody who dislikes him.. "He um.. He uh.. He has no shot!"

Scav · #7 04-23-2008, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

This is the argument of everybody who dislikes him.. "He um.. He uh.. He has no shot!"

I agree that the no shot argument is weak but Andy did have some viable points, I would like to hear why you think he has a shot.

I know you are a sheet user, and looking at his right now, it screams regression if you ask me. And a regression means he aint within the top 5 becuase there are several progressing horses in this race, more so then any year I can remember, they might be slow, but they are progressing

ateamstupid · #8 04-23-2008, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

I agree that the no shot argument is weak but Andy did have some viable points, I would like to hear why you think he has a shot.

I know you are a sheet user, and looking at his right now, it screams regression if you ask me. And a regression means he aint within the top 5 becuase there are several progressing horses in this race, more so then any year I can remember, they might be slow, but they are progressing

The way I see it, in this terrible field, you should have to prove why somebody DOESN'T have a shot, and no one's done that with Smooth Air.

I've said why I like him, but if you wanna hear it again..

He's got figures comparable to anything anybody else (except for Big Brown and Pyro) has run, he's got a fine distance pedigree, and he's got ideal tactical speed. His small stature concerns me slightly, but at 25-1+, I honestly don't understand how anybody can be tossing him.

As for me being a "sheet user", I use the TG numbers, but I'm not like you in that I don't think there are these rigid rules for what's going to happen in the next race based on a horse's "pattern". Most of the time, I don't really care much what a horse's "pattern" is, I just want to see if he/she has run fast enough to contend. Smooth Air, according to Beyers and TG figs, has indisputably done so.

blackthroatedwind · #9 04-23-2008, 10:05 PM

The argument for Smooth Air ( from what I can tell around here ) is, number one, he has a nice trainer, and number two, this Derby field stinks.

But, it's ( apparently ) the dissenters that can't back up their opinion.

miraja2 · #10 04-23-2008, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

This is the argument of everybody who dislikes him.. "He um.. He uh.. He has no shot!"

Oh yeah busted....that is the only argument I have made.
Of course, on page three of this ridiculous thread...I said this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

Well, they went 22.76 and 45.83 in the Florida Derby. That isn't exactly crawling.
He had a very favorable post and a great trip that day, but despite that (and despite the fact that he seemed to be running his guts out in the stretch), he didn't close an inch. The pace was fast enough that day that the horses who were second, third, fourth, and fifth at a 1/4 and a 1/2, ALL finished seventh or worse. It wasn't like they were cheap speed either. Fierce Wind and Elysium Fields were two of the favorites. Meanwhile, the horses coming from off the pace (Tomcito, Cool Gator, Majestic Warrior) ALL finished in the top half. Big Brown obviously ran a very nice race that day, but given the early pace, I have to think that if Smooth Air was really a top-notch two-turn horse, he would have made up SOME ground, or at least have done something in the stretch other than look completely spent.
His previous race in Tampa (the Sam Davis) showed me the same thing. Big Truck simply ran by him at the end.
To me he is a closer that just flattens out in the stretch when asked to go two-turns, and I don't think the increase in distance to 10f can do anything but hurt him.

But I guess that sort of analysis doesn't count when compared to the overpowering "fitness" argument of his supporters.

ateamstupid · #11 04-23-2008, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

Oh yeah busted....that is the only argument I have made.
Of course, on page three of this ridiculous thread...I said this:

But I guess that sort of analysis doesn't count when compared to the overpowering "fitness" argument of his supporters.

His internal fractions were pretty quick in the Florida Derby, so I disagree that the race was set up for him. I agree though that the "fitness" argument is fairly silly. If all it took to get a ten-furlong horse was putting some long works in him, then I'm pretty sure every trainer would be at it.