8/8: Saratoga (Day 15-Vanderbilt; $253k C/O)

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

That race the other day was run over an incredible bias, the second place finisher, the half to Winslow Homer will be much better long term. Kimmel is a disaster, but good luck. Ill take Rick.

Kimmel has some pretty nice stats w/ debuting 2yo's at Saratoga no matter how you slice them.

The rest of your post shows a huge misunderstanding of how to play baby races. The "bias" thing is irrelevant whether or not it's accurate. You want horses with a lot of speed-which the Forestry ridden by Cohen had-because these races are almost always won by speed horses or stalkers, especially at the shorter distances. What they will do in the future is meaningless and the best types to play against are the ones who are bred to be good in the future and good going longer. The first thing I do when I handicap one of these races is go through and pick out all the pedigrees that can't win going short, and they're almost always horses owned by Darley, Shadwell, the Phipps', etc... and trained by weaker first out trainers. But they still get bet by people who see their potential or price tag rather than their ability to get five furlongs first time out. There's a reason why guys like Wesley Ward and Violette (Klaravich/Lawrence) dominate baby races-because they're only concerned with the short term, rather than the future. I think it's a terrible strategy when you look at how many Violette maiden winners with decent price tags are never heard from again, unless he and Ward are selling them all to Sheikh Mo. I doubt that, though. He's clueless, but not that clueless.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Kimmel has some pretty nice stats w/ debuting 2yo's at Saratoga no matter how you slice them.

The rest of your post shows a huge misunderstanding of how to play baby races. The "bias" thing is irrelevant whether or not it's accurate. You want horses with a lot of speed-which the Forestry ridden by Cohen had-because these races are almost always won by speed horses or stalkers, especially at the shorter distances. What they will do in the future is meaningless and the best types to play against are the ones who are bred to be good in the future and good going longer. The first thing I do when I handicap one of these races is go through and pick out all the pedigrees that can't win going short, and they're almost always horses owned by Darley, Shadwell, the Phipps', etc... and trained by weaker first out trainers. But they still get bet by people who see their potential or price tag rather than their ability to get five furlongs first time out. There's a reason why guys like Wesley Ward and Violette (Klaravich/Lawrence) dominate baby races-because they're only concerned with the short term, rather than the future. I think it's a terrible strategy when you look at how many Violette maiden winners with decent price tags are never heard from again, unless he and Ward are selling them all to Sheikh Mo. I doubt that, though. He's clueless, but not that clueless.

Well said.

Why isn't Rudy Rudy Rudy being mentioned?

This seems like the kind of horse Rudy would dope up to the max. Only a self-loathing rat turd would train a horse with his namesake.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Why isn't Rudy Rudy Rudy being mentioned?

This seems like the kind of horse Rudy would dope up to the max. Only a self-loathing rat turd would train a horse with his namesake.

He is a lot more likely then Kimmel

[Dahoss]

The Kimmel has some works that match up with his opening day winner.