5/21 (PIM): Preakness (G1), DuPont, Sprint, Gallorette, Schaefer (G3's)

hockey2315 · #1 05-19-2011, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philcski

I don't really understand why you think Desert Sage has any chance to win here. She was an absolute pig in Europe, gets the Chad Brown magic juice, and suddenly is a world beater?

She looks like a pretty obvious bleeder. . . not that I'm really concerned at all with her Euro form. Who cares if it was the Chad Brown juice (not that it is)? I was very impressed with her two starts at Gulfstream. . . I guess I'm the only person on the planet who was. That makes me happy. I'll still use some Shared Account and maybe a little No Explaining as a back-up.

Scav · #2 05-19-2011, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

She looks like a pretty obvious bleeder. . . not that I'm really concerned at all with her Euro form. Who cares if it was the Chad Brown juice (not that it is)? I was very impressed with her two starts at Gulfstream. . . I guess I'm the only person on the planet who was. That makes me happy. I'll still use some Shared Account and maybe a little No Explaining as a back-up.

Please explain how you can tell if she is a bleeder from PP's

hockey2315 · #3 05-19-2011, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

Please explain how you can tell if she is a bleeder from PP's

Like I said - her Euro form has nothing to do with my opinion of her. . . But, are we to assume that when she lost by 101 1/4 lengths in her four most recent starts that she was running to the best of her ability? She came to the U.S. and hmmm all of a sudden she's better while getting Lasix.

Scav · #4 05-19-2011, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Like I said - her Euro form has nothing to do with my opinion of her. . . But, are we to assume that when she lost by 101 1/4 lengths in her four most recent starts that she was running to the best of her ability? She came to the U.S. and hmmm all of a sudden she's better while getting Lasix.

Dude, not knocking ya, but assuming she was a bleeder is not solid reasoning. Alot of horses bleed to different degrees.

How about she likes a firm course and maybe a cut back in distance.

I like her, No Explaining and Dyna Waltz equally. I like betting Sheppard's horses 2nd off the layoff and between May and September. Shared Account sucks, and far from good enough to give 10-12lbs away those fillies

hockey2315 · #5 05-19-2011, 10:13 PM

I don't need solid reasoning, because I'm not evaluating her based on that form. . . Phil's comment that she was a "pig in Europe" just seemed sort of irrelevant to me, so that's why I mentioned that she's probably a bleeder. Here's an interesting quote from her trainer when they decided to run her in the Irish Oaks: "It's raining over there, and that's good for her."

Scav · #6 05-19-2011, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I don't need solid reasoning, because I'm not evaluating her based on that form. . . Phil's comment that she was a "pig in Europe" just seemed sort of irrelevant to me, so that's why I mentioned that she's probably a bleeder. Here's an interesting quote from her trainer when they decided to run her in the Irish Oaks: "It's raining over there, and that's good for her."

And trainers know EVERYTHING, and this filly then proceeds to get drilled on good-soft ground (Grade 1 though) and soft before they realized they need firmer ground.

I understand you tossing her euro form, but adding Lasix doesn't improve horses a billion lengths. Preferred ground and horses like Differentiate help.

philcski · #7 05-19-2011, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I don't need solid reasoning, because I'm not evaluating her based on that form. . . Phil's comment that she was a "pig in Europe" just seemed sort of irrelevant to me, so that's why I mentioned that she's probably a bleeder. Here's an interesting quote from her trainer when they decided to run her in the Irish Oaks: "It's raining over there, and that's good for her."

Maybe she's a bleeder- I think that's a reasonable assumption, I thought the same thing. But the very relevant fact is her maiden win over there was in one of the worst meets in GB, and against "real" competition she was noncompetitive. Now that she's won a decent N1X and a mediocre N2X she's supposed to step up and beat the FMT champ in a race with no pace? And improve 4-5 lengths more in the process to do so? Seems like a tall task for a horse that will be 5-1. I just don't see the point of even betting this race. It's truly terrible.

Dahoss · #8 05-19-2011, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

Dude, not knocking ya, but assuming she was a bleeder is not solid reasoning. Alot of horses bleed to different degrees.

Assuming she was a bleeder isn't solid reasoning? But assuming her improvement was due to a firm surface is?

What is the difference between the two?

Scav · #9 05-20-2011, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Assuming she was a bleeder isn't solid reasoning? But assuming her improvement was due to a firm surface is?

What is the difference between the two?

As Phil noted, maybe she was a bleeder, she probably was, ALOT if not most horses bleed, and even some horses bleed through lasix.

I looked at it that she ran some decent races on a very firm turf course (nothing like she had ever seen over in Europe) and ran those races on a course that was very speed favoring.

I find that reasoning much more solid then Lasix moved the horse up. (And I know this wasn't his only reason but I don't understand the focus because Lasix is not some miracle drug)

slotdirt · #10 05-20-2011, 08:19 AM

Today is five years to the day since Barbaro's Preakness breadown. Truly a day at the track I'll never forget.

Dahoss · #11 05-20-2011, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scav

As Phil noted, maybe she was a bleeder, she probably was, ALOT if not most horses bleed, and even some horses bleed through lasix.

I looked at it that she ran some decent races on a very firm turf course (nothing like she had ever seen over in Europe) and ran those races on a course that was very speed favoring.

I find that reasoning much more solid then Lasix moved the horse up. (And I know this wasn't his only reason but I don't understand the focus because Lasix is not some miracle drug)

I think most people know a lot of horses bleed and I don't think anyone was acting like lasix is a miracle drug.

I don't agree the races she ran at Gulfstream were over a very speed favoring surface. People love to rush to claim a surface speed favoring. There is no evidence based on results that the courses were very speed favoring.