dear bernardini fans....

Originally Posted by todko

In the 30 or so years of being involved with thoroughbred racing I can't honestly recall a horse more over-hyped than Bernardini. That wasn't even a strong BC Classic field. He beat nobody in his previous starts (if you throw out the injured Barbaro, Sunriver, and Bluegrass Cat). His times were unremarkable (and so was Invasor's).

He had the Beyer hype machine behind him full bore. JC didn't move too early. He moved in the same place where Prado moved on Barbaro. Bernardini just couldn't hack it. And he had to get after Bernardini in the backstretch because Bernardini wasn't getting :48s and nearly 1:13s like he had in some of his other races. Bernardini was a fraud pure and simple.

The Travers is a weak race and has been for some time. So is the JCGC. So is the Jim Dandy. Grades don't mean a damn thing. I can name dozens of Grade I winners who could barely get 1:36 for a mile.

Jazil could beat him. And so could a healthy Bluegrass Cat. Invasor had a tough trip and ran by him under wraps. Invasor couldn't even get 2:01 flat. And that track was far from slow that day. Beyer had to hype some more figures to justify Bernardini's earlier hype figures.

Ghostzapper would have been so far gone it wouldn't have even been funny. So would St. Liam. Barbaro too.

If you buy Beyer speed figs and commentary by people like Jon White then you deserved to lose your money on BC day.

Okay, while all else are holding their breath, I'll be the first to say it.....

THIS ANALYSIS IS HORENDOUS!...Sorry man...I had to call you out for this post....Not to insult, but I had to pick myself off the ground after laughing to post this....

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

Okay, while all else are holding their breath, I'll be the first to say it.....

THIS ANALYSIS IS HORENDOUS!...Sorry man...I had to call you out for this post....Not to insult, but I had to pick myself off the ground after laughing to post this....

As did I... FUNNIEST POST ALL DAY LONG!!!

[blackthroatedwind]

It's typical internet nonsense. You always see way too much on both ends of the extreme. He's great....no. He sucks....no.

Now don't be knocking my pal Dixie anymore. He's the glue holding this place together.

Luckily for all of us we have Latent Heat to look forward to in 2007.

[avance2000]

Originally Posted by todko

Jazil could beat him.

my god man! a statement like this has put me in the very uncomfortable situation of......(i can't believe i am doing this)........defending bernardini. as people on this board know I really don't like bernardini. i started this thread, and bcc 2006 is now my favorite race ever because the sight of invasor blowing by him as he labored home was delightful. the hype for this horse was out of control.
but that being said......JAZIL!!!!!! ummmmm no.
i guess maybe i should give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were being sarcastic or something. i love bernbashing more than anyone.....but that is just crazy.

[todko]

Originally Posted by Cardus

And the track did slow down considerably after the sprint. -- DAHoss9698

How do people know that the track slows or quickens during a day, minus a recognizable, tangible weather change, like rain or wind increase/decrease? This is what gets me about "split variants."

Why was the track at Churchill Downs slower after the Sprint? What atmospheric condition changed the composition of the dirt? What man-made change was observed that changed the distribution of the track surface?

There were two races run on dirt after the Sprint, neither of which resulted in a superficially fast time. Is it possible -- and given that most people considered Round Pond a fluky winner it is not unreasonable to suspect -- that the performances were sub-par?

While we can debate a lot of what Todko wrote -- or ridicule, based upon follow-up posts --I think that variant/speed figure portions of his post invite debate.

Thanks Cardus. It seems that the people who lost money on Bernardini have nothing left but resorting to insults. I called it beforehand. They bought the hype while I bought the winning ticket.

That nearly instantaneous slowdown in a track's surface is merely an excuse used often by poor handicappers. If the track moved in any way it should have been faster later in the day. Churchill did have rain that week.

You can't base a dependent variable (speed figure) on an iffy independent variable (track variant). To put it simply, horses are not quantifiable. If they were, we'd know in advance which horse was going to win. Not even the best supercomputer crunching the best numbers (throw Trakus in there too) will ever be able to predict which horse will win with much more than 30% accuracy.

If you bet the speed figures you are a fool. Bernardini is proof positive.

[todko]

I don't hate any horse -- and I donate money to thoroughbred charities routinely. Not as much money as I'd like but maybe life will get better and I can do more in the future. And if Bernardini doesn't work out as a stallion and some of my donations go to save his life I'll be a very happy man. Seriously. I'd cry if he went to the slaughterhouse. It would depress me to the end.

The Preakness wasn't really an issue with me. I think it was more the racing press and how they tried to pivot off the public's interest in Barbaro and place that interest in Bernardini. It didn't work and it was a crappy sleazy move to begin with.

And really the hype was to the detriment of Bernardini. The racing press asked Bernardini to be Ghostzapper and Bernardini wasn't. It's a shame.

People on this forum were asking him to run a record at Churchill -- asking him to run 1:58. That was asking too much of Bernardini. And too much of any other horse.

The hype didn't help -- it didn't help Bernardini, it didn't help the handicappers who fell for it, it didn't help the novice bettors who fell for it, it didn't help racing, and most of all it didn't help the horse racing press. The horse racing press is still the same old fraud. Read at your own peril. And bettor beware.

[Bernardini]

Originally Posted by avance2000

.....take it. that is all i can say. take it. you owe us that. us rational people had to listen to your bs for a long time. "he was as good as secretariat. he was way better than barbaro. well guess what......he was not.
i fully expect people to attack me for "ripping" bernardini after that race and his defenders may blast me for this post. i'm fine with that, in part because - as my signature this last week probably reveals - i had a nice day at the windows today. but the bottom line is that we had to listen to your irrational and unjustified comments about this horse for months. now sit back and let us rational people take the stage for awhile. you were flat-wrong. when your boy met a quality animal he folded up like a cheap suit.
he is no invasor. he is no barbaro. secretariat? it isn't even worth discussing.
the best horse won today. there is no question about that....and i'm not just saying it after the fact.....i have been saying it on this board for awhile.

absolute respect for invasor, I try not to compare two different horses from two different eras but just like you cashed in today, I was cashing in on Preakness !! when the world was riding on Barbaro(unfortunately i can never prove that Bernardini was better than Barbaro and neither can you). Im assuming Secretariat lost about five times, and at least once didnt hit the board. Greatness?? I would suggest Citation. Look up his career stats..

[blackthroatedwind]

Seems like we have two schools of thought here....some people need to somehow brag about being right to vindicate themselves. Others seem willing to admit that they probably overrated Bernardini.

Gee, I wonder which group is more likely to win at the racetrack.