No Wood for Circular Quay

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Grits

I do not approach second guessing trainers decisions. I try, instead, to just deal with them, rather than contemplating and expounding on them.

In this particular instance though, it appears that Pletcher is quite concerned about Keeneland's poly surface. From the last paragraph in the article reported by DRF, he will be noting this weekend's races.

This was my first and only thought on the deal. The surface.

Me neither, ESPECIALLY Pletcher, who has proven time and again he knows his stock to a T. A friend of mine owns a nice turf filly with him so I get a nice look at how he plots their courses through her (looks like the Beaugay next for the filly.)

I didn't see that article, I'll check it out. With the expected cold weather this week, that's an interesting thought as well with all the stuff that happened at TP.

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by philcski

I second that. Andy, you nailed it. Sending AGS to the Wood is the RIGHT move, from an earnings perspective as well as profile perspective... but why can't CQ at least run around the track in the Blue Grass if he's sound?!? Who cares if he finishes 3rd, 4th, 5th if it sets him up better for the big day (worked out just find for his charge last year)? Isn't that the point of a PREP?

For a guy as smart as Pletcher, he's making a really dumb move if CQ is sound enough to run this week or next and training him up to the Derby.

I completely agree with you. If he's OK, you'd think TP would want to get some sort of prep in him. even if he just jogs around the track in a race like the blue grass. pulling CQ and sending AGS to the wood with the field the way it's shaping up makes perfect sense from a graded earnings perspective, but NOT placing CQ in another prep in favor of training up to the derby sends up a red flag to me.

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by Benevolus

I wouldn't count on it. Street Sense and Any Given Saturday are the class of the 3yr old division.

Except I'm not so sure Pletcher wants JV to push AGS that hard in the race.. especially coming off short rest(the reason they were pointing to the Blue grass).. getting at least 2nd place money is likely the main goal in this spot. if something goes wrong with Nobiz, they'll be happy to take down the race, but I'd be surprised if AGS is really ever pushed harder than enough to place 2nd. I think the last thing they want to do is knock heads in the stretch again.

[blackthroatedwind]

People really need to get it out of their heads that good races somehow aren't good for any horse's future efforts. This is the kind of baloney that is ruining the game at the top level.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

People really need to get it out of their heads that good races somehow aren't good for any horse's future efforts. This is the kind of baloney that is ruining the game at the top level.

and the soga continues, trainers putting horses in races, without a chance to win.

Great, another training lesson on race training.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

People really need to get it out of their heads that good races somehow aren't good for any horse's future efforts. This is the kind of baloney that is ruining the game at the top level.

I dont know about that Andy. Look how bad Secretariat ran after those too taxing efforts in the Derby and Preakness!

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

People really need to get it out of their heads that good races somehow aren't good for any horse's future efforts. This is the kind of baloney that is ruining the game at the top level.

I agree, and I think Any Given Saturday needs to win this race to be a factor in the Derby. A hard fought victory is just what this horse needs.

[Linny]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

People really need to get it out of their heads that good races somehow aren't good for any horse's future efforts. This is the kind of baloney that is ruining the game at the top level.

Jaysus Andy, ya finally said something I can defend! GOOD RACES MEAN A HORSE IS GOOD.
As Woody Stephens once said, "Run e'm when they're fit."

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I dont know about that Andy. Look how bad Secretariat ran after those too taxing efforts in the Derby and Preakness!

Cannon, are you a "Sheets" follower?
Personally I think most of their "theories" are a bunch of mularkey but the only other explanation I can come up with is CQ ran a big Sheet number in the La Derby and they're trying to avoid a "bounce". Makes no sense to me, however.

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by philcski

Cannon, are you a "Sheets" follower?
Personally I think most of their "theories" are a bunch of mularkey but the only other explanation I can come up with is CQ ran a big Sheet number in the La Derby and they're trying to avoid a "bounce". Makes no sense to me, however.

Yeah, but if that's the case, why not run him now and get it out of the way? Like you said before, who cares where he finishes in a race like the Wood or Blue Grass.. TP and Tabor shouldn't.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I dont know about that Andy. Look how bad Secretariat ran after those too taxing efforts in the Derby and Preakness!

Honestly, let me ask you a question.....if you get a horse that you know is a genuinely good horse isn't the one thing you say to yourself " God, I hope I don't screw this one up "? Not in any way to denigrade your profession but do you really consider it rocket science?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

Cannon, are you a "Sheets" follower?
Personally I think most of their "theories" are a bunch of mularkey but the only other explanation I can come up with is CQ ran a big Sheet number in the La Derby and they're trying to avoid a "bounce". Makes no sense to me, however.

I look at TG's. A lot of what they do is great but they are not without flaw. I believe that too many guys are using them as an excuse not to run. I remember that Smarty Jones was a big sheets play against in the Derby because he was a likely bounce. If I remember right he "bounced" that day but was still an easy winner. Good horses can sustain consistent good efforts over a long period of time. But no one seemingly want to run anymore. And I blame a lot of this squarely on the owners and breeders. There was a time not so long ago that a horse that was percieved to be fragile or a bleeder would meet a cool reception at stud until he proved he could produce. It is almost not a factor what a horse accomplishes anymore except to win a graded stakes on the dirt, preferably at a mile or shorter.

[zippyneedsawin]

I read somewhere else that they're having trouble keeping weight on CQ.. a sign that something may be wrong with him.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Honestly, let me ask you a question.....if you get a horse that you know is a genuinely good horse isn't the one thing you say to yourself " God, I hope I don't screw this one up "? Not in any way to denigrade your profession but do you really consider it rocket science?

Absolutely. I had a good 2 yo last year that I thought could run. I wanted to get him a couple races under his belt so I ran him once at TP and the other time at Kee on the Poly. He did not really seem to love the poly but got some good experience. I brought him to CD and worked him 6 f's. He worked as good as a horse could work. Not a huge time but a rare perfect work. He got a little shin sore afterwards so I said to myself,"God I dont want to screw this one up" so we backed off of him. The owner decided to send him to FL and he won at GP with a 90 Beyer. Not rocket science but common sense. The trick is understanding when you have common sense and when you are just being too conservative.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I look at TG's. A lot of what they do is great but they are not without flaw. I believe that too many guys are using them as an excuse not to run. I remember that Smarty Jones was a big sheets play against in the Derby because he was a likely bounce. If I remember right he "bounced" that day but was still an easy winner. Good horses can sustain consistent good efforts over a long period of time. But no one seemingly want to run anymore. And I blame a lot of this squarely on the owners and breeders. There was a time not so long ago that a horse that was percieved to be fragile or a bleeder would meet a cool reception at stud until he proved he could produce. It is almost not a factor what a horse accomplishes anymore except to win a graded stakes on the dirt, preferably at a mile or shorter.

Good stuff, Chuck. I completely agree with this statement.

Figures wise I think TG does a really good job. I just can't read the damned things for long periods of time, it's like watching the chicklet screen at Keeneland...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

Good stuff, Chuck. I completely agree with this statement.

Figures wise I think TG does a really good job. I just can't read the damned things for long periods of time, it's like watching the chicklet screen at Keeneland...

It seems like they are trying harder than the other guys. Maybe I'm crazy but that's what it seems like to me.

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

Although I fully understand that the 8-week to the Derby schedule is extremely questionable, I'm going to give Pletcher the benefit of the doubt on this one..

Why? Because he has such a good record of preparing horses to win the Derby?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann

Why? Because he has such a good record of preparing horses to win the Derby?

low blow

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by MisterB

WOW

What a bet to take here

I know! Have you ever seen such a sure thing?
In a somewhat related - and slightly more serious matter - I have no idea how good of a trainer Tim Ritchey is overall, because I don't follow his tracks carefully, but personally I loved what he did with Afleet Alex in '05.
Remember when he brought him back in that 6f Mountain Valley Stakes (or whatever it is called)? Ritchey said something to the effect of "well I was planning on giving him a strong 6f work so I figured hey, might as well put him in a race!" What a novel concept! Apparently he wasn't afraid that his horse would run too well (whatever the hell that means) and therefore compromise his chances for future success.
Then there was the business about all of Alex's long works that Ritchey said he used to build up the horse's stamina. It seemed to work out okay with his impressive victories in the Arkansas, Preakness, and Belmont. I don't know squat about training, but don't these two ideas (bringing your horse back in a sprint, and using long/slow works to build stamina) make more sense than only running your horses every two months with some 5f works in between starts?
Also do trainers ever really think...."Oh no my horse ran much better in that race than I wanted him to run." Somehow I doubt it.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I know! Have you ever seen such a sure thing?
In a related - and slightly more serious matter - I have no idea how good of a trainer Tim Ritchey is overall, because I don't follow his tracks carefully, but personally I loved what he did with Afleet Alex in '05.
Remember when he brought him back in that 6f Mountain Valley Stakes (or whatever it is called)? Ritchey said something to the effect of "well I was planning on giving him a strong 6f work so I figured hey, might as well put him in a race!" What a novel concept!
Then there was the business about all of Alex's long works that Ritchey said he used to build up the horse's stamina. It seemed to work out okay with his victories impressive victories in the Arkansas, Preakness, and Belmont. I don't know squat about training, but don't these two ideas (bringing your horse back in a sprint, and using long/slow works to build stamina) make more sense than only running your horses every two months with some 5f works in between starts?

It seemed to work well for about 100 years