The AP question???

[Kash$]

If he had run in the Whitney,

According to Serling,

[I]My answer to the American Pharoah/Whitney question is that it's a great tribute to AP that we even consider it possible he would have won

At what point was he blowing by a horse that was reeling off 23 quarters at 1 1/8 miles and not tiring?

[EMD4ME]

If he had run in the Whitney,

According to Serling,

[I]My answer to the American Pharoah/Whitney question is that it's a great tribute to AP that we even consider it possible he would have won

At what point was he blowing by a horse that was reeling off 23 quarters at 1 1/8 miles and not tiring?


American Pharaoh would have lost in an ugly fashion if he ran in the Whitney.

LTG is right on point!

[horses4courses]

Conjecture

I'm not saying AP would have won......we'll just never know, will we?

Hopefully, this puzzle gets solved in the BC Classic.

[Vinnie]

It will more than likely get solved. The fractions were pretty much identical to the Haskell for the opening quarter and the half. I know that the #4 was moving right along (I really liked him for the Win), but, did everyone forget how effortlessly AP was moving in the Haskell without being pushed at all? When I saw the comfort and ease of his strides, I said to my wife, ah hell, watch out now!! :) Hell, he ran every bit as fast as Honor Code did all out in the win at 9 furlongs today, and I really am a fan of Honor Code.

If healthy (God willing) I really believe that we are going to witness something very special from AP come BC Classic Day.

[Thebigguy]

It will more than likely get solved. The fractions were pretty much identical to the Haskell for the opening quarter and the half. I know that the #4 was moving right along (I really liked him for the Win), but, did everyone forget how effortlessly AP was moving in the Haskell without being pushed at all? When I saw the comfort and ease of his strides, I said to my wife, ah hell, watch out now!! :) Hell, he ran every bit as fast as Honor Code did all out in the win at 9 furlongs today, and I really am a fan of Honor Code.

If healthy (God willing) I really believe that we are going to witness something very special from AP come BC Classic Day.

Pretty much all wrong....

[EMD4ME]

Pretty much all wrong....

Exactly. Stalking similar fractions at MONMOUTH is a whole lot all different than stalking those fractions at Saratoga VS. older.

If he was in here he would have been off the board, looking for an excuse.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Not sure I even get the point of even pondering the question or trying to make the comparison.

In 12 weeks, we will all hopefully get a real answer. And at the Classic 12 Furlongs to boot.

[EMD4ME]

Not sure I even get the point of even pondering the question or trying to make the comparison.

In 12 weeks, we will all hopefully get a real answer. And at the Classic 12 Furlongs to boot.

You mean 10, right LDH?

[cj]

Forget the raw times.

American Pharoah is just a better horse in my opinion. Keep in mind Liam's Map carried 117 today. If they meet later he would have to give weight to American Pharoah, a horse that carried 126 a mile and a half in the Belmont quite handily.

I'm not the world's biggest weight guy buy any stretch, but the shift alone that we would see should they meet is a big factor.

I long since gave up trying to beat American Pharoah, but I admire the spirit of those that have not.

[EMD4ME]

Forget the raw times.

American Pharoah is just a better horse in my opinion. Keep in mind Liam's Map carried 117 today. If they meet later he would have to give weight to American Pharoah, a horse that carried 126 a mile and a half in the Belmont quite handily.

I'm not the world's biggest weight guy buy any stretch, but the shift alone that we would see should they meet is a big factor.

I long since gave up trying to beat American Pharoah, but I admire the spirit of those that have not.

I said it another thread. HC is not about the 1 Turn vs. 2 Turn issue. He is all about the pace and race flow. If AP leads/stalks/presses a hot pace in the BCC, HC can definately run him down.

After watching Liam's Map run like that, I am more confident that I will make some healthy wagers at decent odds in the BCC against A.P.

Beating up on 3 yo's is 1 thing. Running 5 real quarters stressed out vs. a lot of older horses in a 12 horse field is a totally different thing.

If he proves me wrong, I won't cry. I'll admire him BIG TIME but I will play heavily against.

Count me in.

[cj]

I said it another thread. HC is not about the 1 Turn vs. 2 Turn issue. He is all about the pace and race flow. If AP leads/stalks/presses a hot pace in the BCC, HC can definately run him down.

After watching Liam's Map run like that, I am more confident that I will make some healthy wagers at decent odds in the BCC against A.P.

Beating up on 3 yo's is 1 thing. Running 5 real quarters stressed out vs. a lot of older horses in a 12 horse field is a totally different thing.

If he proves me wrong, I won't cry. I'll admire him BIG TIME but I will play heavily against.

Count me in.

Why would he be stressed out tracking Liam's Map? That horse is as laid back as they come. If I was going to try beat American Pharoah, it wouldn't be with a one run closer that has had back to back dream set ups.

[EMD4ME]

Why would he be stressed out tracking Liam's Map? That horse is as laid back as they come. If I was going to try beat American Pharoah, it wouldn't be with a one run closer that has had back to back dream set ups.

He can easily be put in a position to be stressed when you have 12 horses, of which 5 or 6 can be speedy. Post Position draws can play havoc, the gate break can cause havoc where AP would need to accelerate and use to earn position OR hit certain holes.

All that stuff hasn't happened. Why not? Let's take a look back.

Derby. Great post. Moved inward as 10 horses were put into a racing slaughter house. I personally don't care if he raced 3 wide around the track. People think he lost ground, what about the 10 horses who were accordioned to death? How much ground did they lose?

Preakness.

His entrymate snatched away from him at the gate. No stress there. Used a bit to keep rail and lead from Mr.Z (no coincidence his one initial to his name is the last name in the alphabet)

Belmont-Broke a hair slow. For some strange reason, both the 4 and 6 wanted nothing to do with being the goat and closing his path 1 step from the gate, I wonder why.

Haskell-all closers/weak horses in outside draws. Main speed from post 2. No one to really stress him. Jordan tried a bit but he couldn't.

Replace C Edge with Liam's Map, replace Jordan with any older horse with tactical speed. Don't you think his Haskell would become a bit more stressful?

Add in that he can have the rail in the BCC, break that hair slow that he has done before, jocks who know to cut him off if he break a hair slow, WILL cut him off. He's 8th buried, maybe rank and has to prove that he can rally from well of the pace.

Or, he might have to hit holes through traffic if Bayern lines up next to him and SMACKS him from Saratoga to Delmar at the gate (LOL-was kinda kidding on that one. Baffert would never allow that from his own stable).

He's been prone to some awesome racing luck. Was awesome in the haskell, I give him that but after watching Liam's Map progress, HC rally well going 2 turns I'm a bit more skeptical of him crushing the BCC field.

All depends on who lines up, how many line up and what form they're in. No final thoughts yet. We'll see. I might turn around 10/31 and say AP is a lock. I don't know yet.

I'm excited. We'll see.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

You mean 10, right LDH?

Pretty damn sure it is 12.

Today is/was 8/8. A Saturday.

We have the next following Saturdays.

8/15
8/22
8/29
9/5
9/12
9/19
9/26
10/3
10/10
10/17
10/24

and.....drum roll.. 10/31 for 12 Saturdays away from today is the Breeders Cup Classic.

[cj]

Pretty damn sure it is 12.

Today is/was 8/8. A Saturday.

We have the next following Saturdays.

8/15
8/22
8/29
9/5
9/12
9/19
9/26
10/3
10/10
10/17
10/24

and.....drum roll.. 10/31 for 12 Saturdays away from today is the Breeders Cup Classic.

Should have thought this out and saved some time. You referenced 12 twice. One of those 12s is incorrect.

[rastajenk]

Funny stuff :D

[highnote]

Will AP be able to cut fast fractions, match Liam stride for stride, look him in the eye, put him away and then hold off a hard charging HC?

Hopefully, we get a chance to find out.

[pandy]

The pacesetter Liam's Map did indeed run huge in the Whitney. I don't know what the track speed was on Haskell day, but the Saratoga track was slow and tiring yesterday, the rail was dead and the track strongly favored closers. In the five dirt races, the winner's rallied from these positions 7-4-5-9-9

Liam's Map set the pace in the two path, so Smith knew what he was up against. Liam's Map is a serious miler. His pedigree and style would seem to be a poor fit for the classic, however.

Yesterday's track bias is the reason why Baffert does not like Saratoga and it could play into his decision about the Travers. Although American Pharoah doesn't need to lead, so I don't see why it should. I'd like to see him in the Travers.

I think CJ is underestimating these older horses. You can't compare the Haskell field to the Whitney field. Keen Ice, a horse who has one win and no speed, ran 2nd in the Haskell. C'mon man. The Whitney was a deep Gr1. The Haskell was essentially an allowance race.

[PICSIX]

The pacesetter Liam's Map did indeed run huge in the Whitney. I don't know what the track speed was on Haskell day, but the Saratoga track was slow and tiring yesterday, the rail was dead and the track strongly favored closers. In the five dirt races, the winner's rallied from these positions 7-4-5-9-9

Liam's Map set the pace in the two path, so Smith knew what he was up against. Liam's Map is a serious miler. His pedigree and style would seem to be a poor fit for the classic, however.

Yesterday's track bias is the reason why Baffert does not like Saratoga and it could play into his decision about the Travers. Although American Pharoah doesn't need to lead, so I don't see why it should. I'd like to see him in the Travers.

I think CJ is underestimating these older horses. You can't compare the Haskell field to the Whitney field. Keen Ice, a horse who has one win and no speed, ran 2nd in the Haskell. C'mon man. The Whitney was a deep Gr1. The Haskell was essentially an allowance race.
CJ's figures:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1861738&postcount=60

[pandy]

Beyer gave the top two finishers in the Whitney a 112, the highest Beyer of the year so far. The Haskell got a 109, but of course AP could have gone faster in the Haskell.

[Kash$]

AP vs Liam's Map not worth discussing

AP has 2 races left and chasing history

LM has less then 2 races left if hes lucky..


LM ran out his skin yesterday ill pass on him repeating that type of performance.Pletchers horses get worse as the year progresses.

[Grits]

I think CJ is underestimating these older horses. You can't compare the Haskell field to the Whitney field. Keen Ice, a horse who has one win and no speed, ran 2nd in the Haskell. C'mon man. The Whitney was a deep Gr1. The Haskell was essentially an allowance race.

I'm not as sure as you are about the older horse division. Speaking strictly of those, here, finishing the Whitney. Don't care how many G1s they have among them, I'm not convinced they'll bring it to American Pharaoh, much less beat him. Aside from Honor Code, Liam's Map, Tonalist...this is how the others ran.

The chart comments. The leader margins and beaten lengths:

4th-Wicked Strong-beaten 6 "flattened out"
5th-V.E.Day-beaten 10+ "made no impact"
6th-Lea-beaten 11+ "made no impact"
7th-Normandy Invasion beaten 17+ "folded"
8th-Moreno-beaten 20 "began to back away"
9th-Noble Bird-beaten 24+ "failed to give run when asked, tired"

I could be wrong, but this doesn't seem quite so flattering among Grade 1s, most of whom were done coming out of the far turn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kucENwYfGyc

[Grits]

Beyer gave the top two finishers in the Whitney a 112, the highest Beyer of the year so far. The Haskell got a 109, but of course AP could have gone faster in the Haskell.

He had to annoint something. His former "highest of the year" retired Friday. :lol:

[Tor Ekman]

Exactly. Stalking similar fractions at MONMOUTH is a whole lot all different than stalking those fractions at Saratoga VS. older.

If he was in here he would have been off the board, looking for an excuse.
As the Mig Man likes to say, it's not how fast you ran, but how you ran fast

[EMD4ME]

Pretty damn sure it is 12.

Today is/was 8/8. A Saturday.

We have the next following Saturdays.

8/15
8/22
8/29
9/5
9/12
9/19
9/26
10/3
10/10
10/17
10/24

and.....drum roll.. 10/31 for 12 Saturdays away from today is the Breeders Cup Classic.

I was talking about furlongs not weeks left. Was just trying to help ya.

[EMD4ME]

As the Mig Man likes to say, it's not how fast you ran, but how you ran fast

Exactamundo.

I don't care if my horse is scorching along IF he's doing it easy.

If AP can stalk vicious fractions stress free, put away a performance like Liam's Map and THEN put away Honor Code in the lane, then he will EARN every single accolade given to him WITHOUT question.

[pandy]

I'm not as sure as you are about the older horse division. Speaking strictly of those, here, finishing the Whitney. Don't care how many G1s they have among them, I'm not convinced they'll bring it to American Pharaoh, much less beat him. Aside from Honor Code, Liam's Map, Tonalist...this is how the others ran.

The chart comments. The leader margins and beaten lengths:

4th-Wicked Strong-beaten 6 "flattened out"
5th-V.E.Day-beaten 10+ "made no impact"
6th-Lea-beaten 11+ "made no impact"
7th-Normandy Invasion beaten 17+ "folded"
8th-Moreno-beaten 20 "began to back away"
9th-Noble Bird-beaten 24+ "failed to give run when asked, tired"

I could be wrong, but this doesn't seem quite so flattering among Grade 1s, most of whom were done coming out of the far turn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kucENwYfGyc


I think AP will have a very good chance of winning the Classic, especially since horses like Firing Line and Shared Belief won't be in the race. But, I mean, you can't compare the Haskell to the Whitney, monstrous difference here. Again, Keen Ice is eligible for NW2 and I thought he was the main threat to AP in the Haskell, in fact, I played the exacta. As for the Whitney, based on what I saw in the other races, I'd say the pace was brutal and that's why those horses got tired. That was definitely a tiring track at Saratoga yesterday. The Test only went 1:22.4, and that's not because of the quality of the field, it was the slow surface.

[098poi]

Should have thought this out and saved some time. You referenced 12 twice. One of those 12s is incorrect.

Wait a couple of Saturdays and it will be 10 and 10.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Should have thought this out and saved some time. You referenced 12 twice. One of those 12s is incorrect.

Yep. 12F? Egg on face. :faint:

[EMD4ME]

Yep. 12F? Egg on face. :faint:

It happens to the BEST of us LDH. No worries..

Now go out and get 12 winners today, NOT just 10!

[Lemon Drop Husker]

It happens to the BEST of us LDH. No worries..

Now go out and get 12 winners today, NOT just 10!

Damn straight!:jump:

[taxicab]

American Pharoah is the best horse in the world.
There's no two ways about it.
Any race he runs in he's going to win.
He's different from the rest....

[Kash$]

If he had run in the Whitney,

According to Serling,

[I]My answer to the American Pharoah/Whitney question is that it's a great tribute to AP that we even consider it possible he would have won

At what point was he blowing by a horse that was reeling off 23 quarters at 1 1/8 miles and not tiring?

To answer Serlings question,,

The same time Honor Code blew by him :rolleyes:

[burnsy]

The pacesetter Liam's Map did indeed run huge in the Whitney.

I think CJ is underestimating these older horses. You can't compare the Haskell field to the Whitney field. Keen Ice, a horse who has one win and no speed, ran 2nd in the Haskell. C'mon man. The Whitney was a deep Gr1. The Haskell was essentially an allowance race.

I totally agree Pandy. I'm not saying Pharoah could not of won or lost or whatever......its pure conjecture. But that field yesterday was "cooking", from start to finish. There were ZERO breathers in that one and it is how you run fast, not how fast you run! Those horses are tons more accomplished and way faster than Keen Ice or Upstart. American Pharoah SHOULD be pulling up and beating those chumps (in NJ).....yesterday was a race of a different color and Shugs horse was picking them up hard at the end...real race horses. The only horse that would of had a chance out of that Haskell is American Pharoah, the rest would of been chewed up and spit out vs. that field. Put it this way, Pharoah could/should win a race like that but I guarantee he's not cantering away at the wire. There was real "contention pressure" in that Whitney.....from the speed early to the closers late.......its a joke to even compare the two races. Liam's Map and Honor Code could both make the rest of that Haskell field look slow too. It was a 1.75 mill allowance race compared to the horses yesterday. Keen Ice, Frosted and some of these other 3 yo's seem like they can't win even if Pharaoh's not there. There were multiple Grade 1 winners in the Whitney. Running their balls off, start to finish. Apples to oranges...........

[Kash$]

I totally agree Pandy. I'm not saying Pharoah could not of won or lost or whatever......its pure conjecture. But that field yesterday was "cooking", from start to finish. There were ZERO breathers in that one and it is how you run fast, not how fast you run! Those horses are tons more accomplished and way faster than Keen Ice or Upstart. American Pharoah SHOULD be pulling up and beating those chumps (in NJ).....yesterday was a race of a different color and Shugs horse was picking them up hard at the end...real race horses. The only horse that would of had a chance out of that Haskell is American Pharoah, the rest would of been chewed up and spit out vs. that field. Put it this way, Pharoah could/should win a race like that but I guarantee he's not cantering away at the wire. There was real "contention pressure" in that Whitney.....from the speed early to the closers late.......its a joke to even compare the two races. Liam's Map and Honor Code could both make the rest of that Haskell field look slow too. It was a 1.75 mill allowance race compared to the horses yesterday. Keen Ice, Frosted and some of these other 3 yo's seem like they can't win even if Pharaoh's not there. There were multiple Grade 1 winners in the Whitney. Running their balls off, start to finish. Apples to oranges...........

Normandy Invasion-ready to be retire
VE Day-Hasnt won since last year
Moreno-16-1 had zero chance
Noble Bird-had 3 wins...2 in Allowance races
Wicked Strong-LAst win last year.

Who exactly are these REAL HORSES?

AP was running 24 quarters in the Belmont..

[thaskalos]

Normandy Invasion-ready to be retire
VE Day-Hasnt won since last year
Moreno-16-1 had zero chance
Noble Bird-had 3 wins...2 in Allowance races
Wicked Strong-LAst win last year.

Who exactly are these REAL HORSES?

AP was running 24 quarters in the Belmont..
The game looks so easy in hindsight.

[rastajenk]

When AP does take on older rivals, do you think he's going to know or care how old they are or what they've accomplished? Maybe he should ask them as they stand around ready to load. I think his response would be a horsey, "Mmm-hmm, that's nice." :p

[Kash$]

The game looks so easy in hindsight.

Burnsy made the Whitney sound like the 78 Gold Cup gee,,

I bet HC they kept saying hes not a two turn horse what would you call the Remsen win 1 1/2 turns?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

The game looks so easy in hindsight.

For ***** sake, that was the best field we have seen all year.

For anybody to discount that field...:D

The :4: ran a man's man race The :1: was just better and IN FORM.

Half of that field will be running in Keeneland come 10/31.

[thaskalos]

Can we at least agree that Honor Code beat better horses yesterday than what American Pharoah has ever faced?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Can we at least agree that Honor Code beat better horses yesterday than what American Pharoah has ever faced?

yes.

Anybody to say otherwise is a complete moron or fan boy.

[Kash$]

Can we at least agree that Honor Code beat better horses yesterday than what American Pharoah has ever faced?

Before the Derby they call this years 3 year crop the best in a long time....
What happen..?

Older handicap division :lol:

[Kash$]

For ***** sake, that was the best field we have seen all year.

For anybody to discount that field...:D

The :4: ran a man's man race The :1: was just better and IN FORM.

Half of that field will be running in Keeneland come 10/31.

Half that field maybe retire before the BC.

[thaskalos]

Half that field maybe retire before the BC.
Maybe so. But the other half is still better than what American Pharoah has ever seen.

[taxicab]

Half that field maybe retire before the BC.


Moreno....

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Half that field maybe retire before the BC.

Name them.

It was a 10 horse field, so you have to name 5.

[Kash$]

Name them.

It was a 10 horse field, so you have to name 5.

It was a 9 horse field;

Liams Map will soon hear the news next couple of months hes been Pletcherized.
Normandy Invasion cant win in a 3 horse field at Delaware.Shouldve been retire two years ago
Moreno's campaign this year and last has taken its toll
And imo Lea is finish..

Nobel Bird,Tonalist,VE Day,And Wicked Strong are left...Dortmund is better then all of except Tonalist.

[Grits]

Name them.

It was a 10 horse field, so you have to name 5.

Maybe you can name the 5 you feel will be at Keeneland aside from Honor Code and Noble Bird who won the Stephen Foster?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Maybe you can name theI 5 you feel will be at Keeneland aside from Honor Code and Noble Bird who won the Stephen Foster?
Easy

So I already have 2 in hand, and the I now have Honor Code.

Tonalist is 4.

And between Wicked Strong, Lea, and VE Day. we have 5. IF not 6 or....more LG.

[Kash$]

Easy

So I already have 2 in hand, and the I now have Honor Code.

Tonalist is 4.

And between Wicked Strong, Lea, and VE Day. we have 5. IF not 6 or....more LG.

None have any shot in winning the classic..I guess your buying LM ,btw can you name a older Pletcher horse that has posed any threat come BC Classic time?

No disrespect LDH.

[Grits]

Easy

So I already have 2 in hand, and the I now have Honor Code.

Tonalist is 4.

And between Wicked Strong, Lea, and VE Day. we have 5. IF not 6 or....more LG.

Maybe I'm missing something. I'm sorry, please, read my post again.

Honor Code is one of the two. Noble Bird is the other.

[ILovetheInner]

All of this debating, IMO, only underscores racing's sorry ability to host a great horse. Rarely, you have connections who are willing to invest in it. If it's a horse for the ages, you run him like one. And if you don't, you can expect these debates.

AP was a smashing juvenile, although he didn't run much (injury not withstanding, that will be a new part of our times). His path to KY was easy, his Derby win visually not particularly becoming of a TC winner (in hindsight ultra impressive as he clearly was a short horse), his Preakness a gift, a laugh, and then the Belmont, quite becoming of a TC winner indeed, but with that said, Frosted getting denied isn't exactly a landmark moment. The Haskell field was not exactly one for the ages either. I do think there is a difference stalking CE vs LM. The former was done when AP sailed right on by.

HAD he instead been in the Whitney, and won, how amazing might that be? It's where he belonged, IMO. We knew he'd win the Haskell. It was nice to see him win and win impressively, but if Paulson had him, he would have been in the Whitney. We know he is dominating his crop, this is a record book moment, so let it be that or don't. If your horse is supposed to be potentially be "one of the greatest ever," why not? I do know which would have been better for racing.

I am a big Honor Code fan and have been so since his first start. Even with that, I was ultra impressed by Liam's Map....if you weren't, I question if you love horse racing. Had AP been in there, it would have been amazing. But he wasn't, so I will continue to debate. Pretty much knowing it will come down to the BCC (only if Baffert thinks he's perfect), likely off the PA Derby which will also be soft, and either wins his second hard race of an entire season, or has some "forgivable ala Zenyatta" excuse, in his case for the "tough" year he has had. Le sigh.

I don't have a clue if he would have won or not. I do know, either way, it would have been a race for the ages.

[thaskalos]

All of this debating, IMO, only underscores racing's sorry ability to host a great horse. Rarely, you have connections who are willing to invest in it. If it's a horse for the ages, you run him like one. And if you don't, you can expect these debates.

AP was a smashing juvenile, although he didn't run much (injury not withstanding, that will be a new part of our times). His path to KY was easy, his Derby win visually not particularly becoming of a TC winner (in hindsight ultra impressive as he clearly was a short horse), his Preakness a gift, a laugh, and then the Belmont, quite becoming of a TC winner indeed, but with that said, Frosted getting denied isn't exactly a landmark moment. The Haskell field was not exactly one for the ages either. I do think there is a difference stalking CE vs LM. The former was done when AP sailed right on by.

HAD he instead been in the Whitney, and won, how amazing might that be? It's where he belonged, IMO. We knew he'd win the Haskell. It was nice to see him win and win impressively, but if Paulson had him, he would have been in the Whitney. We know he is dominating his crop, this is a record book moment, so let it be that or don't. If your horse is supposed to be potentially be "one of the greatest ever," why not? I do know which would have been better for racing.

I am a big Honor Code fan and have been so since his first start. Even with that, I was ultra impressed by Liam's Map....if you weren't, I question if you love horse racing. Had AP been in there, it would have been amazing. But he wasn't, so I will continue to debate. Pretty much knowing it will come down to the BCC (only if Baffert thinks he's perfect), likely off the PA Derby which will also be soft, and either wins his second hard race of an entire season, or has some "forgivable ala Zenyatta" excuse, in his case for the "tough" year he has had. Le sigh.

I don't have a clue if he would have won or not. I do know, either way, it would have been a race for the ages.

In all fairness...the owners of these horses have their own agendas, and they should not be concerned about providing answers to internet debates. Whether you are a horse player or a horse owner, your task is a tough one...and easy money is hard to turn down.

[ILovetheInner]

In all fairness...the owners of these horses have their own agendas, and they should not be concerned about providing answers to internet debates. Whether you are a horse player or a horse owner, your task is a tough one...and easy money is hard to turn down.

It is. Paulson didn't need easy money, though. I thought the whole Cigar campaign was pretty amazing. I was slow to enjoy it because I was a Holy Bull freak feeling sorry for myself, but retrospectively we have a huge debt, because he did not mess around and Cigar's legacy is what it is because of Paulson. And it was great for racing. Racing then, and racing now.

It's in line with what I said, what racing is today. I think best reflected in Zenyatta's campaign and debates that remain heated to this day. Rachel beat her for HOY because they campaigned her to her developing legend. It's luck of the draw these days for how much racing will benefit from a specific horse. It is not so much the internet debates I think owners should worry about, but for the rare opportunities great horses present. If racing is not put first in these instances, racing will not prosper.

[thaskalos]

It is. Paulson didn't need easy money, though. I thought the whole Cigar campaign was pretty amazing. I was slow to enjoy it because I was a Holy Bull freak feeling sorry for myself, but retrospectively we have a huge debt, because he did not mess around and Cigar's legacy is what it is because of Paulson. And it was great for racing. Racing then, and racing now.

It's in line with what I said, what racing is today. I think best reflected in Zenyatta's campaign and debates that remain heated to this day. Rachel beat her for HOY because they campaigned her to her developing legend. It's luck of the draw these days for how much racing will benefit from a specific horse. It is not so much the internet debates I think owners should worry about, but for the rare opportunities great horses present. If racing is not put first in these instances, racing will not prosper.

The owners are taking the biggest financial gamble in this game, and I can't begrudge them for seeking whatever return they can get on their "investment". Putting racing first should be a collective effort, and, until it is...I forgive the horse owners for looking out only for themselves, and for the well-being of their horses.

If I owned Zenyatta, then the only thing that I would change about her campaign would be that I would insist on a couple of more dirt races before that last BC Classic. Boy what I wouldn't give to see that gal have another crack at Blame at that distance. :)

[cj]

Maybe so. But the other half is still better than what American Pharoah has ever seen.

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean American Pharoah isn't still better. None in that field yesterday has even been all that fast. Yes, G1 horses, but not above the average. Liam's Map popped a big number but did it carrying only 117 pounds.

Some horses I just don't want to bet against. He is one of them.

[Kash$]

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean American Pharoah isn't still better. None in that field yesterday has even been all that fast. Yes, G1 horses, but not above the average. Liam's Map popped a big number but did it carrying only 117 pounds.

Some horses I just don't want to bet against. He is one of them.


How long before someone post if AP was chasing BOP he wouldve been in trouble?

[thaskalos]

Of course it is, but that doesn't mean American Pharoah isn't still better. None in that field yesterday has even been all that fast. Yes, G1 horses, but not above the average. Liam's Map popped a big number but did it carrying only 117 pounds.

Some horses I just don't want to bet against. He is one of them.

I think the Pharoah is a truly GREAT horse...but the word "GREAT" doesn't seem to satisfy some of his biggest fans. Do we really have to place this horse right between Secretariat and Man O' War before we can be thought of giving this horse his due? Even ZENYATTA ran a 137 speed figure, for heaven's sake. Let AP come within a diminishing neck of winning two BC Classics, and then we'll talk. :)

[Robert Fischer]

Honor Code would have caught him if Victor Espinoza geared American Pharoah down, after Liams Map quit on the turn, once tackled.

In the absence of jockey error, American Pharoah would win comfortably.

Honor Code is very good, and he's probably the 2nd best horse in training, but American Pharoah is a class above, in a class that doesn't even exist. Honor Code needed a great setup and a perfectly timed move to beat a horse who ran his eyeballs out in the Whitney after saving ground on a clear lead and running the other pace horses into a collapse.

[cj]

I think the Pharoah is a truly GREAT horse...but the word "GREAT" doesn't seem to satisfy some of his biggest fans. Do we really have to place this horse right between Secretariat and Man O' War before we can be thought of giving this horse his due? Even ZENYATTA ran a 137 speed figure, for heaven's sake. Let AP come within a diminishing neck of winning two BC Classics, and then we'll talk. :)

I actually don't even care about that history stuff any more. Owner and trainers don't, why should I? I just wanna bet.

[pandy]

Some good points about ownership here. If you look at Rachel Alexandra's career, after they sold controlling interest to Jackson, he ran her against tougher competition right away. He believed in her and he wanted her to prove that she could beat the boys, and older horses, which she did, winning the Preakness, Haskell, Woodward. The original owners admitted that the would not have put her in those races. But winning those races cemented her legacy. I guess you could speculate that the tougher schedule hurt her at 4, but Jackson wanted to strike while the iron was hot, and Rachel proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was one of the greatest fillies of all time and quite possibly the greatest 3yo filly ever. But Jackson didn't care about the money from the races. He bought racehorses for the sport.

[thaskalos]

Some good points about ownership here. If you look at Rachel Alexandra's career, after they sold controlling interest to Jackson, he ran her against tougher competition right away. He believed in her and he wanted her to prove that she could beat the boys, and older horses, which she did, winning the Preakness, Haskell, Woodward. The original owners admitted that the would not have put her in those races. But winning those races cemented her legacy. I guess you could speculate that the tougher schedule hurt her at 4, but Jackson wanted to strike while the iron was hot, and Rachel proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was one of the greatest fillies of all time and quite possibly the greatest 3yo filly ever. But Jackson didn't care about the money from the races. He bought racehorses for the sport.
Rachel was a great 3 year-old...but a mediocre 4 year-old. I bet Jackson ended up regretting the horse's aggressive handling during the three year-old's campaign. IMO...Zenyatta left a much better legacy...even if her campaign was sheltered. You don't exactly have to get carried away with your horse, in order to secure her spot in the history of the game.

[horses4courses]

Rachel was a great 3 year-old...but a mediocre 4 year-old. I bet Jackson ended up regretting the horse's aggressive handling during the three year-old's campaign. IMO...Zenyatta left a much better legacy...even if her campaign was sheltered. You don't exactly have to get carried away with your horse, in order to secure her spot in the history of the game.

They were both special in their own way.
Horses that good don't come around too often.

[thaskalos]

They were both special in their own way.
Horses that good don't come around too often.
They were both special...but Zenyatta left the better legacy. :cool:

[horses4courses]

They were both special...but Zenyatta left the better legacy. :cool:

Agreed.

As a Triple Crown winner, AP will leave an even better legacy.
If he beats older horses in the BC Classic, it will grow further.

Add this to the fact that he has the makings of a very influential sire.
Lots of little Pharoahs should be winning stakes races for years to come. :ThmbUp:

[bks]

HAD he instead been in the Whitney, and won, how amazing might that be? It's where he belonged, IMO. We knew he'd win the Haskell. It was nice to see him win and win impressively, but if Paulson had him, he would have been in the Whitney. We know he is dominating his crop, this is a record book moment, so let it be that or don't. If your horse is supposed to be potentially be "one of the greatest ever," why not? I do know which would have been better for racing.

I am a big Honor Code fan and have been so since his first start. Even with that, I was ultra impressed by Liam's Map....if you weren't, I question if you love horse racing. Had AP been in there, it would have been amazing. But he wasn't, so I will continue to debate. Pretty much knowing it will come down to the BCC (only if Baffert thinks he's perfect), likely off the PA Derby which will also be soft, and either wins his second hard race of an entire season, or has some "forgivable ala Zenyatta" excuse, in his case for the "tough" year he has had. Le sigh.

I don't have a clue if he would have won or not. I do know, either way, it would have been a race for the ages.

FTR, I bet a ton on Liam's Map. But Liam's Map has never won a graded stakes race. He's only been entered in one of them. AP just won the Triple Crown in basically a jog. At 1 1/4miles, there's only one of them I'll want my money on.

[bks]

. . . I think best reflected in Zenyatta's campaign and debates that remain heated to this day. Rachel beat her for HOY because they campaigned her to her developing legend.

Give it a rest. Rachel was a very, very good 3-y-o filly. But where would Woodward winner Rachel have been in the Whitney yesterday? We know exactly where. A tiring 3rd or 4th.

Where would Zenyatta have been? We know exactly where. Bobbing heads with Honor Code.

At any distance, against any company alive when she was, Zenyatta was going to be right there on the wire, particularly at a classic distance. Not so for Rachel. End of story.

[thaskalos]

Give it a rest. Rachel was a very, very good 3-y-o filly. But where would Woodward winner Rachel have been in the Whitney yesterday? We know exactly where. A tiring 3rd or 4th.

Where would Zenyatta have been? We know exactly where. Bobbing heads with Honor Code.

At any distance, against any company alive when she was, Zenyatta was going to be right there on the wire, particularly at a classic distance. Not so for Rachel. End of story.

The voice of reason. :ThmbUp:

[Thebigguy]

Honor Code would have caught him if Victor Espinoza geared American Pharoah down, after Liams Map quit on the turn, once tackled.

In the absence of jockey error, American Pharoah would win comfortably.

Honor Code is very good, and he's probably the 2nd best horse in training, but American Pharoah is a class above, in a class that doesn't even exist. Honor Code needed a great setup and a perfectly timed move to beat a horse who ran his eyeballs out in the Whitney after saving ground on a clear lead and running the other pace horses into a collapse.


You come off as totally smug, and you spew garbage. Truth is you were darted from DT and HH because of this crap. Jockey error? Liams Map quit on the turn? What are you talking about?

[Thebigguy]

FTR, I bet a ton on Liam's Map. But Liam's Map has never won a graded stakes race. He's only been entered in one of them. AP just won the Triple Crown in basically a jog. At 1 1/4miles, there's only one of them I'll want my money on.


AP was awesome in the Preakness and Belmont. He was all out, and whipped sometime like 32 times in the Derby. I wouldn't call his Derby a jog.

[ILovetheInner]

Give it a rest. Rachel was a very, very good 3-y-o filly. But where would Woodward winner Rachel have been in the Whitney yesterday? We know exactly where. A tiring 3rd or 4th.

Where would Zenyatta have been? We know exactly where. Bobbing heads with Honor Code.

At any distance, against any company alive when she was, Zenyatta was going to be right there on the wire, particularly at a classic distance. Not so for Rachel. End of story.

You are only proving my point. I said not one word about the quality of those runners, but you are so used to defending it that you read something not even there. It has been debated ad nauseam, and certainly not by me. Had Rachel remained with her more conservative connections, Zenyatta would have been HOY that year. But in the end, the debate about Zenyatta still manages to generate intense passion, whereas no one debates whether or not Rachel had a remarkable 3yo campaign. Because of the nature of it. I don't need to give "a rest" to a very ambitious campaign being what won Rachel HOY. It's the very reason the voters gave.

No one questions Cigar. No one questions that Spectacular Bid was unlucky to lose the Belmont. No one questions Forego. No one questions the might of Seattle Slew, despite the fact that he was even more argued about after his TC romp than AP is. Because their campaigns were ambitious.

I am pretty clear with the way things are today that my personal top five list of horses in my lifetime will likely never change, for horses will no longer to be campaigned to their standard. None will ever be as tried, as proven, as facing down of adversity. Because those days are gone. Who else would have a TC winner almost die and then bring him back as a four year old today? Not happening.

[pandy]

They were both special...but Zenyatta left the better legacy. :cool:


Zenyatta left a better legacy because she was better. Yes, it is possible that Rachel would have done better at 4 if she was babied, but there is no way to know that. By racing her against better horses she did stamp herself as perhaps the greatest 3yo filly of all time, and that's something.

[pandy]

Give it a rest. Rachel was a very, very good 3-y-o filly. But where would Woodward winner Rachel have been in the Whitney yesterday? We know exactly where. A tiring 3rd or 4th.

Where would Zenyatta have been? We know exactly where. Bobbing heads with Honor Code.

At any distance, against any company alive when she was, Zenyatta was going to be right there on the wire, particularly at a classic distance. Not so for Rachel. End of story.


I agree with you except for your statement that Rachel was a very good filly, she was without a doubt a GREAT 3yo filly, and it would be hard to argue with anyone who said she was the greatest 3yo filly ever. Zenyatta was a freak it's not fair to compare any mare against her with the possible exception of Ruffian, although Zenyatta will be ranked higher than Ruffian because her accomplishments were greater.

[classhandicapper]

The Whitney would obviously have been a tougher race than the Haskell from both a pace and overall competition point of view.

However, I think some people questioning AP have it backwards (just as they have with many other great horses). They are looking for speed figures and tough trips that justify his quality when they should be trying to figure how good he is and waiting for the circumstances that will allow him to prove or disprove that opinion with higher/lower figures against tougher competition and trips.

If you wait for him to crush older horses after stalking a fast pace and putting in a lifetime top figure, you are too late.

If you've been betting against him hoping he can't, you've been going broke.

There are clues to these things visually and otherwise. I'm not saying it's easy to tell the difference or that I am especially good at it. I played against him in the Derby and Preakness. But people looking at his figures in a snapshot and thinking that represents how good he is now are often way behind the curve on these potentially great and/or lightly raced horses.

[Robert Fischer]

You come off as totally smug, and you spew garbage. Truth is you were darted from DT and HH because of this crap. Jockey error? Liams Map quit on the turn? What are you talking about?


BTW, I am a god compared to you in the way I process races. Pick through the garbage I spew and find some nourishment for your atrophied brain.
AFAIK I am still a member at DT, although I haven't checked the site in a couple/few years when Doug Salvatore still updated a trip notes blog in a subforum there.
I posted on HH this morning.

Yes jockey error. I answered the question given in the thread from my own opinion and perspective. I'm glad it upset you for whatever weird reason.

Looked very straightforward and clear to me.

Now read it again cockroach! :mad: :


"Honor Code would have caught him if Victor Espinoza geared American Pharoah down, after Liams Map quit on the turn, once tackled.

In the absence of jockey error, American Pharoah would win comfortably.

Honor Code is very good, and he's probably the 2nd best horse in training, but American Pharoah is a class above, in a class that doesn't even exist. Honor Code needed a great setup and a perfectly timed move to beat a horse who ran his eyeballs out in the Whitney after saving ground on a clear lead and running the other pace horses into a collapse."

[thaskalos]

The Whitney would obviously have been a tougher race than the Haskell from both a pace and overall competition point of view.

However, I think some people questioning AP have it backwards (just as they have with many other great horses). They are looking for speed figures and tough trips that justify his quality when they should be trying to figure how good he is and waiting for the circumstances that will allow him to prove or disprove that opinion with higher/lower figures against tougher competition and trips.

If you wait for him to crush older horses after stalking a fast pace and putting in a lifetime top figure, you are too late.

If you've been betting against him hoping he can't, you've been going broke.

There are clues to these things visually and otherwise. I'm not saying it's easy to tell the difference or that I am especially good at it. I played against him in the Derby and Preakness. But people looking at his figures in a snapshot and thinking that represents how good he is now are often way behind the curve on these potentially great and/or lightly raced horses.

I've read the highlighted portion of your post several times...but I still don't know what you mean. Are you suggesting that horses like American Pharoah should not be bet against...because they will drive us "broke"? Is it unusual for a bettor to take a stand against a short-priced horse...even if that horse appears to be the best in the race?

No matter which handicapping approach you embrace...there will be times when the race results will not align with your pre-conceived handicapping philosophy. Andy Beyer underestimated Seattle Slew...and some more recent figure-handicappers underestimated American Pharoah. Figure handicapping is more objective than the other handicapping styles, and that makes the figure-player's judgement errors more obvious to see. But make no mistake; the class and the trip handicappers make plenty of these "mistakes" too.

Yes...these truly great horses may indeed possess a certain quality which the speed/pace figures seem unable to fully measure. This "quality" is a testament to the horses' greatness...and it's not necessarily a handicapping "mistake" made by the speed/pace handicapper. Figure-handicapping still works well enough in the other races to keep the competent figure player from "going broke".

[cj]

I've read the highlighted portion of your post several times...but I still don't know what you mean. Are you suggesting that horses like American Pharoah should not be bet against...because they will drive us "broke"? Is it unusual for a bettor to take a stand against a short-priced horse...even if that horse appears to be the best in the race?

No matter which handicapping approach you embrace...there will be times when the race results will not align with your pre-conceived handicapping philosophy. Andy Beyer underestimated Seattle Slew...and some more recent figure-handicappers underestimated American Pharoah. Figure handicapping is more objective than the other handicapping styles, and that makes the figure-player's judgement errors more obvious to see. But make no mistake; the class and the trip handicappers make plenty of these "mistakes" too.

Yes...these truly great horses may indeed possess a certain quality which the speed/pace figures seem unable to fully measure. This "quality" is a testament to the horses' greatness...and it's not necessarily a handicapping "mistake" made by the speed/pace handicapper. Figure-handicapping still works well enough in the other races to keep the competent figure player from "going broke".

I think a lot of people go overboard and make bad bets trying to beat superior horses. I've done it, and probably still do at times, but I try my best not to do so. It all comes down to having a legitimate reason to dislike a horse or just stretching to be clever.

How anyone could be against American Pharoah in any race since the Derby is beyond me. Usually when a "star" horse is a go against for me it is because I think I saw a weakness that others may miss. I've yet to see this horse show a weakness. He can lead, he can rate off speed, he can run inside and out, he was won with the pace slow and the pace fast, and he always finishes strongly.

[thaskalos]

I think a lot of people go overboard and make bad bets trying to beat superior horses. I've done it, and probably still do at times, but I try my best not to do so. It all comes down to having a legitimate reason to dislike a horse or just stretching to be clever.

How anyone could be against American Pharoah in any race since the Derby is beyond me. Usually when a "star" horse is a go against for me it is because I think I saw a weakness that others may miss. I've yet to see this horse show a weakness. He can lead, he can rate off speed, he can run inside and out, he was won with the pace slow and the pace fast, and he always finishes strongly.

I don't share your enthusiasm about the Pharoah's performance in the Derby. He was all out to prevail by a relatively short margin...and the resulting speed figure was unimpressive, relatively speaking. The fact that I didn't bet against the Pharoah in the Preakness and the Belmont had more to do with the weakness of his opposition. I was dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Belmont, but I couldn't find another horse worthy of a sizable wager. The horse was bucking 37 years of history...while sporting some pretty weak closing fractions. Yes...his Preakness victory was impressive...but Smarty Jones' Preakness victory was even MORE impressive, IMO.

I am now dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Classic...and I hope to find a worthwhile wager there. Betting against the seemingly outstanding horses when I consider it warranted isn't a "death wish". It's the way I have chosen to play this game. I expect to lose plenty of races along the way...but I also expect to remain standing when the dust clears, and it's time to cash our chips and go home. I plan on winning the WAR...even if I lose some of the battles. :)

[cj]

I don't share your enthusiasm about the Pharoah's performance in the Derby. He was all out to prevail by a relatively short margin...and the resulting speed figure was unimpressive, relatively speaking. The fact that I didn't bet against the Pharoah in the Preakness and the Belmont had more to do with the weakness of his opposition. I was dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Belmont, but I couldn't find another horse worthy of a sizable wager. The horse was bucking almost 30 years of history...while sporting some pretty weak closing fractions. Yes...his Preakness victory was impressive...but Smarty Jones' Preakness victory was even MORE impressive, IMO.

I am now dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Classic...and I hope to find a worthwhile wager there. Betting against the seemingly outstanding horses when I consider it warranted isn't a "death wish". It's the way I have chosen to play this game. I expect to lose plenty of races along the way...but I also expect to remain standing when the dust clears, and it's time to cash our chips and go home. I plan on winning the WAR...even if I lose some of the battles. :)

Part of winning the war is choosing your battles wisely. It sounds like you did by not betting against him. The fields he faced is a big part of why I saw no reason to go against...which had a prayer of beating him?

When he faces older horses, I'll reevaluate with any new data. I don't see any way a speed horse will ever finish in front of him, including the now mighty Liam's Map. The only hope I could see is a closer running at him late after he presses a fast pace and takes over. What odds would I want on that? A lot more than the tote board will offer on a horse like Honor Code or Tonalist.

[classhandicapper]

I've read the highlighted portion of your post several times...but I still don't know what you mean. Are you suggesting that horses like American Pharoah should not be bet against...because they will drive us "broke"? Is it unusual for a bettor to take a stand against a short-priced horse...even if that horse appears to be the best in the race?

.

What I am saying is that when you are dealing with horses that are winning consistently, figures often don't tell you how good a horse is.

Assuming perfect accuracy they tell you how fast a horse ran under a specific set of conditions.

The idea is know how good the horse is BEFORE it faces different conditions.

In this case, by different conditions I mean a faster pace against tougher foes and a tougher overall trip. When that happens, some horses reveal there is more in the tank. They run faster against those tougher foes even with the tougher trip. Others reveal they are of a cheaper variety that needs a soft setup. When those finally get tested they run slower.

There are tools that help figure out which a horse is beforehand.

I think people sometimes tend to take the figures too literally. They wait for the fast race against a tough field or tougher trip to verify quality. Sometimes very sharp horses get soft trips or beat easy fields. It can be a mistake to downgrade them. Sometimes great horses keep dominating softer fields. That doesn't make them any less great.

It would not shock me if AP faced a tougher field, tougher pace, but still put up a new speed figure top. And if he should do so at a future date, it won't necessarily be because he improved. It could be because it was the first time he was asked to.

[Robert Fischer]

I am now dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Classic...and I hope to find a worthwhile wager there. Betting against the seemingly outstanding horses when I consider it warranted isn't a "death wish". It's the way I have chosen to play this game. I expect to lose plenty of races along the way...but I also expect to remain standing when the dust clears, and it's time to cash our chips and go home. I plan on winning the WAR...even if I lose some of the battles. :)


I do think American Pharoah is the best horse I've ever seen, and I am looking for a chance to bet against in the Classic. Fans are quick to forget that it's a horse race. There's a reason we provide incentives and have them run around. When the public underestimates the randomness and overestimates the great performances and media presence, even the best horse can be over-bet. In a field like the Classic, where even a dominant horse may have a 30% or 40% chance of winning, it has to be considered. If you don't happen to feel he's a once in a generation type of horse, it's even more true.

[PaceAdvantage]

Give it a rest. Rachel was a very, very good 3-y-o filly. But where would Woodward winner Rachel have been in the Whitney yesterday? We know exactly where. A tiring 3rd or 4th.

Where would Zenyatta have been? We know exactly where. Bobbing heads with Honor Code.

At any distance, against any company alive when she was, Zenyatta was going to be right there on the wire, particularly at a classic distance. Not so for Rachel. End of story.Is there a way to stop bringing up Zenyatta into every thread lately and derailing? :lol: :lol:

Not solely directed at you bks...but anyone with such thoughts...

[PaceAdvantage]

It's kind of funny how some people in this thread (EMD4ME especially), were basically doing back flips after AP's Haskell (a race I didn't think was more impressive than his Belmont)...but now they're back to putting AP into the dustbin of history after the Whitney... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Really? You guys were that impressed with Honor Code/Liam's Map?

These are your AP killers?

[Grits]

I've never seen anything like the waffling, back in forth. Glad someone else has noted it.

Liam's Map is now the certified world beater. If he doesn't dust the Triple Crown winner, to be sure, Honor Code will.

[OTM Al]

Is there a way to stop bringing up Zenyatta into every thread lately and derailing? :lol: :lol:

Not solely directed at you bks...but anyone with such thoughts...

We have a corollary to the famed Godwin's Law! (Look it up and then look at any multipage off-topic thread for proof...)

I give you the PaceAdvantage Corollary

"As an online horse racing discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Zenyatta approaches 1"

[dilanesp]

I think a lot of people go overboard and make bad bets trying to beat superior horses. I've done it, and probably still do at times, but I try my best not to do so. It all comes down to having a legitimate reason to dislike a horse or just stretching to be clever.

How anyone could be against American Pharoah in any race since the Derby is beyond me. Usually when a "star" horse is a go against for me it is because I think I saw a weakness that others may miss. I've yet to see this horse show a weakness. He can lead, he can rate off speed, he can run inside and out, he was won with the pace slow and the pace fast, and he always finishes strongly.

I think there's a strong argument for betting against any Triple Crown attempt, no matter how impressive the horse is in the Derby and Preakness.

[thaskalos]

Is there a way to stop bringing up Zenyatta into every thread lately and derailing? :lol: :lol:

Not solely directed at you bks...but anyone with such thoughts...
Come now. Rachel didn't measure up to Zenyatta, and you are just gonna have to accept that. :)

[Stillriledup]

I don't share your enthusiasm about the Pharoah's performance in the Derby. He was all out to prevail by a relatively short margin...and the resulting speed figure was unimpressive, relatively speaking. The fact that I didn't bet against the Pharoah in the Preakness and the Belmont had more to do with the weakness of his opposition. I was dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Belmont, but I couldn't find another horse worthy of a sizable wager. The horse was bucking 37 years of history...while sporting some pretty weak closing fractions. Yes...his Preakness victory was impressive...but Smarty Jones' Preakness victory was even MORE impressive, IMO.

I am now dying to bet against the Pharoah in the Classic...and I hope to find a worthwhile wager there. Betting against the seemingly outstanding horses when I consider it warranted isn't a "death wish". It's the way I have chosen to play this game. I expect to lose plenty of races along the way...but I also expect to remain standing when the dust clears, and it's time to cash our chips and go home. I plan on winning the WAR...even if I lose some of the battles. :)

The impressive thing about his Derby is that he had to battle to win while losing ground. It was the race he faced the most adversity in, so even though he was beaten up with the whip and didnt win by a 'country mile' it was impressive even if it wasn't impressive in a conventional way.

[PaceAdvantage]

Come now. Rachel didn't measure up to Zenyatta, and you are just gonna have to accept that. :)I honestly don't care anymore after all these years...and neither should you... :lol:

Zenyatta was the best. There, you win. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[thaskalos]

I honestly don't care anymore after all these years...and neither should you... :lol:

Zenyatta was the best. There, you win. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Now that you've finally seen the light...you'll never hear a peep from me about Zenyatta ever again. :)

[PaceAdvantage]

Well, we wouldn't want that...NEVER A PEEP? Don't be that restrictive...just keep it to threads about Zenyatta...

[elhelmete]

I've never seen anything like the waffling, back in forth. Glad someone else has noted it.

+1.

The constant cycling between "they're all tomato cans" and "they're worldbeaters" is tiresome.

[EMD4ME]

It's kind of funny how some people in this thread (EMD4ME especially), were basically doing back flips after AP's Haskell (a race I didn't think was more impressive than his Belmont)...but now they're back to putting AP into the dustbin of history after the Whitney... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Really? You guys were that impressed with Honor Code/Liam's Map?

These are your AP killers?

I wasn't doing backflips :lol: :lol: :lol:

I was giving credit for what I see as his most impressive race to date.

I am still not sold on him as a MEGASTAR until I see him beat a very good horse and field with some kind of adversity (I don't mean losing 5 lengths at the gate-just have some real speed in front of him or be in between 2 real horses or something similar from a trip perspective)

Yes, I like Liam's Map performance. I will go on record as saying that it's at least the second best performance of the year so far.

I said HC can go two turns well and it's not about the number of turns with HC. It's about the pace in front of him. However, after he VALIDATED that he can run two turns exceptionally well, it only makes my doubts of AP's coronation of Horse of the Millenium, larger.

Put a healthy Liam's Map in front of AP, rattling off the same fractions while AP stalks him and I will be on record now that either Tonalist or Honor Code will run down AP in the last 1/8 of a mile at KEENELAND UNLESS there is a speed bias that day.

If the track plays fair or biased to closers, AP will lose.

I am not flip flopping. I am giving credit where credit is due (TO AP for his Haskell) but after watching 2 or 3 of his possible nemesis run in the Whitney, it excites me that I may have a solid wagering opportunity betting against AP in the Classic.

Before the Whitney, I thought there maybe could be 2 or 3 starters who could come back and be a factor in the Classic. Now I'm more comfortable that 2 or 3 solid starters will come back to make the classic competitive.

It all comes down to will Liam's Map be Pletcherized??? If he can avoid Pletcherization, he won't be the one that finishes ahead of AP in the Classic but he will be the one who starts the domino that will get AP beat in the Classic.

Without variables and quantity AP will romp in the Classic. Now I feel a bit better that there are 2 horses who will come from behind to attack and there might be 1 horse who can offer quality speed for an extended portion of the race to set up those 2 closers, while impacting AP's performance.

Like I said before, I'll know what I feel when the PP's come out and future performances are already past us. When 10/28 or 10/29 comes, I'll be sure to make my small opinion known :D

[PaceAdvantage]

I have a hard time buying what you're selling when basically, your entire pitch seems to be that American Pharoah is quite likely the most "dressed up" horse ever.

That's basically your position. He's been the luckiest horse to ever grace our presence. Most everything has fallen into his lap (if he had one), while the innate talent level is slightly above average at best. :rolleyes:

I disagree. I don't think this horse needs a bias or a highly favorable pace setup to beat what I saw in the Whitney.

But that's why they race them, isn't it?

But I'm glad you already have your excuses at the ready should AP win the Classic...track bias..."Pletcherization" of his competition...piss-poor jockeys...etc...etc.

AP will never get a fair shake from you. That's kind of obvious at this point.

[classhandicapper]

IMO, Liam's Map ran a sensational race in the Whitney, but I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he would last until the 1/8th pole of a 10F race with AP stalking him. If Espinoza gets involved too early that could be problematical, but I can't see either Honor Code or Tonalist beating AP on a honest track if he's still 100% and ridden well. HC and T had help from both the pace and the way the track was playing Saturday. One barely caught Liam's Map with the extra benefit of a ground saving ride and the other didn't catch him at all. I know that says a lot about Liam's Map, but it also says something about the others.

I give one of the other 3yos a better shot at upsetting AP. One of them may still blossom enough in the Travers or beyond to be a better threat with good position and a solid pace up front.

Latest news from Baffert is that the Travers is a "go" if he continues doing well.

[whodoyoulike]

Is there a way to stop bringing up Zenyatta into every thread lately and derailing? :lol: :lol:

Not solely directed at you bks...but anyone with such thoughts...

Darn it. I was just ready to jump back in because I felt GRITS wasn't around.

[Grits]

Darn it. I was just ready to jump back in because I felt GRITS wasn't around.

HUSH!!!! When I get to Saratoga? (I'm late leaving this year.) I'm not around as much... ;)

[EMD4ME]

I have a hard time buying what you're selling when basically, your entire pitch seems to be that American Pharoah is quite likely the most "dressed up" horse ever.

That's basically your position. He's been the luckiest horse to ever grace our presence. Most everything has fallen into his lap (if he had one), while the innate talent level is slightly above average at best. :rolleyes:

I disagree. I don't think this horse needs a bias or a highly favorable pace setup to beat what I saw in the Whitney.

But that's why they race them, isn't it?

But I'm glad you already have your excuses at the ready should AP win the Classic...track bias..."Pletcherization" of his competition...piss-poor jockeys...etc...etc.

AP will never get a fair shake from you. That's kind of obvious at this point.

I never said he was the luckiest horse on earth. I said I wasn't wowed by him, like other awesome horses have wowed many of us in the past 30 years.


I'll say it again but brief. His Derby was not amazing at all. His preakness was against a few ham and eggers (2 actual average horses in race were 1) his entry mate who was taken back to let him go and 2) Firing Line who drowned at the gate. His Belmont was nice but not awesome. Nothing awesome about wiring the field in a boat race. I don't care if he wired Secretariat and Forego. If it's a boat race with consistent slow quarters I will not be wowed.

So, after the Haskell, like a gentlemen, I give credit where credit is due and I'm selling goods? Why? Because I found his Haskell to be more impressive than his 3 TC races?

I don't appreciate that.

I could've easily came on here like many jerks who never admit they're wrong and say he beat nobody, track favored him blah blah blah.

I didn't. I gave the horse credit.

I also said in another thread that he has been a bit unlucky. He has never (besides the Derby) been in a position to wow (wow defined by overcoming adversity or a tough trip) because he 1) has been so damn good (except for the Derby-I still don't find his Derby to be awesome) and because 2) his competition can't keep up with him.

Am I looking to beat him? ABSOLUTELY. Do I think he's beatable? YES, if the right horses are healthy and in the gate next to him.

Am I saying he will lose the BCC on 8/10/15? No. Would you bet on a race where the pps aren't out yet?

I'm, like an adult, giving credit to a horse who has done nothing wrong.

But if anyone starts saying he's better than Holy Bull or Secretariat, I will defend the prior generation as he (due to his competition & due to his light schedule-will retire soon) has not had a chance to show he is better than prior generation horses.

I refuse to get on the bandwagon that AP is god, at least not yet.

Nothing wrong with that.

[ILovetheInner]

Really? You guys were that impressed with Honor Code/Liam's Map?

These are your AP killers?

I don't think it's that. Not for some at least. Often here we are being advised to "enjoy him while he's here." Well I am not exactly sure how I am supposed to do that when I could have watched the Haskell with my eyes closed and known the result. He put up a strong number. That was great. But I don't know how having the master of his generation trouncing Keen Ice, Upstart and Competitive Edge is supposed to be a landmark moment in racing history. It's not. He wins the Classic and that will be. Until then, off the campaign I am anticipating, I don't really care. I will just hang my hat on him winning the Belmont as a TC winner ought and just ignore until the Breeders' Cup.

CJ said it best - "I actually don't even care about that history stuff any more. Owner and trainers don't, why should I?" Sobering and depressing truth for me, right there. It's why I say my personal list of the top five I have seen in my lifetime is unlikely to change, because they were so resoundingly proven. Rather than this "kind of would have, could have if he ran" rationalization that defines racing so often today. When you have Martha Gerry say "run him" even though the track is sloppy, or Slew almost dying and then he's back to write a history to dwarf his TC, or Bid's tour de force to diminish whatever questions may have lingered about his Belmont loss. In an era where Secretariat setting a world record on the turf is viewed by some as a "cop out", "would have!" is of no value to me. Hell, even putting Housebuster in against Easy Goer in the Met Mile. They didn't have to do that, but it was Housebuster, so there ya go.

So I guess I am officially entering old fartdom. I don't really care. "Well 'x' would have won if they were entered!" claims to racing immortality just aren't all that appealing. Just let him run in the PA Derby, be done with it, and then finally we'll get something halfway interesting. Or minimally, historically significant.

[thaskalos]

The impressive thing about his Derby is that he had to battle to win while losing ground. It was the race he faced the most adversity in, so even though he was beaten up with the whip and didnt win by a 'country mile' it was impressive even if it wasn't impressive in a conventional way.

Just a minute now. Aren't you the guy who declared, right after the Derby, that you would avoid American Pharoah in the Preakness...because he was whipped so much down the stretch in the Derby?

And now you tell me that AP's Derby was IMPRESSIVE to you. You confuse me sometimes, SRU...

[mostpost]

Rachel was a great 3 year-old...but a mediocre 4 year-old. I bet Jackson ended up regretting the horse's aggressive handling during the three year-old's campaign. IMO...Zenyatta left a much better legacy...even if her campaign was sheltered. You don't exactly have to get carried away with your horse, in order to secure her spot in the history of the game.
I gave you more credit than that. Rachel's four year old season was only mediocre when compared with her three year old season. Otherwise it was quite good. She ran five times, all stakes races. She won twice by open lengths. She ran second three times. She was beaten by half a length, a head and three quarters of a length. That may not be a Horse of the Year campaign, but it is far from mediocre.

It is my strong memory-which still may be incorrect-that Rachel was not turned out between her three and four year old seasons. Instead of being sent to the farm to rejuvenate and enjoy life, she was kept with Asmussen's barn at Fair Grounds to stand in a stall 23 hours a day. This could have caused her to go sour. Even so, two wins and three seconds in five starts is not that bad.

[thaskalos]

I gave you more credit than that. Rachel's four year old season was only mediocre when compared with her three year old season. Otherwise it was quite good. She ran five times, all stakes races. She won twice by open lengths. She ran second three times. She was beaten by half a length, a head and three quarters of a length. That may not be a Horse of the Year campaign, but it is far from mediocre.

It is my strong memory-which still may be incorrect-that Rachel was not turned out between her three and four year old seasons. Instead of being sent to the farm to rejuvenate and enjoy life, she was kept with Asmussen's barn at Fair Grounds to stand in a stall 23 hours a day. This could have caused her to go sour. Even so, two wins and three seconds in five starts is not that bad.

When I said "mediocre"...I meant by Grade-1 standards. At 4...the horse was mere a shell of her former self. The two races she won were glorified allowances.

[mostpost]

If he had run in the Whitney,

According to Serling,

[I]My answer to the American Pharoah/Whitney question is that it's a great tribute to AP that we even consider it possible he would have won

At what point was he blowing by a horse that was reeling off 23 quarters at 1 1/8 miles and not tiring?
At any point, unless of course he was already ahead of him. American Pharoah was also reeling of 23 second quarters. 46+ for the half and 1:09+ for three quarters; at which point he would have been ahead of Liam's Map.

[mostpost]

Exactly. Stalking similar fractions at MONMOUTH is a whole lot all different than stalking those fractions at Saratoga VS. older.

If he was in here he would have been off the board, looking for an excuse.
From the esteemed CJ:
American Pharoah in the Haskell: 131.
Liam's Map in the Whitney:130.
Honor Code in the Whitney: 125.
Tonalist in the Whitney: 123.

I do not know anything about the TimeformUS figures but I do know that they are transferable from track to track. So I am pretty sure that means that whatever American Pharoah did in the Haskell and Monmouth; he would also be capable of doing in the Whitney at Saratoga.

I have not seen the internal numbers for the two races. Perhaps CJ would be kind enough to share them with us-at least for the horses above.

[EMD4ME]

From the esteemed CJ:
American Pharoah in the Haskell: 131.
Liam's Map in the Whitney:130.
Honor Code in the Whitney: 125.
Tonalist in the Whitney: 123.

I do not know anything about the TimeformUS figures but I do know that they are transferable from track to track. So I am pretty sure that means that whatever American Pharoah did in the Haskell and Monmouth; he would also be capable of doing in the Whitney at Saratoga.

I have not seen the internal numbers for the two races. Perhaps CJ would be kind enough to share them with us-at least for the horses above.


This debate ,if that's what anyone wants to call it , won't be won via speed figures. It will be decided if and when AP runs against older .

I stated my opinion. If he was next to Liam's map stalking on that track this past Saturday, my opinion is the great AP everyone is seeing would not be the AP that everyone is seeing. Stalking competitive edge at MTH is a whole lot different vs. Stalking pressing that version of Liam's Map .

If that was at 10 F, I say HC & Tonalist both go by AP in the lane.

Maybe AP doesn't face a Liams map performance in the BCC & jogs. We'll see how it turns out.

[mostpost]

There really is no debate about this. Watch the Haskell. Espinoza never moves on this horse. He idles along beside Competitive Edge until it's time to go past. That could have happened at any point in the race and the results would have been the same. The three length margin of victory could have been five, or ten, or fifteen.

If American Pharoah had run in the Whitney, he would have had no more difficulty tracking Liam's Map than he did tracking Competitive Edge. And not too much more difficulty putting him away on the turn. Prior to the Whitney, Liam's Map had won a Maiden Special weight, an Allowance race, and an Optional Claimer all at one mile, plus an ungraded stakes at a mile and a sixteenth.

The great Honor Code has never won a race at more than a mile and an eighth. He has never raced further than that,

American Pharoah won the Kentucky Derby at a mile and a quarter; the Preakness at a mile and three sixteenth; and the Belmont Stakes at a mile and half. Yet there are those on this forum who think that he would be at a severe disadvantage against horses who have never even raced at those distances. Are they nuts????

ETA to add: What really bugs me are those people who refuse to take a stand on a great horse. "Prove it to me" they say long after he has proven it to everyone else. Well some people are not afraid to take a stand ahead of time. So, if some of you decide after the BCC that American Pharoah is a great horse, don't bother. Your opinion means nothing. You are just parroting what many of us figured out long before you.

[thaskalos]

There really is no debate about this. Watch the Haskell. Espinoza never moves on this horse. He idles along beside Competitive Edge until it's time to go past. That could have happened at any point in the race and the results would have been the same. The three length margin of victory could have been five, or ten, or fifteen.

If American Pharoah had run in the Whitney, he would have had no more difficulty tracking Liam's Map than he did tracking Competitive Edge. And not too much more difficulty putting him away on the turn. Prior to the Whitney, Liam's Map had won a Maiden Special weight, an Allowance race, and an Optional Claimer all at one mile, plus an ungraded stakes at a mile and a sixteenth.

The great Honor Code has never won a race at more than a mile and an eighth. He has never raced further than that,

American Pharoah won the Kentucky Derby at a mile and a quarter; the Preakness at a mile and three sixteenth; and the Belmont Stakes at a mile and half. Yet there are those on this forum who think that he would be at a severe disadvantage against horses who have never even raced at those distances. Are they nuts????

You are getting carried away in this argument. You are making it sound as if Liam's Map is comparable in quality to Competitive Edge...and that's being terribly unfair to Liam's Map. You have no shred of proof to support your assertion that American Pharoah would have had as easy a time putting away Liam's Map as he did Competitive Edge.

Also...I don't remember the term "severe disadvantage" being used when describing AP's chances against older horses. Who are those posters who have placed American Pharoah at a "severe disadvantage" against his elders? Is it blasphemy to say that the Whitney would have been a stern test for the Pharoah? What is it with you guys...nothing but a prediction of a Pharoah runaway victory will satisfy you?

[cj]

Maybe AP doesn't face a Liams map performance in the BCC & jogs. We'll see how it turns out.

Maybe he does face that type performance and still jogs...certainly possible.

[cj]

Here is a look comparing American Pharoah's Haskell to Liam's Map's Whitney:

[cj]

The thing that I think some people are missing is that the Haskell field, despite being obviously overmatched, really tried to take it to American Pharoah early. That was no cakewalk on or near the front. He has tracked fast paces in the past and still wins with ridiculous ease. I personally don't think the Whitney would have been any different. The numbers agree and more importantly for me, so do my eyes.

[nijinski]

Liam's Map , thought he was an $800,000 purchase . Something was amiss and hopefully it's behind him. Let's see how he comes out of this . Very fast horse with Trippi his broodmare sire . Missed a lot due to a respiratory issue and didn't want the whip . Imo the BCC will not be his distance. We'll see. For the few who keep belittling AP, can you really compare their resumes up to Saturday and only then the fast horses career path was pathetic compared to AP. he was a nice fresh prospect .

[mostpost]

You are getting carried away in this argument. You are making it sound as if Liam's Map is comparable in quality to Competitive Edge...and that's being terribly unfair to Liam's Map. You have no shred of proof to support your assertion that American Pharoah would have had as easy a time putting away Liam's Map as he did Competitive Edge.

Also...I don't remember the term "severe disadvantage" being used when describing AP's chances against older horses. Who are those posters who have placed American Pharoah at a "severe disadvantage" against his elders? Is it blasphemy to say that the Whitney would have been a stern test for the Pharoah? What is it with you guys...nothing but a prediction of a Pharoah runaway victory will satisfy you?
It does not seem to me as if there is much difference between Competitive Edge and Liam's Map, particularly up to a mile. Both horses have won four out of six races. Liam's Map's four wins came in an MSW, two allowance races and an ungraded stakes. Competitive Edges four victories occurred in and MSW, an ungraded stakes, a Grade 3 stakes and a Grade 1 stakes.

All of which doesn't mean much because American Pharoah was not racing against Competitive Edge. CE just happened to be on the track at the same time. So how would AP have done against LM if they were in the same race?

By comparative times LM ran the last three furlongs of his 1-1/8 mile race about 3/4 length faster than AP ran the last three furlongs of his 1-1/8 mile race. (38.10 compared to 38.25). Of course Liam's Map was all out for the entire three furlongs while American Pharoah was never all out and was eased for the final furlong.

So let's look at two races in which both horses were all out. For Liam's Map that would be the Whitney. As stated above, he ran the final three furlongs in 38.10 or 12.7 seconds per furlong. In the Belmont Stakes, American Pharoah ran the final four furlongs in 48.66 seconds, which is 12.165 seconds per furlong. So, it does not seem out of line to suggest that AP would not have had too much more trouble with LM than with any of the horses in the Haskell.

As for "Severe disadvantage" that was my assessment of the general tone of the AP detractors. I never said that was direct quote.

[mostpost]

Here is a look comparing American Pharoah's Haskell to Liam's Map's Whitney:
Thank you for that.

[mostpost]

As for Honor Code; based on comparative times and the traditional 1/5 second per length behind, he would have been 2.46 seconds behind American Pharoah after six furlongs. He then ran the final three furlongs 2.40 seconds faster than American Pharoah, which would bring them to the wire almost together. That is if you think American Pharoah could not have run his last three any faster than 38.10. Does anyone think that? If so, I point you to the Belmont Stakes where AP was clicking off twelve second eighths from the half mile pole to the finish.

[classhandicapper]

The thing that I think some people are missing is that the Haskell field, despite being obviously overmatched, really tried to take it to American Pharoah early. That was no cakewalk on or near the front. He has tracked fast paces in the past and still wins with ridiculous ease. I personally don't think the Whitney would have been any different. The numbers agree and more importantly for me, so do my eyes.

+1

He did the same thing in the Preakness.

I still think this is an excellent crop of 3yos. The reason people have sort of drifted away from that view is because AP has been so dominant. But horses like Dortmund, Firing Line, Frosted, Texas Red etc.. are very good horses and horses like Upstart and Materiality are not bums . Anyone that has tried to run with him or press him has been dismissed and torched.

[cj]

+1

He did the same thing in the Preakness.

I still think this is an excellent crop of 3yos. The reason people have sort of drifted away from that view is because AP has been so dominant. But horses like Dortmund, Firing Line, Frosted, Texas Red etc.. are very good horses and horses like Upstart and Materiality are not bums . Anyone that has tried to run with him or press him has been dismissed and torched.

Yep, and many horses that have finished far back of him have returned to win nice races. I remember seeing the same thing with Rachel Alexandra. She'd win by 20 or 10 and the also rans would return and win G1s when she wasn't entered.

[Robert Fischer]

I would guess that AP would pass LM at some time (well before the shadow of the wire), and that there is a fair chance that it would negatively affect LM as well.

LM shouldn't get to run 'in a vacuum' in our imaginary races.


I'm pretty confident that American Pharoah could attend the pace with Liam's Map and then finish more than a neck in front of what Liam's Map finished in the Whitney.

imaginary Whitney chart 1/4 1/2 ...3/4.strtch.. fin
American Pharoah ........2(1).2(1).2(1/2).1(1)..1(2)
Honor Code...................814..919.712...2(5).. 2(2)
Liam's Map...................11...11..1(.5)...2(1)...3(3. 75)
Tonalist.......................................... .............4(4)

^^assuming Liam's Map held well enough to outplace Tonalist

[Tom]

I honestly don't care anymore after all these years...and neither should you... :lol:

I don't even care about the Whitney anymore -it's TUESDAY, for God's sake!

[classhandicapper]

Yep, and many horses that have finished far back of him have returned to win nice races. I remember seeing the same thing with Rachel Alexandra. She'd win by 20 or 10 and the also rans would return and win G1s when she wasn't entered.

I was just talking about that in the office the other day. I've seen a handful of horses in my life that could torch the opposition like that. Rachel was one on the filly side and Seattle Slew was another.

I thought Liam's Map was huge in the Whitney. He took out all the chasers and held really well on a track that wasn't carrying speed well. But I suspect AP has gears we haven't see yet. Competitive Edge is not a superstar, but he's a fast sprinter. AP had him measured and could have dusted him with ease at any point.

[raybo]

Here is a look comparing American Pharoah's Haskell to Liam's Map's Whitney:

That just makes me feel like my comments about LM running a bit too fast in the 1st quarter was what allowed HC to catch him at the wire.

Regarding all the controversy about who would have beaten who if AP would have run in the Whitney instead of the Haskell, if AP was in the same condition he was in the Haskell, nobody in the Whitney field would beat him. He just overcomes whatever is thrown at him and wins anyway. As to whether or not Liam's Map can stay with him in the BCC, Liam's Map has to get to the BCC first, and if he does, he will need yet another jump in performance to do it. Not saying he won't improve again, but he certainly won't beat a sound and ready AP with what we saw in the Whitney. And this is coming from someone who picked (and posted here) Liam's Map to win the Whitney. I still think he was the best horse that day, just beat himself in the 1st quarter. But, he is not an AP yet!

[reckless]

I am assuming that Liam's Map came out of the Whitney in fine health and good shape.

That said, it is of my opinion that Liam's Map will never face American Pharoah anytime in the fall with the possible exception of the Breeder's Cup Classic.

I also want to go on record by saying that Liam's Map, granted a 4-year-old, is lengths, make that many, many lengths, faster than Materiality. There's a reason why I even say this and bring up Materiality's name at all:

Just prior to the Belmont Stakes many experts felt that Materiality had as good a shot of beating AP as did Frosted, some thought better due to his early running style. But, when Pletcher was asked about Materiality's chances of winning, I do remember him saying this:

"I train horses for Mr. Zayat and it would be unfortunate if American Pharoah didn't win the Triple Crown." Or words to that affect.

I believed then, and especially now, that Materiality couldn't warm up AP on his best day ever, so his poor race in the Belmont didn't surprise me one bit. But I was still intrigued by Pletcher's response.

With American Pharoah racing toward true immortality this year, I don't expect Pletcher to run any horse --such as Liam's Map-- that is capable, even slightly of upsetting the apple cart.

[letswastemoney]

What horses does Pletcher have for Zayat?

American Pharoah is likely much the best, even if the numbers don't show it right now. Three-year-old colts improve and there is still room for him to get better.

A lot of people have compared Honor Code, but he's needed a pace setup to win. When the pace was slow in the Remsen, he was up front.

[EMD4ME]

Maybe he does face that type performance and still jogs...certainly possible.

It absolutely could and odds are it's 2/5 to happen.

In a nutshell, I am not knocking AP. I am just looking for any angles/scenarios that could get him beat as any handicapper would when there's a heavy bomb involved.

There are limited scenarios for him to lose. I do respect and admire him. I do however want some competition for him for 2 reasons.

1) If he dominates or wins well, his wins would be definitive. (Beat decent older horses, overcome some sort of trip etc. NO one could say he didn't do this or that before he retires.)

Or

2) He loses and a great price is earned in beating him.

Either way, I win. If 1 happens, as a fan, I'd enjoy it.

If 2 happens and IF I BET AGAINST him, depends on how things play out and he loses, I win in the pocket.

Either way, I'm enjoying this run.

For those that say: 'The people that want AP to prove his dominance vs older or what not', are well behind other smart people who recognized his dominance from day 1 and will be late in seeing his special talent after the BCC, all I'll say is this: Even rookie handicappers can see this horse is special. There is absolutely nothing wrong with looking for a chink in the armor against a 1/9 or 1/5.

Finally, reckless referenced the Zyatt Pletcher connection. I too don't like the fact that the only horse that could help start a domino effect, that could and I mean could in a 20% chance, to beat AP is trained by Pletcher. One for the Zayat connection and 2) any horse Pletcher trains can derail in a heartbeat.