Poll: Why do you think SJ lost the Belmont

[cj]

Many thoughts going around, would like to see the thoughts added up. I know some may think a combo of some of the above, but pick the one you think made the MOST difference.

[BillW]

... what happens if the 2nd half mile is run just a few ticks slower?

Bill

[Larry Hamilton]

If you had been paying attention during the post parade, you would have noticed that SJ was not the same, beautiful, prancing, bowed-neck, tail standing away from the rump, picture post card perfect horse of the Derby and the Preakness. My brother and I both noticed this almost simultaneously, but too late to bet. By the way, using the same eye-ball criteria (from Joe Takach's tape) you would have picked Birdstone as the standout in looks. Get his tape "Beat The Beam", it's worth it.

[Tee]

I cast my vote for the pace was too fast, caught in a spd duel.

Here's why - an excerpt from a e-mail sent to a local horse playing friend.

Looking over the pp's I see 3 horses(other than Smarty) with the running style that wins the Belmont. Birdstone, Rock Hard Ten & Eddington. They all are very capable of sitting close to the pace, I think they will all take their shots at Smarty & this is the only reason I think Smarty can get beat. One of em could wear him down or for that matter set it up for a deep closer ala Wagon Limit & Dare & Go as I eluded to in an earlier e-mail.

[Jeff P]

I think Smarty was done in by the prevailing track bias. Either a deep surface or a strong headwind while horses were in the stretch (or a combination of both) was lengthening the races at Belmont on Saturday. In my opinion, on a normal track he holds on and wins.

[bettheoverlay]

Any horse with that many big wins in a row is bound to get tired sooner or later. Pace analyses, like politics, always give me a headache, but I think if Smarty were fresher he'd be able to survive it. He only got beat a length.

I know the Triple Crown captures the public imagination, but sometimes its importance seems so unrealistic. Especially with modern training methods and more fragile horses. I was at the packed Brandywine Turf Club Saturday and the prevailing attitude when Smarty lost was that he was another bigtime Philadelphia loser. Jeez, he won the Kentucky Derby!

The Preakness is the race thats the killer- 2 weeks after a 1/4 race. And when will a horse ever have to run a mile and a half again except maybe on the Turf? Strange that greatness is so determined by such a race in so short a period of time. Well Spectacular Bid didn't win it either, and hes the greatest horse I ever saw.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by Larry Hamilton
If you had been paying attention during the post parade, you would have noticed that SJ was not the same, beautiful, prancing, bowed-neck, tail standing away from the rump, picture post card perfect horse of the Derby and the Preakness. My brother and I both noticed this almost simultaneously, but too late to bet. By the way, using the same eye-ball criteria (from Joe Takach's tape) you would have picked Birdstone as the standout in looks. Get his tape "Beat The Beam", it's worth it.


If Smarty had finished up the track along with RHT, Purge and Master David, I might buy that, but the way he ran, he had to have been feeling AOK pre-race!

[JPinMaryland]

I saw him just before he loaded and his ears didnt look have that turned up look. But a moment later I turned again and I think they were. His head was down I think when the post parade went past us the first time. I was wondering if that long wait while RHT loaded might have sapped some energy.

[Larry Hamilton]

true enough...mayhaps I am just grasping for a reason a MORTAL lock wasnt

[JackS]

I also posted my vote for Pace To Fast. It has always been that I consider any horse can route until proven he can't. Almost all horses will get a distance ,any distance ,but in some cases,or many cases, the pace will not be suitable. This is what happened to Smarty. The distance of 1-1/2miles didn't do him in, it was the pace. Smarty beat seven very good horses in this race so, I think it's very possible Smarty can succesfully marathon in the future if the owers/trainer decide to do so. I'd love to see him try a 1-5/8 or 1-3/4 or even 2 miles. It may never happen but the point is, until he repeatedly fails, you'd best assume that these distances would be no problem and the first time he tries something beyond a 1-1/2 the price will be right.

[OTM Al]

Not just one speed duel either, but several and he fended them all off until the end. Personally I'm getting tired of everyone looking for excuses. I don't think he needs one. I think he ran a very good race, it just wasn't quite good enough to win. Like I've said before, its not like any of the horses that were being touted as upset threats were remotely close to him at the end and if Birdstone ran a race like he had in the Lane's End or Derby, Smarty would have been a winner by an impressive 8 lengths in a very respectable time and everyone would be complimenting him on the very same run. No horse, if he runs long enough, is going to win them all. This guy is a champion with or without a TC. His record so far speaks for itself. 9-8-1-0 with 7 stakes wins, 2 Gr1, 1 Gr2 and a close second in a Gr1.

I honestly think the person that should be receiving a whole lot of second guessing is Nick Zito. Birdstone should have been the triple crown threat this spring, not some upstart from Pha. Winner of the Gr1 Champagne going away as a 2 yo and a respectable 4th in the G1 Hopeful after a tough trip. Where was he up until last saturday? Well, about 16 lenghts back of Smarty in the Derby and over 10 back of Sinister G in the Lane's End (no knock on Sinister G, I enjoy watching him and he's made me a few bucks along the way). So my big Belmont question is not why did Smarty lose, but where the hell was Birdstone all spring?

[Zaf]

As a few posters pointed out, the internal splits were simply too fast !

ZAFONIC

[reckless]

Even though only five other PA fans voted for "Smarty was tired and not 100%" besides myself, I will try to defend this opinion, if you don't mind.

Once word got out that Smarty Jones was the real deal, trainer John Servis had just one goal in mind: to get to the Kentucky Derby for his very sick owner, Roy Chapman. I believe Chapman's quote was "All I asked John to do was to get me to the Derby however way he has to."

Now, aside from the obvious obstacles in planning a program to get to Louisville, one of the toughest mountains to climb is to be an unraced or very lightly-raced 2-year-old contender.

There's a fine line between being lightly raced and not seasoned enough to handle to task. I don't claim to know the difference or how to get over that hump, but it is there, for sure, and John Servis did a great job.

Smarty Jones, throughout his 2-year-old year, often breezed one mile and six furlongs works, part, in parcel, due to Servis feeling he needed to play catchup.

Servis ran a 'short' horse in the Southwest Stakes, Smarty's 3-year-old debut, figuring if he was to lose a race, this one was the one he could afford to lose.

Now, if you have PP's on Smarty Jones from the Rebel through the Kentucky Derby, you'll find a regular work program, with numerous extemely sharp mile and six furlong breezes along the way. Like clockwork, he workede every 5-6 days, never missing a beat.

After a few of them extra fast works, Servis was often quoted as saying, "I didn't want him going that fast," and the such.

Then, Smarty wins the Derby in a sharp effort.

Yet, between the Derby and Preakness, the trainer doesn't breeze the horse. No longer is he on the same schedule. Servis' reason is that Smarty Jones is fit enough and he doesn't need to breeze. Servis even told the pompus Bob Neumeirer such on their way to the paddock for the Preakness.

And, actually, I agreed with the trainer. I didn't think working the colt was necessary. Then, of course, Smarty Jones blew the doors off the field in Baltimore, and anyone who had any doubts about Smarty Jones the horse, or John Servis, the trainer, rather quickly disipitated them.

Now it's three weeks to Belmont Stakes and destiny and Servis is a race away with a horse that didn't run until November, playing catch-up since late summer and early fall.

Yet we don't see any of those 1:11s and 58 and change breezes that Smarty Jones did numerous times since Arkansas. Why not?

Isn't the Belmont a race where you need to be fit? Yet Servis had him work just one seven furlong wrok, in pedestraian time. No where near what Smarty was capable of working; just too slow in my opinion.

I think Servis knew he had a tired horse on his hands and hoped he'd win it on heart and class, which he almost did. And why shouldn't Servis feel that Smarty was capable of winning? There wasn't a horse in the race that Smarty hadn't handled that was considered a contender, that's why.

Look, Smarty Jones lost the Triple Crown by a length for god's sake...one length, and that's after going 1 1-4 miles in a tad over 2:00. This isn't a knock by any stretch; I loved Smarty more now than ever!

Another thing that happened since the Derby that hasn't gotten any press play was the use of 'icing' the horse. Servis has a reputation as a trainer of not putting his horses in ice. But when the Smarty team come home from Churchill, they regularly 'iced' the horse. Why ?

I don't know why and I didn't think much of that angle until I saw on TV where the asst. trainer said, "Smarty has his game face on this morning; he'll nap and then we'll put him in ice as a precaution until he bring him over."

Now, I was really taken by that quote; it was like the asst. trainer went out of his way to say 'as a precaution', or even simply say, for the record, that he was iced.

That's when I thought that some of the things I heard about the colt might be true and that Smarty might not be 100%

Look, I repeat--he lost by a stinking length! A winning effort with a losing result.

Now, it's said he won't race until Sept., in the Pa Derby. If there's a semblance of truth to what I say, then it makes sense to keep him on the sidelines. And if they do, it may add credence to this theory, especially with the Haskell a prime race to return on, over a racetrack conducive to Smarty's running style. If a horse is 100% why pass up such a prestigious race like the Haskell? The Chapmans have said a 100 times, it isn't the money. I think Smarty is one tired colt, IMO.

Sorry to carrrying this out too long, but I never learned how to write for the Internet set.

Yours in racing.

[Valuist]

I voted that the internal fractions were too fast but I think a case could be made that he wasn't nearly as sharp physically as before. Of all the horses going for a Triple Crown in the Belmont, I don't think any of them were closing and ran out of ground in NY; they were all on or near the lead turning for home and got run down.

There's a catch-22. The Derby is the primary goal, and if you aren't tough and battle tested, you won't win. But by the end of the Preakness, these horses seem to be over the top and worn down.

[JPinMaryland]

Internal fractions too fast. And Smarty maybe a little distance challenged due some inability to rate. Maybe he will learn to do that later in the year. I hope they keep racing him, he appears quite sound.

[dmattern]

I said I was not going to post anything again in this group. I'm just a dummy compared to all the intelligent people that post here all the time. But everyone is upset about Smarty getting beat in the Belmont. ( I too would of love to seen him win.)

But I am going to point out a few things that was there for everybody to plainly see.
1 - We all knew it was a very long race and there was a chance after the races he had ran recently, that he could be a little suspect to getting the distance for many reasons. Fatique, pedigree, etc.
2 - We all knew that he is usually up on the pace.
3 - I think that everybody thought that if he did lose for some reason, it would take a horse that was coming on late.

With this said let's look at the race.
I use TSN data files and accept their numbers to be as good as any that is out there.
When we look at the LP (late pace) figures from the last 6 races on all the horses we find that Birdstone has a 116 in the Champagne Stakes (which is a GR 1) and then we see that Smarty has a 112 in the Rebel (non graded). The next best is a 104 that Purge got in the Rebel stakes also.

Now look at the races Birdstone ran this year.
An allowance race that he won by 3
Then the Lanes End (GR 2) ran 5th (steadied twice)
Then the Ky Derby (GR 1) ran 8th (steadied, shuffled back early)
plus he threw a front shoe.
So if he runs back to the Champagne and doesn't have a problem the 116 (in GR 1) is better than 112 in a non graded stakes.

And by the way there is a software program that pointed this out.

[BeatTheChalk]

I only know about one ....
Thoromation ... Be glad to send you the readouts.

[JackS]

DMattern- All of what you say may be true but there is a lot of information on many horses. It would depend on the exact slice of info you decided to use. In this case, playing Smarty was not wise due to the very short and unfair price. In my opinion, Smarty had a fifty-fifty chance to win which is 1to1. The obvious play was another horse to win. Any play besides Birdstone resulted in a loss just as it did for a win play on Smarty. I lost, but thats racing. I tried to beat him but had the wrong horse. New York players should have an edge in handicapping NY tracks. the Calder payoff on Birdstone to win was less than NY. I only point this out to emphisize how unpredictable this race was. My track buddy had the trifecta 1,2,3,4/9/1,2,3,4,6 only because he figured it really was unpredictable. I tossed the 4 and 6. I think I'll start paying a little more attention to some of his picks. After all, information regardless of where it comes from, if it's informed, it's good.

[highnote]

Originally posted by JackS
the Calder payoff on Birdstone to win was less than NY.

I didn't know Calder had different pools than NY. I thought it was all mixed together -- co-mingled.

[JackS]

CRC pool paid $46.00(about) as I remember on Birdstone.

[cj]

After reviewing the Belmonts over the past 20 years (I know, I'm sick! :p), and the track surface on Saturday, I came up with pace and speed figures (Beyer scale) of 109-101 for the race.

What does this tell me? The pace was not the overriding factor in Smarty's defeat. It leads me to believe it was a combination of just being a tired horse, and the distance being a little too far for him, with emphasis on the earlier. If he was firing his best shot, he still wins the race at 1 1/2 miles, so I can't entirely blame the distance. On the other hand, if he was firing a little less than his best, he wins the race at 1 1/4 miles anyway, so I can't just blame his physical condition for the race.

This kind of surprised me in that I originally picked that the pace did him in. The duel certainly didn't help either, but for me:

1. Condition
2. Distance
3. Pace
4. Elliot
5. Birdstone

In that order.

[highnote]

That's a good explanation, cj -- the best I've heard.

It is probably a combination of several identifiable things and several not.

[JPinMaryland]

CJ: can you explain how you figure your pace figure? Or if it's too complicated, just the factors that you look at? My main question is how many different calls in the race do you use? If any? I am curious as to how you boil that down to a single number, which presents some problems to me as I think about it.

Or just direct me to a website. Thanks.

[cj]

I don't want to go into the specifics and bore everyone, but I'll give the general idea.

First, even though the prestretch call is 1 1/4 miles for 1 1/2 race, I used the mile. I don't want a pace figure that is 83% of the race. Its the same reason I'm tinkering with using 6f instead of a mile for 1 1/4 mile races.

So, I just looked at the final time in relation to the mile time of the winner for the past 20 Belmonts...you do not want to know how hard it was to dig up that info.

I have experimented in the past with rating all of the early fractions, but I found it was a waste of time. There was just nothing of any benefit to finding a figure for a 1/4 mile in sprints or a half mile in routes. It wasn't predictive of anything. I averaged the pace calls, flipped and flopped them just about any way you can imagine, and I always came back to the pace figure that represented as close to 65% of a race as possible. I don't know why it works, but its the best I have come up with.

Hope that helps!

There is a more detailed explanation on my site, just click on the link below.

[gene]

cantr reallly add much.

Ifeel that smarty had reached a peeak in the Preakness and just tailed off as a tired horse would. couple that with the pace and distance and after the race it is easy ti=o see these factors.

with the above to overcome he only lost by one leangth and the rest of the horses were no where near. a good effort go smarty.

[Tom]

He lost.....because I bet him. My exacta ran 2-3. THAT was the mortal lock.:(

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by reckless
Servis has a reputation as a trainer of not putting his horses in ice.


Where did you get this info from?

[reckless]

Re: Smarty is tired

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by reckless
Servis has a reputation as a trainer of not putting his horses in ice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Where did you get this info from?


I got this information from someone at Philadelphia Park who is a jockey's agent. This agent has been in the business for over 25 years and his riders over the years have ridden for Servis.

[PaceAdvantage]

All I know is, icing a horse's legs before a race is pretty common, is it not?