Pace was too hot for Nyquist this time

[dballard125]

Uncle Lino pushed him big time, and in that slop, he just couldn't sustain his final kick like he's been able to in previous races.

Kent ran a perfect race on Exaggerator, getting in 5-6 lengths off coming into the far stretch.

[ArlJim78]

It was Uncle Lino not Lani pushing Nyquist.

[dballard125]

It was Uncle Lino not Lani pushing Nyquist.

Right, my bad. Too many brews today.

Anyway...got any thoughts on the race?

[PaceAdvantage]

I had Exaggerator as the obvious second choice, as did everyone else.

When you think about it...him winning was a no brainer, but still not worth the price.

But if you put out of your mind that he's lost to Nyquist four times...he was getting the pace set up...he was getting an off track...and he had Kent D. on his back, the one time king of Maryland racing...

[ArlJim78]

My thoughts are the result was fairly formful. this figured to by Exaggerators day and he stepped up. Nyquist ran very respectably though given the circumstances. These two are the class of the bunch so far.

When we start talking about the Belmont, I think it will be ripe for a "new shooter" to take down.

[RXB]

Not sure why the jock felt the need to push Nyquist into a speed duel with an outclassed horse when by far the most dangerous rival runs from off of the pace, and Nyquist has proven that he can rate. Strange tactics.

When I saw them on parade, however, Exaggerator was the better looking animal today. Tail arched, ideal head carriage, on his toes, looked very fit and ready to roll.

[CincyHorseplayer]

2 jewels of the TC and 2 horrible betting races!

Greatness not so great today. I'm sure people are astonished. 2nd place derby horse can't win! Where are the choruses for those absurd stats?! LOL! :D

[pandy]

Nyquist ran a very game race. Uncle Lino can certainly run but was used too hard. Good race. I don't like it when they let the favorite waltz along on the lead, so I can't be too hard on Perez. The NFL is king because it's so competitive. It was exciting, the way it's supposed to be.

[SecretAgentMan]

Excellent ride by Kent! Way too fast pace for Nyquist. AP & Baffert will probably be the last triple crown winner in a very long time.

I'm ready for a 50-1 shot in next years KD.

[depalma113]

Nyquist had the perfect setup in the Derby, today Exaggerator did.

[Grits]

When I saw them on parade, however, Exaggerator was the better looking animal today. Tail arched, ideal head carriage, on his toes, looked very fit and ready to roll.

Indeed, he did. Congrats to the Desormeaux brothers. I'm happy for them. I'm ok without moving through, waiting, and looking at another Triple Crown CROWD in New York. Really ok. :)

[Clocker]

Kent ran a perfect race on Exaggerator

One of his first comments after the race was that he had a "dream trip".

[Fager Fan]

Anyone know the fractions?

[Bullet Plane]

Not sure why the jock felt the need to push Nyquist into a speed duel with an outclassed horse when by far the most dangerous rival runs from off of the pace, and Nyquist has proven that he can rate. Strange tactics.

When I saw them on parade, however, Exaggerator was the better looking animal today. Tail arched, ideal head carriage, on his toes, looked very fit and ready to roll.


Man, he looked good in that parade!

[rastajenk]

I don't mind Nyquist going for the lead early. If you have supposedly the best horse, on slop, go out and make the others come to you. And he's been in some quick fractions before, so that wasn't new territory. It just didn't happen. Most people reading this forum have seen this happen hundreds or thousands of times.

His Beyers (and I do not want to make this into a Beyer pro-or-con thread) made him vulnerable. None of them had outstanding numbers.

Somewhere in the NBC telecast they mentioned it could be a rivalry between Ex and Ny. Maybe the rivalry is on. Which could be better than a Triple Crown winner.

We shall see.

[RXB]

Anyone know the fractions?

22.38 46.56 1:11.97 1:38.19 1:58.31

[Fager Fan]

I don't mind Nyquist going for the lead early. If you have supposedly the best horse, on slop, go out and make the others come to you. And he's been in some quick fractions before, so that wasn't new territory. It just didn't happen. Most people reading this forum have seen this happen hundreds or thousands of times.

His Beyers (and I do not want to make this into a Beyer pro-or-con thread) made him vulnerable. None of them had outstanding numbers.

Somewhere in the NBC telecast they mentioned it could be a rivalry between Ex and Ny. Maybe the rivalry is on. Which could be better than a Triple Crown winner.

We shall see.

I'd disagree. Hustling out to make sure he got good position I can see. Ding-donging with another horse the entire way around the track, not.

Nyquist ran a great race considering. The horse he slugged it out with had to be vanned off the track.

[PaceAdvantage]

Indeed, he did. Congrats to the Desormeaux brothers. I'm happy for them. I'm ok without moving through, waiting, and looking at another Triple Crown CROWD in New York. Really ok. :)Unless all those tickets have been bought up by ticket brokers, then seats for the Belmont have been almost sold out prior to the Preakness...so it's won't be a graveyard... :lol:

[Grits]

Unless all those tickets have been bought up by ticket brokers, then seats for the Belmont have been almost sold out prior to the Preakness...so it's won't be a graveyard... :lol:

And tonight, folks are putting them up at fire sale prices. You can buy yours now on the cheap!!! :lol::lol::lol: REALLLLL Cheap.

[rastajenk]

I'd disagree. Hustling out to make sure he got good position I can see. Ding-donging with another horse the entire way around the track, not.

Nyquist ran a great race considering. The horse he slugged it out with had to be vanned off the track.We agree on a lot of things about this game. I think you have a good perspective. But I don't see that a speed duel with an inferior runner is a "ding-dong" affair. I guess I don't see at what point he should have been taken back and let the cheap speed do its thing. I would guess that Mario followed his instructions and his instinct and it simply didn't work out.

[pandy]

I don't see how you can fault Mario's ride. When you're on a horse that's 8 for 8, won the Derby, won the Breeders Cup, and you have an inside post, you have to commit or you may get in trouble. If you're going to question any ride it would be the ride on Uncle Lino. Uncle Lino ran his heart out. Hopefully he'll be okay and they'll tackle a softer field next time.

[Grits]

I'd disagree. Hustling out to make sure he got good position I can see. Ding-donging with another horse the entire way around the track, not.

Nyquist ran a great race considering. The horse he slugged it out with had to be vanned off the track.

The horse he slugged it out with, vanned off? I didn't realize this. That's a shame.

As far as Nyquist, I'll be surprised if he comes to NY. I believe they'll rest their horse.

[dballard125]

My thoughts are the result was fairly formful. this figured to by Exaggerators day and he stepped up. Nyquist ran very respectably though given the circumstances. These two are the class of the bunch so far.

When we start talking about the Belmont, I think it will be ripe for a "new shooter" to take down.

Agreed. Cherry Wine ran big today, and I expect him to factor. Creator will likely ship in. Brody's Cause as well. My Man Sam? Should be a ton of fresh closers that enter, and I expect one of them to win it.

[Fager Fan]

22.38 46.56 1:11.97 1:38.19 1:58.31

Thanks, RXB.

[outofthebox]

Nyquist was trained very lightly for this race. Maybe O'neill saw that he needed that to come up to this race in top form. What he had was a very fresh horse off his alternating jog/gallop/walk routine. Once Gutierrez asked him leaving the gate to establish position, it was game on. Gutierrez will take a lot of blame for his ride. But this set up was in the cards, and i can't fault his ride, he was following the instructions. Game effort.

[Fager Fan]

The horse he slugged it out with, vanned off? I didn't realize this. That's a shame.

As far as Nyquist, I'll be surprised if he comes to NY. I believe they'll rest their horse.

Yes, though they reported that he got on the van on his own, so hopefully it was exhaustion rather than anything more serious.

[dballard125]

The horse he slugged it out with, vanned off? I didn't realize this. That's a shame.

As far as Nyquist, I'll be surprised if he comes to NY. I believe they'll rest their horse.

I think they will as well...or I hope they do anyway. He has nothing left to prove right now.

[Fager Fan]

We agree on a lot of things about this game. I think you have a good perspective. But I don't see that a speed duel with an inferior runner is a "ding-dong" affair. I guess I don't see at what point he should have been taken back and let the cheap speed do its thing. I would guess that Mario followed his instructions and his instinct and it simply didn't work out.

Around the turn, UL got in front, with Nyquist outside of him, and all the others behind. That's when I think he should've laid off, let the other horse have the lead, and sit just a length behind.

Horses running ding-dong puts a pressure on them that they don't otherwise have when not going eyeball to eyeball with another horse. The horse can't run relaxed under that kind of pressure, and the time doesn't really tell the story.

[Nitro]

2 jewels of the TC and 2 horrible betting races!

Greatness not so great today. I'm sure people are astonished. 2nd place derby horse can't win! Where are the choruses for those absurd stats?! LOL! :D
I totally disagree! Especially when you let the tote be your guide to $$.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131165

[thespaah]

Right, my bad. Too many brews today.

Anyway...got any thoughts on the race?
I have a question....What the HELL was Guitierrez thinking about getting into a speed duel in 46 and change with THAT freakin horse?!!!!!!

[thespaah]

My thoughts are the result was fairly formful. this figured to by Exaggerators day and he stepped up. Nyquist ran very respectably though given the circumstances. These two are the class of the bunch so far.

When we start talking about the Belmont, I think it will be ripe for a "new shooter" to take down.
The new kid ? Yep..Happens a lot. I agree. There is going to be some horse come from out of the woodwork to take it down.
BTW, I Would not be in the least bit surprised if Nyquist's connections decide to skip the Belmont....

[rastajenk]

Around the turn, UL got in front, with Nyquist outside of him, and all the others behind. That's when I think he should've laid off, let the other horse have the lead, and sit just a length behind.

Horses running ding-dong puts a pressure on them that they don't otherwise have when not going eyeball to eyeball with another horse. The horse can't run relaxed under that kind of pressure, and the time doesn't really tell the story.

I don't know about that. I think "relaxed" is a human description, the animals don't know or care about that. It's the jock that controls that kind of thing, and I can't fault Mario for trying to get the distance as quickly as he can, however it occurs.

[thespaah]

Indeed, he did. Congrats to the Desormeaux brothers. I'm happy for them. I'm ok without moving through, waiting, and looking at another Triple Crown CROWD in New York. Really ok. :)
Are you going?
I am entertaining the idea.
Haven't been to the Belmont in a long time.

[Clocker]

Nyquist was trained very lightly for this race.


Desormeaux said the same thing about Exaggerator after the race. He said the horse was in top form and wasn't going to get any stronger in 2 weeks, so he didn't push him.

[thespaah]

Anyone know the fractions?
1/4 22.38, 1/2 46.56, 3/4 1:11.97, Mile 1:38.19, Fin 1:58.31

[Grits]

I totally disagree! Especially when you let the tote be your guide to $$.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131165

Nitro, $2. win bettors don't usually come off the cash for $2. exacta boxes, trifecta boxes, superfecta boxes, all with 5 horses each. Are you claiming that you placed and won all of these wagers?

Albeit, of course, you could have placed them for the lesser amounts, eg, .10, .50. 1.00. ;)

[Grits]

Are you going?
I am entertaining the idea.
Haven't been to the Belmont in a long time.

Plan to. Ticket was bought when they went on sale. ;)

[thespaah]

Unless all those tickets have been bought up by ticket brokers, then seats for the Belmont have been almost sold out prior to the Preakness...so it's won't be a graveyard... :lol:
The seats will go pretty cheap now. At least in my experience with the ticket market.
I could be wrong, but I don't think so

[thespaah]

I don't see how you can fault Mario's ride. When you're on a horse that's 8 for 8, won the Derby, won the Breeders Cup, and you have an inside post, you have to commit or you may get in trouble. If you're going to question any ride it would be the ride on Uncle Lino. Uncle Lino ran his heart out. Hopefully he'll be okay and they'll tackle a softer field next time.
Looking at Nyquist's PPS, he does have wins where he did not need the lead.
I think they could have put the horse in a stalking position. The speed horse was not going to steal the race. No way.

[thespaah]

I think they will as well...or I hope they do anyway. He has nothing left to prove right now.
:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:
Send hiom home. Wait for the summer stakes. Hopefully we'll see him at The Spa

[thespaah]

Plan to. Ticket was bought when they went on sale. ;)
Ok...If I decide to go and if its ok with you, I will let you know.
Right now, it's just an idea

[whodoyoulike]

We agree on a lot of things about this game. I think you have a good perspective. But I don't see that a speed duel with an inferior runner is a "ding-dong" affair. I guess I don't see at what point he should have been taken back and let the cheap speed do its thing. I would guess that Mario followed his instructions and his instinct and it simply didn't work out.

Bailey on the telecast thought Mario was trying to slow him on the first turn but wasn't able.

[depalma113]

I have a question....What the HELL was Guitierrez thinking about getting into a speed duel in 46 and change with THAT freakin horse?!!!!!!

On Sirius XM this morning it was reported that Nyquist was going to the lead. The plan was to send him. Uncle Lino's jockey had other ideas.

[thespaah]

Bailey on the telecast thought Mario was trying to slow him on the first turn but wasn't able.
I looked at the video of the race a few times.
For the first half mile, Nyquist is throwing his hid up and down, as opposed to his normally smooth action.
The horse appeared to be on the engine.
But, the rider is the driver. Gotta do what they must to get the horse to relax.

[cj]

On Sirius XM this morning it was reported that Nyquist was going to the lead. The plan was to send him. Uncle Lino's jockey had other ideas.

What a dumb plan...seriously.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I totally disagree! Especially when you let the tote be your guide to $$.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131165

Yeah stalking chalk and riding trainer's nuts like a magic carpet! Not my cup of tea. :cool:

And I hit the tri BTW on a small token bet. The race was a complete unappetizing affair.

http://alldataexcel.freeforums.org/preakness-2016-t784-10.html

[Grits]

Ok...If I decide to go and if its ok with you, I will let you know.
Right now, it's just an idea

Ok. That's cool. I'm usually there for the week, or usually by Tuesday.

[depalma113]

What a dumb plan...seriously.

That's exactly what I thought when I heard it.

It's a shame I was only alive to him in the pick 5 and pick 4 with saver tickets. I knew it was going to be trouble.

[PaceMasterT]

What a dumb plan...seriously.

Yes, if that was the actual plan, it was seriously stupid. They had to be way overconfident if they thought they could pull an American Pharoah in the slop over these.

[RXB]

What a dumb plan...seriously.

LOL, if they'd announced their plan in front of you I'd have paid money if someone could've done one of those neuroimaging scans on the spot. What colour is shock mixed with disbelief, I wonder?

[Grits]

I know this sounds terrible, but I'm gonna have to tell it. Sometime, we're bowled over by a horse. Sometime...not as much. Nyquist is a fine fella, no doubt, but I can't stand the horse's name. Why would you name a horse after a hockey player? Yeah, I know he's a fan and all that...but really.

Next thing you know someone's gonna name one, Curry. Or, Brady. Or some other athlete.

[porchy44]

"With these turns you want to paint the fence. We did, they didn't and—not for nothing—knowledge is power."

[Grits]

"With these turns you want to paint the fence. We did, they didn't and—not for nothing—knowledge is power."

No. Instead. Kent took notes this week, from visiting here at PA, when Ruffian schooled the masses on track maintenance...and THE RAIL. :lol:

[ArlJim78]

The new kid ? Yep..Happens a lot. I agree. There is going to be some horse come from out of the woodwork to take it down.
BTW, I Would not be in the least bit surprised if Nyquist's connections decide to skip the Belmont....
Nor would I. Think they'll give him a break and come back in the summer.

[Tom]

Race went very fast out of the gate, then dropped off. The 4f call was pretty close to average but the leaders were already cooked.

[CincyHorseplayer]

"With these turns you want to paint the fence. We did, they didn't and—not for nothing—knowledge is power."

That was pretty good wasn't it?!

[cj]

LOL, if they'd announced their plan in front of you I'd have paid money if someone could've done one of those neuroimaging scans on the spot. What colour is shock mixed with disbelief, I wonder?

:) That race turned out very well for me, one of a scant few the last couple days, so I'm not complaining. But my gosh, just silly.

[AltonKelsey]

Exaggerator looking the part was nothing new. I believe he looked the same in the Derby

[CincyHorseplayer]

:) That race turned out very well for me, one of a scant few the last couple days, so I'm not complaining. But my gosh, just silly.

I thought for a brief second we were going to get Nyquist out of the top 4 damnit!

[CincyHorseplayer]

I totally disagree! Especially when you let the tote be your guide to $$.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131165

BTW Nitro I'm just giving you a hard time. I respect how you play the game. We are just at opposite ends of the spectrum and it sounds like we both do well. So cheers!

[RXB]

"With these turns you want to paint the fence. We did, they didn't and—not for nothing—knowledge is power."

Porchy, good job on "making the case for Exaggerator" before the race.

[burnsy]

Porchy, good job on "making the case for Exaggerator" before the race.

Yeah, you guys were right on. I was wishy washy on Exaggerator but Kent put up a perfect ride and the pace came back. Good call by all the people that stuck with him. I didn't have that second horse but it was a great day for me.

[Nitro]

BTW Nitro I'm just giving you a hard time. I respect how you play the game. We are just at opposite ends of the spectrum and it sounds like we both do well. So cheers!
No Problem! I'm glad there are some around here who are not only comfortable with their own game, but recognize that we each may have our own ways to play this game successfully. BTW nice hit on the Preakness Tri!

[CincyHorseplayer]

No Problem! I'm glad there are some around here who are not only comfortable with their own game, but recognize that we each may have our own ways to play this game successfully. BTW nice hit on the Preakness Tri!

I think this right here is what makes this the greatest game on earth! There is room for everybody and 2 players who go about their business in completely different manners have total confidence that the end results justify their means. And the long haul is your best friend. I notice you had the whole enchilada on the Preakness so congratulations as well! I had a strange day. Most exotics eluded me. My big trick pony was hammering a lone speed over the favorite in the exacta in Pimlico Race 3. Other than that it was bust city for the exotics. I was hoping Stradivari would get 2nd and Nyquist would run out. Not so. I didn't bet a ton of races today. I went 11-4-2-0(10.75 avg mut) and most of that was early but honestly it was a very mediocre day. I found winners but didn't know the races. It happens!

[pandy]

Looking at Nyquist's PPS, he does have wins where he did not need the lead.
I think they could have put the horse in a stalking position. The speed horse was not going to steal the race. No way.

It's hard to get that perfect stalking trip from an inside post. The thing is, when a jockey loses a race on a horse like Nyquist, and he loses it because he gets steadied in traffic along the inside, he is going to get scorched by the trainer and owners. If he tries to set the pace and loses, no one is going to blame him for that. You've got to stay out of trouble when riding a champion horse.

I've written about this many times in my columns as something that every bettor should think about before they bet a heavy favorite. You have to expect that the rider will use the horse hard, especially in a situation like this with a undefeated champion horse. If you don't think the horse can be used hard and win, then it's not a good bet. I go through this thought process not only when considering betting a great horse, but every time I think of betting any favorite.

[Bigadam119]

Wasn't the half mile time almost identical to last year?

[Speed Figure]

Wasn't the half mile time almost identical to last year?
Last year it was 22:90 46:49 1:11.42 1:37.74 1:58.46
This year it was 22:38 46:56 1:11.97 1:38.19 1:58.31

[Fager Fan]

It's hard to get that perfect stalking trip from an inside post. The thing is, when a jockey loses a race on a horse like Nyquist, and he loses it because he gets steadied in traffic along the inside, he is going to get scorched by the trainer and owners. If he tries to set the pace and loses, no one is going to blame him for that. You've got to stay out of trouble when riding a champion horse.

I've written about this many times in my columns as something that every bettor should think about before they bet a heavy favorite. You have to expect that the rider will use the horse hard, especially in a situation like this with a undefeated champion horse. If you don't think the horse can be used hard and win, then it's not a good bet. I go through this thought process not only when considering betting a great horse, but every time I think of betting any favorite.

Are you reading the comments? Everyone is blaming the jockey (though the trainer says they were his instructions). He did have an opportunity to back off and have a stalking trip, he just didn't take it.

[upthecreek]

"With these turns you want to paint the fence. We did, they didn't and—not for nothing—knowledge is power."
And there are guys on here who still think jockeys don't matter :bang:

[Fager Fan]

And there are guys on here who still think jockeys don't matter :bang:

I'm very much interested in how/why KD chose to go inside. We're all talking about the great ride, yet Donna during the telecast talked of how the rail path was deeper and a couple paths out were best. I didn't watch the undercard races but hear that the rail wasn't the place to be. Yet it was the dream spot in the big race? Did KD luck into that or are we to believe he somehow knew it was now the dream path when it hadn't been all day (if the rumor of a bad rail is true)?

[upthecreek]

I'm very much interested in how/why KD chose to go inside. We're all talking about the great ride, yet Donna during the telecast talked of how the rail path was deeper and a couple paths out were best. I didn't watch the undercard races but hear that the rail wasn't the place to be. Yet it was the dream spot in the big race? Did KD luck into that or are we to believe he somehow knew it was now the dream path when it hadn't been all day (if the rumor of a bad rail is true)?
I'd trust a hall of fame jock to know more about a track he's quite familiar with.than an ex jock on horseback

[pandy]

Are you reading the comments? Everyone is blaming the jockey (though the trainer says they were his instructions). He did have an opportunity to back off and have a stalking trip, he just didn't take it.

Maybe he could have worked out an easier trip, but that's a moot point. I'm just saying, you have to expect a champion horse to be raced aggressively in a huge race. The trainers don't want the jockey to finesse his way into a traffic plagued trip. O'Neill is not going to blame Mario. Baffert has had a lot of great horses and he can be hard on riders, but he has never criticized a jockey for cutting the pace even when the pace is quick.

[Fager Fan]

I'd trust a hall of fame jock to know more about a track he's quite familiar with.than an ex jock on horseback

That doesn't address whether the rail was a bad path or not during the other races. As for Donna, if it was deeper, it was deeper. That's sort of factual, you know?

[upthecreek]

That doesn't address whether the rail was a bad path or not during the other races. As for Donna, if it was deeper, it was deeper. That's sort of factual, you know?
Obviously the rail was fine And I couldn't care less what Donna Brother's or any other of the so called experts on NBC have to say

[Fager Fan]

Maybe he could have worked out an easier trip, but that's a moot point. I'm just saying, you have to expect a champion horse to be raced aggressively in a huge race. The trainers don't want the jockey to finesse his way into a traffic plagued trip. O'Neill is not going to blame Mario. Baffert has had a lot of great horses and he can be hard on riders, but he has never criticized a jockey for cutting the pace even when the pace is quick.

I guess I'm familiar with the opposite, which are owners and trainers being slower to get mad at a jock for trying to save ground.

But when you look at the TC races, what most often gets the best horse beat in the Preakness or Belmont? Getting caught up in a fast pace. Smarty Jones, Funny Cide, etc. I don't really understand the instructions to get to the front. That's not how they won the Derby and it didn't look like a good plan on paper.

[KingChas]

I thought for a brief second we were going to get Nyquist out of the top 4 damnit!

Did anyone else think after being passed by Exaggerator, when Nyquist cut back to the outside,he was going to come back at him?
For a brief second I did.
At that time I am thinking how good is this horse.

He does have a lot of heart.

[Fager Fan]

Obviously the rail was fine And I couldn't care less what Donna Brother's or any other of the so called experts on NBC have to say

Sheesh. Ok, how many others won with a rail trip? Like I said, I didn't watch the undercard races, but I'm hearing there was evidence the rail wasn't the place to be up til then.

[AirNate012]

Actually the rail wasn't bad, but the surface was much different for the undercard races. It became a swamp prior to the Preakness with all the hard rain that had been falling before the Dixie.

[Tom]

And there are guys on here who still think jockeys don't matter :bang:

They are crucial to stopping a good horse. :rolleyes:

[chenoa]

You can put Mario's ride on Nyquist right up there with Stewart Elliott and his ride on Smarty Jones in the Belmont.....both boneheaded.

[Secondbest]

:ThmbUp: You can put Mario's ride on Nyquist right up there with Stewart Elliott and his ride on Smarty Jones in the Belmont.....both boneheaded.

[cj]

That doesn't address whether the rail was a bad path or not during the other races. As for Donna, if it was deeper, it was deeper. That's sort of factual, you know?

It started raining again before the Preakness, and raining hard. Track before that may have been different than it was for the Preakness.

[linrom1]

It was a horrible race to watch. NYQUIST did not look comfortable the whole race and it reminded me how SMARTY JONES was cooked by Bailey and Solis in 2004 Belmont.

NYQUIST was 8-8, a feat that one has to go way back to SEATTLE SLEW and then to MAJESTIC PRINCE in 1969 (never seen him race) and then to see him lose this badly to a very mediocre horse....

[Grits]

Nyquist didn't lose "this badly". He willingly kept on when passed...there's nothing badly about such a performance. Losing or not.

It was a horrible race to watch. NYQUIST did not look comfortable the whole race and it reminded me how SMARTY JONES was cooked by Bailey and Solis in 2004 Belmont.

NYQUIST was 8-8, a feat that one has to go way back to SEATTLE SLEW and then to MAJESTIC PRINCE in 1969 (never seen him race) and then to see him lose this badly to a very mediocre horse....

[daveyj]

Sheesh. Ok, how many others won with a rail trip? Like I said, I didn't watch the undercard races, but I'm hearing there was evidence the rail wasn't the place to be up til then.

In the Chick Lang, Justin Squared wired from the 1 post.

In the Sir Barton, American Freedom was on the inside of the speed duel. Then Voluntario rallied up the rail to get to the lead in the stretch only to see American Freedom come again to win.

Granted, the winners were short prices and may not have been directly on the rail, but in the 2 or 3 path, but based on these two races alone, there was no clear evidence that the rail was bad.

[pandy]

I guess I'm familiar with the opposite, which are owners and trainers being slower to get mad at a jock for trying to save ground.

But when you look at the TC races, what most often gets the best horse beat in the Preakness or Belmont? Getting caught up in a fast pace. Smarty Jones, Funny Cide, etc. I don't really understand the instructions to get to the front. That's not how they won the Derby and it didn't look like a good plan on paper.


I actually agree with you, but, these trainers often tell the riders to go to the lead. Baffert does it all the time. They are so afraid of the horse getting blocked or in some sort of trouble. I can understand both sides because if I owned a top horse, I would much rather have the horse lose the way Nyquist did yesterday than the way Mo Tom has lost three in a row, getting so badly blocked that he had no chance to win.

[dilanesp]

Nyquist didn't lose "this badly". He willingly kept on when passed...there's nothing badly about such a performance. Losing or not.

Yes, this is the old Secretariat thing. There's a tendency to think a good horse should win every race. But it's not true- you run them enough and they will get beat.

Nyquist ran well yesterday, but ran into a mud freak who got a pace setup.

[dilanesp]

It was a horrible race to watch. NYQUIST did not look comfortable the whole race and it reminded me how SMARTY JONES was cooked by Bailey and Solis in 2004 Belmont.

NYQUIST was 8-8, a feat that one has to go way back to SEATTLE SLEW and then to MAJESTIC PRINCE in 1969 (never seen him race) and then to see him lose this badly to a very mediocre horse....

I think time will tell that Exaggerator is a very good horse, and a spectacular horse on off tracks.

[dilanesp]

Reports today are that it is on to the Belmont for both of them.

[burnsy]

I totally disagree! Especially when you let the tote be your guide to $$.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131165

Yeah, you piggy backed those on my picks (thread). The Preakness was my worst race too. Like I say every time, "Beware of the undercard." ;) .......but it was the Preakness, steak, beer and more beer, did I say beer? :)

[dogkatcher]

What a dumb plan...seriously.


Totally agree, suicide mission, not all cheap speed.

[whodoyoulike]

I actually agree with you, but, these trainers often tell the riders to go to the lead. Baffert does it all the time. They are so afraid of the horse getting blocked or in some sort of trouble. I can understand both sides because if I owned a top horse, I would much rather have the horse lose the way Nyquist did yesterday than the way Mo Tom has lost three in a row, getting so badly blocked that he had no chance to win.

Don't know if it's still true but a lot of Horseplayers at the OTB when I went used to prefer front running horses in the slop which minimizes their chances of getting into trouble. There actually was a saying which I can't recall at the moment.

In this instance, MG should have tried harder to slow Nyquest after the first turn but horses sometimes make up their own minds. After all, they don't really know they're not going 6f this time out since he was rushed out of the gate like he was.

[PaceAdvantage]

Reports today are that it is on to the Belmont for both of them.Glad to hear it. Horse racing is meant for racing horses. Duh.

[letswastemoney]

I think Nyquist ran fine, and that the result doesn't prove Exaggerator is better yet.

With a slower or more normal pace in the Belmont, Nyquist can win.

[Secondbest]

No reason Nyquist can't pull a Riva Ridge and win both ends of the Triple Crown with a loss in the mud in the middle.

[Fager Fan]

I think Nyquist ran fine, and that the result doesn't prove Exaggerator is better yet.

With a slower or more normal pace in the Belmont, Nyquist can win.

I agree.

For those saying Ex is the better horse, has he won a big race yet that wasn't sloppy and didn't have a pace meltdown?

[bobphilo]

Nyquist ran a very game race. Uncle Lino can certainly run but was used too hard. Good race. I don't like it when they let the favorite waltz along on the lead, so I can't be too hard on Perez. The NFL is king because it's so competitive. It was exciting, the way it's supposed to be.

I like it even less when some pinhead rider tries to use his horse as his own rabbit in a stupid pace duel. What's the point of getting the favorite beat if you get yourself beat worse.

[bobphilo]

Obviously the rail was fine And I couldn't care less what Donna Brother's or any other of the so called experts on NBC have to say
So true. Those that think that the rail was dead and going wide was the way to go should tell it to Exaggerator and Cherry Wine who rode the rail to 1-2 finishes. These 2 were also ridden wisely enough to avoid the stupid suicidal pace duel on a very tiring track.

[f2tornado]

The trifecta was made up of the only three horses to have 37.8 or better final 3/8th in one of the big five Derby preps. I forgot about Cherry Wine's closing speed instead focusing on his overall speed figures and that cost me the exotics. Not that they were huge but money is money. I still think Nyquist will ultimately be a Goldencents type horse that could wire the Breeders Cup Dirt Mile but have a tough time hitting another 10F race. I'm not so sure Exaggerator will enjoy the Belmont either. Will take a shot on Governor Malibu if he goes.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Glad to hear it. Horse racing is meant for racing horses. Duh.

What a concept ehh?! Lovin it.

[Hard2Like]

The 7 furlong comebacker has had me scratching my head for some time with Nyquist. Initially, I thought it was an awful idea. A week ago, Team O'Neill were all mad geniuses.
Most likely it means nothing at all.
That won't stop me from agonizing over it again when he bites off a mile and a half in 3 weeks.

[Mc990]

The trifecta was made up of the only three horses to have 37.8 or better final 3/8th in one of the big five Derby preps. I forgot about Cherry Wine's closing speed instead focusing on his overall speed figures and that cost me the exotics. Not that they were huge but money is money. I still think Nyquist will ultimately be a Goldencents type horse that could wire the Breeders Cup Dirt Mile but have a tough time hitting another 10F race. I'm not so sure Exaggerator will enjoy the Belmont either. Will take a shot on Governor Malibu if he goes.

Very surprised to see ex and Nyquist both coming back for the Belmont... Both probably need some time off. From a handicapping perspective I love it though. Can't see using either one. Probable race shape and 5 weeks rest make Destin the one to beat IMO

[delayjf]

Not sure why the jock felt the need to push Nyquist into a speed duel with an outclassed horse when by far the most dangerous rival runs from off of the pace, and Nyquist has proven that he can rate. Strange tactics.


I agree with Bailey, they sent him from the gate to get position. Problem is sometimes a horse will get his adrenaline up and wants to run with the horse that challenging him and will not rate.

[dilanesp]

Very surprised to see ex and Nyquist both coming back for the Belmont... Both probably need some time off. From a handicapping perspective I love it though. Can't see using either one. Probable race shape and 5 weeks rest make Destin the one to beat IMO

I suspect trainers know A LOT more than handicappers about this subject.

[Mc990]

I suspect trainers know A LOT more than handicappers about this subject.

If they're racing 3 times within 5 weeks, they obviously don't know more (or simply don't care). It is 100%, without a doubt, the wrong percentage play. With the triple crown on the line, you don't have much of a choice. Without one on the line, no reason to run back.

[upthecreek]

Didn't ship to Belmont as planned,spiked 102 degree fever O'Neil still hopeful(from TVG/Twitter)

[dilanesp]

If they're racing 3 times within 5 weeks, they obviously don't know more (or simply don't care). It is 100%, without a doubt, the wrong percentage play. With the triple crown on the line, you don't have much of a choice. Without one on the line, no reason to run back.

Without a doubt?

Do you realize that for about 100 years of American racing, the only problem with a 3 races in 5 weeks schedule was that it was too MUCH rest, not too little? Citation won the Jersey Derby in between the Preakness and the Belmont. Are you going to tell us that you are a bigger expert on the training and management of racehorses than Ben Jones was?

This fetish for spacing races is a VERY recent phenomenon.

Having said that, this really wasn't even my point. My point is, Doug O'Neill and Keith Desormeaux spend hours every day with these horses. They get the vet reports. They examine the horses themselves. They talk to the hot walkers and exercise riders and stable hands and grooms.

This is not an issue like a speed figure where a good handicapper may have an advantage. Trainers simply know more about the physical condition of their horses than you do. Saying definitively that these horses can't survive three races in five weeks, when their very experienced trainers determine otherwise, is just a really arrogant thing for a handicapper to say.

[Rex Phinney]

I don't think the ride was that bad. Keep in mind that the go for the lead at all costs wins more races than it loses in dirt racing today. It's getting harder and harder to find a track that doesn't favor speed.

Saturday (for once) an honest race broke out, instead of one with a pattycake pace and a bunch of competitors too afraid to use up their own horse to actually challenge on the front end. Wrong place wrong time for Mario, even with all that happened it took a great trip from a horse who loves slop and born of Curlin to beat him.

Long story short, I don't blame the jock here, he rode the way all jocks ride dirt races on the best horse these days, I think it's lame but it's true. races getting shorter and noone bred with enough stamina to come pass you anyway, let it rip.

[cj]

I don't think the ride was that bad. Keep in mind that the go for the lead at all costs wins more races than it loses in dirt racing today. It's getting harder and harder to find a track that doesn't favor speed.

It just seemed an odd strategy give the Derby ride and the make up of the field. Who looks at the Preakness PPs and thinks that field was ripe for a wire job?

[dilanesp]

It just seemed an odd strategy give the Derby ride and the make up of the field. Who looks at the Preakness PPs and thinks that field was ripe for a wire job?

O'Neill admitted it was his boneheaded idea. Didn't want mud kicked in the horse's face.

[PaceAdvantage]

Just goes to show, it's not only the public that buys into the "invincible horse" theory every year.

[dilanesp]

Just goes to show, it's not only the public that buys into the "invincible horse" theory every year.

My favorite example of all time is Cigar in the Pacific Classic.

He WAS, of course, basically invincible. He had won 16 in a row. But they got so overconfident that Jerry Bailey-- no doubt a great rider-- gave him a ridiculous ride. He kept him outside of a three horse speed duel that went through insane fractions. I am not sure that Secretariat or Man O' War could have won that race under those circumstances. And, of course, Cigar didn't. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16eNz8zocbM

[Rex Phinney]

It just seemed an odd strategy give the Derby ride and the make up of the field. Who looks at the Preakness PPs and thinks that field was ripe for a wire job?

It was pretty easy before the race to look at the PP of that field and see no reason Nyquist COULDN'T go gate to wire, even if the pace was little hot he would more than make up for it in talent.

Why risk letting the horse get mud to the face the entire time to shy away from any of those foes?

I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact I think you are right, our races nowadays need more strategy from the connections, most of the time with ones as good as Nyquist they don't bother, open the gate find the lead and let the merry go round begin.

[Fager Fan]

It was pretty easy before the race to look at the PP of that field and see no reason Nyquist COULDN'T go gate to wire, even if the pace was little hot he would more than make up for it in talent.

Why risk letting the horse get mud to the face the entire time to shy away from any of those foes?

I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact I think you are right, our races nowadays need more strategy from the connections, most of the time with ones as good as Nyquist they don't bother, open the gate find the lead and let the merry go round begin.

He wouldn't get mud in his face if he was stalking the leader.

Besides, horses get dirt and mud in their faces all the time. The winner did on Saturday. You have to have a real difficult horse if he doesn't get over it with training and experience.

[bobphilo]

I don't think the ride was that bad. Keep in mind that the go for the lead at all costs wins more races than it loses in dirt racing today. It's getting harder and harder to find a track that doesn't favor speed.

Saturday (for once) an honest race broke out, instead of one with a pattycake pace and a bunch of competitors too afraid to use up their own horse to actually challenge on the front end. Wrong place wrong time for Mario, even with all that happened it took a great trip from a horse who loves slop and born of Curlin to beat him.

Long story short, I don't blame the jock here, he rode the way all jocks ride dirt races on the best horse these days, I think it's lame but it's true. races getting shorter and noone bred with enough stamina to come pass you anyway, let it rip.
Yeah sure, have your horse go all out from the start just because the race was on dirt, duh. We saw how such a simple minded strategy worked, didn't we?

[cj]

It was pretty easy before the race to look at the PP of that field and see no reason Nyquist COULDN'T go gate to wire, even if the pace was little hot he would more than make up for it in talent.

No way I'm buying that with Exaggerator in the field, in slop no less. There wasn't a big enough talent gap to think Nyquist could beat him going really fast dueling for the lead.

[dilanesp]

No way I'm buying that with Exaggerator in the field, in slop no less. There wasn't a big enough talent gap to think Nyquist could beat him going really fast dueling for the lead.

Yeah. I mean, Exaggerator didn't lose by much in Kentucky, and I thought it was pretty obvious that the track condition and the faster pace was enough to move Exaggerator past Nyquist. Nyquist was clearly a vulnerable favorite and his connections needed to ensure that he got a good trip rather than assuming he was the second coming of Citation and could overcome any trouble.

[delsully]

Could it have been that he loses no matter what strategy they use? After his peak performance in the derby and light prep schedule maybe he just bounced.

[cj]

Could it have been that he loses no matter what strategy they use? After his peak performance in the derby and light prep schedule maybe he just bounced.

Except he probably ran just as well as he did in Kentucky...just different pace dynamics.

I do agree he still could have lost. Exaggerator with a clean trip like he got might have beaten him anyway. But no way Cherry Wine does too.

[whodoyoulike]

Could it have been that he loses no matter what strategy they use? After his peak performance in the derby and light prep schedule maybe he just bounced.


If you had the opportunity to watch the telecast, Bailey highlighted how Nyquist was hustled out of the gate trying to get the lead. It was a close up showing MG working very hard. Bailey commented that MG seemed to try to slow Nyquist going into the first turn. I couldn't tell but from Bailey's POV that's probably what he would have done after all he does know how to ride.

I mentioned earlier given that type of early urging how does a horse know that he still has 7.5f to go instead of 4f. The horse probably thought WTH were they thinking. I think the 2f was 22+ and the 6f call was about 71+ seconds.

[Rex Phinney]

He wouldn't get mud in his face if he was stalking the leader.

Besides, horses get dirt and mud in their faces all the time. The winner did on Saturday. You have to have a real difficult horse if he doesn't get over it with training and experience.

The winner had already run in a similar scenario twice before. Clearly in the Santa Anita Derby he didn't mind the mud in his face.

Nyquist was an unknown in the slop, and seeing how this race was won last year who can blame them? The idea that "all horses deal with mud in their face all the time" is baffling.

Did anyone watch the the Florida Derby just a few months back??? The San Vicente??? Who in this race exactly was Nyquist supposed to be afraid of on the front end? Which horse would anyone have picked out before the race started that you would say "Oh, we better not go with that one"

It's dirt racing folks, it's turned into follow the leader 90% of the time. Anyone remember Bayern winning a $5,000,000 race? And a $1,000,000 one before that? All those races that Game on Dude won? Goldencents in the Breeders Cup twice for god's sake? The only horse faster than him thru 1/4 was Oxbow, and hey he won this race in 2013.

The last time I remember the first 1/4 of the Preakness being that fast some guy named Shackleford was right in the middle of it, how'd he do?

Again I'm not saying it's right, I hate it, totally hate it. Every dirt race that is run has about a 75% chance of looking more like a parade than a horse race, but it's the truth.

[Fager Fan]

The winner had already run in a similar scenario twice before. Clearly in the Santa Anita Derby he didn't mind the mud in his face.

Nyquist was an unknown in the slop, and seeing how this race was won last year who can blame them? The idea that "all horses deal with mud in their face all the time" is baffling.

Did anyone watch the the Florida Derby just a few months back??? The San Vicente??? Who in this race exactly was Nyquist supposed to be afraid of on the front end? Which horse would anyone have picked out before the race started that you would say "Oh, we better not go with that one"

It's dirt racing folks, it's turned into follow the leader 90% of the time. Anyone remember Bayern winning a $5,000,000 race? And a $1,000,000 one before that? All those races that Game on Dude won? Goldencents in the Breeders Cup twice for god's sake? The only horse faster than him thru 1/4 was Oxbow, and hey he won this race in 2013.

The last time I remember the first 1/4 of the Preakness being that fast some guy named Shackleford was right in the middle of it, how'd he do?

Again I'm not saying it's right, I hate it, totally hate it. Every dirt race that is run has about a 75% chance of looking more like a parade than a horse race, but it's the truth.

There is a vast difference between going to the lead and battling nose and nose the whole way around.

I don't mind at all speed being a weapon. If a horse has speed and can hold it to the wire, then that horse is superior.

[dilanesp]

There is a vast difference between going to the lead and battling nose and nose the whole way around.

I don't mind at all speed being a weapon. If a horse has speed and can hold it to the wire, then that horse is superior.

Yeah, this is basic to handicapping. There's a huge difference between contested early speed and uncontested early speed, even if the fractions are similar.

[delsully]

Except he probably ran just as well as he did in Kentucky...just different pace dynamics.

I do agree he still could have lost. Exaggerator with a clean trip like he got might have beaten him anyway. But no way Cherry Wine does too.

Did he though? By winning the battle with Lino he lost the war to Exaggerator. He was struggling coming home.

[delsully]

If you had the opportunity to watch the telecast, Bailey highlighted how Nyquist was hustled out of the gate trying to get the lead. It was a close up showing MG working very hard. Bailey commented that MG seemed to try to slow Nyquist going into the first turn. I couldn't tell but from Bailey's POV that's probably what he would have done after all he does know how to ride.

I mentioned earlier given that type of early urging how does a horse know that he still has 7.5f to go instead of 4f. The horse probably thought WTH were they thinking. I think the 2f was 22+ and the 6f call was about 71+ seconds.

I don't question the strategy, they obviously implemented it wrong.

His light prep schedule, his A+ performance in KY and only 2 weeks off might of set up for failure anyways. Gunning to the lead at all costs and Lino running eyeball to eyeball certainly didn't help.

[five-eighths]

Was hoping Lino could hang in there for 3rd or 4th maybe steal 2nd. , thought he was the best of the speed horses and would easily grab the rail, never thought he would be fighting off Nyquist with such a fast pace. Really wrecked both horses chances. Luckily I hit a saver exacta to break even. Almost similar to AP vs MR Z last year.

The thing I wonder is if Nyquist was running in last years Preakness in place of AP could he have pulled it off? I remember Dortmund didn't like the slop at all and Firing Line was hung wide, and AP didn't have to face a late running horse as good as Exaggerator :confused:

[CincyHorseplayer]

We see plenty of matchups where the horses are relative equals. One of those horses takes a lead and everybody else lets it happen. I have been on both sides of the equation so much I can neither laugh or cry! But bottomline if you think you have the best horse and hit the go button I am all for it. In a world that is getting so smart I miss the old dumb sportsman "I'm killing you somehow before I let you win even if it means killing me ..". I respect Nyquist even more because he fought it out and hell for a second I thought he was going to re rally. What a race horse! He's a man! But he was never that great IMO. His time was up. Let's get some more mojo going though. Hopefully this head knocking is just getting started. Yee Haw!

[raybo]

From my perspective, watching this race on the TV, it seemed rather obvious that Nyquist could not be rated going into the turn. The first quarter looked like an all-out sprint, then when the jock tried to rate him, he refused. That was the whole ballgame right there, IMO. Can't blame the jock, he tried but couldn't force the horse to do his bidding. I think it's a much different ending if he can get Nyquist to rate, on the rail behind the leader in the turn, but that's racing, it doesn't always go the way it should, they are horses after all.

[depalma113]

I think it's a much different ending if he can get Nyquist to rate, on the rail behind the leader in the turn, but that's racing, it doesn't always go the way it should, they are horses after all.

Nyquist was never going to sit behind anyone. They didn't want the horse to take any kickback at all.

[Fager Fan]

Nyquist was never going to sit behind anyone. They didn't want the horse to take any kickback at all.

Where on God's green earth is all this talk of kickback coming from? This horse is no pansy who can't handle some kickback. The decision to go to the front had zero to do with any kickback.

[Fager Fan]

From my perspective, watching this race on the TV, it seemed rather obvious that Nyquist could not be rated going into the turn. The first quarter looked like an all-out sprint, then when the jock tried to rate him, he refused. That was the whole ballgame right there, IMO. Can't blame the jock, he tried but couldn't force the horse to do his bidding. I think it's a much different ending if he can get Nyquist to rate, on the rail behind the leader in the turn, but that's racing, it doesn't always go the way it should, they are horses after all.

Can you tell me where the jockey asks the horse to back off? Because I don't see it.

The horse was not rank. He was doing as he was asked to do.

[RXB]

I saw it fairly similarly to how Raybo did, maybe slightly differently. In the Derby there was a fast head-to-head opening 2f for Nyquist and then they got him to back off by four lengths during the next 2f. But in the Preakness he was a little more headstrong. Unlike the Derby there was a horse pushing up on his outside for the first 2f in addition to the inside speed horse and maybe that was enough to get him too revved up mentally.

Once a horse gets going at a certain rate, especially if it decides that the animal next to it is a rival that must be defeated, it's not easy to get them to slow way down.

Still have no idea why the connections were more concerned about kickback or whatever than the possibility of getting into a needless speed duel against the other frontrunning types who seemed hopelessly outclassed. Exaggerator certainly appeared to be the only dangerous rival and getting Nyquist involved in a hot pace duel was probably an easier way to ensure his defeat than risking a bit of kickback.

[depalma113]

Where on God's green earth is all this talk of kickback coming from? This horse is no pansy who can't handle some kickback. The decision to go to the front had zero to do with any kickback.

It was reported on Siruis XM on Saturday morning that the connections didn't want the horse to have to take kickback and they were going to the lead.

[Fager Fan]

It was reported on Siruis XM on Saturday morning that the connections didn't want the horse to have to take kickback and they were going to the lead.

By who? I haven't read any quotes from the connections saying that kickback was the reason for going to the front. If that really is the reason, then O'Neil didn't just make a bad call but is stupid if I can be so blunt. He wouldn't be getting any kickback if he's outside the front runner.

Thanks for the response though. Now I know where it's coming from at least.

Does O'Neil know that horses have second eyelids that act as windshields?

[castaway01]

By who? I haven't read any quotes from the connections saying that kickback was the reason for going to the front. If that really is the reason, then O'Neil didn't just make a bad call but is stupid if I can be so blunt. He wouldn't be getting any kickback if he's outside the front runner.

Thanks for the response though. Now I know where it's coming from at least.

Does O'Neil know that horses have second eyelids that act as windshields?

O'Neill says it several times in this post-race article alone, how he wanted to go fast, use the horse's speed, not get cute, be aggressive.

DRF Preakness recap (http://www.drf.com/news/fast-opening-quarter-took-its-toll-nyquist)

[raybo]

Nyquist was never going to sit behind anyone. They didn't want the horse to take any kickback at all.

You might want to look at the replay again. Jock was trying very hard to slow him down going into the first turn, Nyquist would have none of that.

[raybo]

Can you tell me where the jockey asks the horse to back off? Because I don't see it.

The horse was not rank. He was doing as he was asked to do.

As they approached the 1st turn Nyquist was beside the leader, the jock was stiff legged and leaning back, with tight reins. That is a jock trying to rate his horse. Nyquist refused to be rated at that point. As someone else said, the horse doesn't know anything about the distance he still has to run, and cares little about saving energy early, that's the jock's job. Unfortunately, the jock couldn't rein him in off that blazing start. When you urge a horse very early like that, it sends a signal to the horse that he can run as fast as he wants. Sometimes a jockey just can't rate a horse under those circumstances, and even if he applies enough pressure to do so, that takes as much energy out of the horse as just letting the horse go. Nyquist, at that point, was in a battle he wanted to win, he just didn't realize that he would lose the battle later, to different horse, due to the distance remaining and the energy expenditure of the all-out start and that one-on-one battle.

[RXB]

It's dirt racing folks, it's turned into follow the leader 90% of the time. Anyone remember Bayern winning a $5,000,000 race? And a $1,000,000 one before that? All those races that Game on Dude won? Goldencents in the Breeders Cup twice for god's sake? The only horse faster than him thru 1/4 was Oxbow, and hey he won this race in 2013.

The last time I remember the first 1/4 of the Preakness being that fast some guy named Shackleford was right in the middle of it, how'd he do?


Except that this was a G1 race in which beyond Nyquist and Exaggerator no other horse had even won a G2, never mind a G1. Bayern, Game On Dude, Goldencents and Shackleford had all shown themselves to be legit G1 runners. Nyquist absolutely laid over every horse in the Preakness except for Exaggerator so there was no reason to be afraid of letting an outclassed speed horse or two get in front of him. He's shown on multiple occasions that he can rate in a G1 route race and win.

[cj]

Except that this was a G1 race in which beyond Nyquist and Exaggerator no other horse had even won a G2, never mind a G1. Bayern, Game On Dude, Goldencents and Shackleford had all shown themselves to be legit G1 runners. Nyquist absolutely laid over every horse in the Preakness except for Exaggerator so there was no reason to be afraid of letting an outclassed speed horse or two get in front of him. He's shown on multiple occasions that he can rate in a G1 route race and win.

Perfectly stated.

[Fager Fan]

O'Neill says it several times in this post-race article alone, how he wanted to go fast, use the horse's speed, not get cute, be aggressive.

DRF Preakness recap (http://www.drf.com/news/fast-opening-quarter-took-its-toll-nyquist)

That's what I was saying, nothing about going to the front to avoid kickback.

[Fager Fan]

As they approached the 1st turn Nyquist was beside the leader, the jock was stiff legged and leaning back, with tight reins. That is a jock trying to rate his horse. Nyquist refused to be rated at that point. As someone else said, the horse doesn't know anything about the distance he still has to run, and cares little about saving energy early, that's the jock's job. Unfortunately, the jock couldn't rein him in off that blazing start. When you urge a horse very early like that, it sends a signal to the horse that he can run as fast as he wants. Sometimes a jockey just can't rate a horse under those circumstances, and even if he applies enough pressure to do so, that takes as much energy out of the horse as just letting the horse go. Nyquist, at that point, was in a battle he wanted to win, he just didn't realize that he would lose the battle later, to different horse, due to the distance remaining and the energy expenditure of the all-out start and that one-on-one battle.

The jock and trainer have taken a lot of heat over this, yet they could cool it off in an instant by just saying he couldn't get the horse to rate, that the horse ran off with him. Have they made this argument, or have they just made the opposite argument that it was all their doing?

[dilanesp]

Except that this was a G1 race in which beyond Nyquist and Exaggerator no other horse had even won a G2, never mind a G1. Bayern, Game On Dude, Goldencents and Shackleford had all shown themselves to be legit G1 runners. Nyquist absolutely laid over every horse in the Preakness except for Exaggerator so there was no reason to be afraid of letting an outclassed speed horse or two get in front of him. He's shown on multiple occasions that he can rate in a G1 route race and win.

Yeah, one of the great examples of this was the 1978 Kentucky Derby. Affirmed had Alydar to worry about, but Laz Barrera and Steve Cauthen weren't worried about Sensitive Prince and Raymond Earl at all. They let them go out and sat Affirmed in third, even though he really wasn't a come from behind horse or even a stalker.

[raybo]

The jock and trainer have taken a lot of heat over this, yet they could cool it off in an instant by just saying he couldn't get the horse to rate, that the horse ran off with him. Have they made this argument, or have they just made the opposite argument that it was all their doing?

What their reasoning was, I have no idea. I can see the trainer making that statement, if he indeed ordered the jockey to go for the lead, and thought what he saw was exactly that. And, I could see the jockey agreeing with the trainer, if ether he was really going for the lead and couldn't get it, or if he was overruling the trainer during the race and was in fact trying to rate the horse with the horse eventually losing the race. The jockey might not want to admit that he made a spur of the moment decision to rate the horse due to the fast pace and/or to prevent a prolonged early pace battle, and by doing so, going against what they had decided to do before the race. He had an out staring him in the face by agreeing with the trainer's interpretation of that segment of the race.

I don't remember ever seeing a jockey trying to make the lead by standing up in the irons and tightening the reins. I have seen gobs of jockeys do just the opposite though.

[whodoyoulike]

The jock and trainer have taken a lot of heat over this, yet they could cool it off in an instant by just saying he couldn't get the horse to rate, that the horse ran off with him. Have they made this argument, or have they just made the opposite argument that it was all their doing?

There's a post in another thread from HalvonHorseracing, he asked O'Neill that question and he confirmed it was his decision to go for the lead early.

[Tom]

Wierdest ride I have seen in along time.
Jock looked lost in space.

Really dumb idea. Could happen to a nicer stable.

[clocker7]

It's obvious that, given the conditions, that Nyquist was intentionally hustled toward the front, to be on the outside shoulder of the leader. What wasn't planned, imo, was running so many paths outward from the rail.

Not sure that can be pinned on the jock. Plan B--dropping back and going inside had its own uncertainty. In Exaggerator's case, doing so had no downside, since it played into his style of running.

[depalma113]

You might want to look at the replay again. Jock was trying very hard to slow him down going into the first turn, Nyquist would have none of that.

You don't try and slow a horse down by scrubbing the reins. Mario never tried once to apply the breaks. He was asking him the whole way.

In fact after a quarter of a mile he gave Uncle Lino's jockey a what the F are you doing look when he wouldn't give him the lead.

[dilanesp]

It's obvious that, given the conditions, that Nyquist was intentionally hustled toward the front, to be on the outside shoulder of the leader. What wasn't planned, imo, was running so many paths outward from the rail.

Not sure that can be pinned on the jock. Plan B--dropping back and going inside had its own uncertainty. In Exaggerator's case, doing so had no downside, since it played into his style of running.

It's pretty obvious Nyquist can close. (See BC Juvenile.) It is stupid to duel with a horse that can rate.

[clocker7]

It's pretty obvious Nyquist can close. (See BC Juvenile.) It is stupid to duel with a horse that can rate.
But O'Neill has said that it was the team's strategy to be at/near the lead. All I was responding to was blame being put solely on the jock. He was doing what he was told to do.

To me, its seems like O'Neill was just going to rerun the strategy used in the Florida Derby, to keep Nyquist clean and out of trouble, but was ambushed by worse track conditions and some ground loss on the first turn.

[dilanesp]

But O'Neill has said that it was the team's strategy to be at/near the lead. All I was responding to was blame being put solely on the jock. He was doing what he was told to do.

To me, its seems like O'Neill was just going to rerun the strategy used in the Florida Derby, to keep Nyquist clean and out of trouble, but was ambushed by worse track conditions and some ground loss on the first turn.

He wasn't ambushed. Anyone who could read a racing form could tell there were 5 or 6 speed horses entered.

This was ridiculously dumb.

[cj]

He wasn't ambushed. Anyone who could read a racing form could tell there were 5 or 6 speed horses entered.

This was ridiculously dumb.

That is what makes it so baffling. It made no sense on paper and even less the way the race unfolded.

[clocker7]

He wasn't ambushed. Anyone who could read a racing form could tell there were 5 or 6 speed horses entered.

This was ridiculously dumb.
Repeating, the jockey was following orders and was guessing about the status of the track. And he lost by a respectable margin.

That he was at fault is 20/20 hindsight.

[clocker7]

That is what makes it so baffling. It made no sense on paper and even less the way the race unfolded.
I suggest that you watch a rerun of the Florida Derby.

[RXB]

I suggest that you watch a rerun of the Florida Derby.

Go back and look at the entrants in both races. There wasn't much frontrunning speed signed up for the Florida Derby. There were need-the-lead stakes winners in the Preakness, including Uncle Lino who ended up being the one that hooked Nyquist.

The two horses that were closest to Nyquist early in the Fla Derby were a maiden who wasn't a frontrunning type and a horse that broke its maiden in a MCL race in its previous start. The early fractions for the Florida Derby were right in line with the final time. In the Preakness the early pace was much faster than the final time in a relative sense.

[classhandicapper]

There was a ton of speed in the race, but Nyquist seemed handy enough to avoid a duel if desired. There were a couple of risks that I saw.

1. He would get drawn into the fast pace a little too soon as is sometimes the case for near the lead horses when the pace is exceptionally fast.

2. Projections of running style and probable strategy sometimes go awry.

[classhandicapper]

Go back and look at the entrants in both races. There wasn't much frontrunning speed signed up for the Florida Derby. There were need-the-lead stakes winners in the Preakness, including Uncle Lino who ended up being the one that hooked Nyquist.

The two horses that were closest to Nyquist early in the Fla Derby were a maiden who wasn't a frontrunning type and a horse that broke its maiden in a MCL race in its previous start. The early fractions for the Florida Derby were right in line with the final time. In the Preakness the early pace was much faster than the final time in a relative sense.

I agree and disagree. IMO, there was plenty of speed in the Florida Derby. It just wasn't of the same quality as in the Preakness. He was able to kill off the 2 horses running with him and some of the chasers with speed in the 2nd tier easier than in the Preakness. But that still allowed some very mediocre horses to suck up behind him in 2nd and 3rd. I'm not 100% sure he would have held off a horse like Exaggerator in that spot either. He was pressured early and didn't exactly light up the tele-timer at the end with that trip.

[RXB]

I agree and disagree. IMO, there was plenty of speed in the Florida Derby. It just wasn't of the same quality as in the Preakness. He was able to kill off the 2 horses running with him and some of the chasers in the 2nd tier easier than in the Preakness. But that still allowed some very mediocre horses to suck up behind him in 2nd and 3rd. I'm not 100% sure he would have held off a horse like Exaggerator in that spot either. He ran early and didn't exactly light up the tele-timer with that trip.

Who were all of the frontrunners in the Florida Derby? There was a horse that had one race, wire-to-wire with modest early fractions in a maiden race, seemed absolutely no threat to Nyquist and then it didn't break well. Look at the horses that were out closest to him; they are literally nothing. And the pace figures were WAY hotter in the Preakness which was no surprise.

[cj]

I suggest that you watch a rerun of the Florida Derby.

That race had a totally different pace dynamic on paper and certainly wasn't blazing fast. I'd suggest whoever mapped out this strategy should watch a rerun of the Kentucky Derby.

[classhandicapper]

Who were all of the frontrunners in the Florida Derby? There was a horse that had one race, wire-to-wire with modest early fractions in a maiden race, seemed absolutely no threat to Nyquist and then it didn't break well. Look at the horses that were out closest to him; they are literally nothing. And the pace figures were WAY hotter in the Preakness which was no surprise.

We definitely agree that the quality of the speed horses and the pace were much tougher in the Preakness, but I don't think it's an accident that Nyquist and Mohaymen ran well in the KY Derby and the horses that sucked up 2nd and 3rd in the Florida Derby are proving to not be much. I said that would probably be the case in discussions about Moyahmen before the Derby.

Even cheaper horses can sometimes be a nuisance.

Nyquist repulsed cheaper horses inside and outside of him and then repulsed Mohaymen's very serious bid on the turn. Other horses with "near the lead" quality speed that were in the 2nd tier (like Copingaway who had cheaper sprint speed and Takeittotheedge) were also put away badly just like Mohaymen. I was dying to play Sawyer's Mickey out of that race for his new trainer but he was dropped into a sprint maiden race and was unplayable. Even worse, he broke down.

Like I said, I fully understand your point and agree with it. I just think the Florida Derby was a little tougher on Nyquist and the chasers than conventional wisdom or the fractions indicate.

I focus less on fractions these days and more on the field, replays, and the actual results in that specific race. I'm even changing my views on how best to evaluate speed and closer track biases and getting more race specific on that.

[Tom]

Interesting take on the race by Tony Black on ATR Thursday, second hour.

[Robert Fischer]

Interesting take on the race by Tony Black on ATR Thursday, second hour.
I liked Steve Haskin's point that Exaggerator will be closer to the pace in the Belmont as well, from that same ATR podcast.

Nyquist had the perfect setup in the Derby, today Exaggerator did.

yes.

This is one of those races where the chart doesn't lie.

no enormous subtleties here

straightforward pace collapse that hurt Nyquist a ton, maybe hurt Stradivari some , Helped Exaggerator, Cherry Wine, Lani a ton.

Hurt Uncle Lino and Collected as well, but those aren't G1 horses, and we don't need to worry about upgrades - they'll be bet to class.

So on setup from the Preakness, you hope that Stradivari runs in the Belmont and that with the heavy favoritism of Exaggerator that there is enough money on Cherry Wine and Lani , to give Stradivari some value.

It's tough because Exaggerator is also legitimately much the best horse in the Belmont. We're talking a 'lock' vs a 'legitimate heavy favorite' type of split-hairs underlay.

[classhandicapper]

I liked Steve Haskin's point that Exaggerator will be closer to the pace in the Belmont as well, from that same ATR podcast.



yes.

This is one of those races where the chart doesn't lie.

no enormous subtleties here

straightforward pace collapse that hurt Nyquist a ton, maybe hurt Stradivari some , Helped Exaggerator, Cherry Wine, Lani a ton.

Hurt Uncle Lino and Collected as well, but those aren't G1 horses, and we don't need to worry about upgrades - they'll be bet to class.

So on setup from the Preakness, you hope that Stradivari runs in the Belmont and that with the heavy favoritism of Exaggerator that there is enough money on Cherry Wine and Lani , to give Stradivari some value.

It's tough because Exaggerator is also legitimately much the best horse in the Belmont. We're talking a 'lock' vs a 'legitimate heavy favorite' type of split-hairs underlay.

I think Exaggerator has a lot more speed than he's been showing lately. They made a conscious decision to take him back after he made that premature move into the fast pace in the San Felipe and weakened late.

It's not that he's slow.

So I wonder what their thinking will be in the Belmont. He can easily be a lot closer, but will they run that way?

[pandy]

I'd agree that Exaggerator is not a one paced horse, not even close, and he will probably be within good striking position in the Belmont.

[ronsmac]

The first quarter was run in 22 36 the fastest ever. After watching the replay a few times it appeared to be a quick pace but visually not a record setting pace. Even Exaggerator was much closer. Seattle! Slews Preakness looked much faster.

[Robert Fischer]

So I wonder what their thinking will be in the Belmont. He can easily be a lot closer, but will they run that way?

Good question.

It's pretty clear that the expected pace scenario favors a greater sense of urgency, and a more forward position.

It's a plus that Exaggerator has shown a sense of urgency in races like the Saratoga Special, Delta Jackpot, and the San Vicente. This isn't a new thing for him.

[RXB]

The first quarter was run in 22 36 the fastest ever. After watching the replay a few times it appeared to be a quick pace but visually not a record setting pace. Even Exaggerator was much closer. Seattle! Slews Preakness looked much faster.

Exaggerator was already 11 lengths behind after 2f. Cherry Wine 24 lengths behind. Stradivari 5 lengths behind. Lani 27 lengths behind. They finished many lengths ahead of the other horses that were near the lead at that point. It was an absolutely wild opening 2f.

[dilanesp]

Exaggerator was already 11 lengths behind after 2f. Cherry Wine 24 lengths behind. Stradivari 5 lengths behind. Lani 27 lengths behind. They finished many lengths ahead of the other horses that were near the lead at that point. It was an absolutely wild opening 2f.

Correct. Exaggerator made a mid-race move (probably because he was having so much fun splashing around in the slop). Collmus made this same mistake-- he said Exaggerator was much closer today. Not really. He just moved earlier.

[cj]

Correct. Exaggerator made a mid-race move (probably because he was having so much fun splashing around in the slop). Collmus made this same mistake-- he said Exaggerator was much closer today. Not really. He just moved earlier.

Not really, he was a lot closer at every call in the Preakness

Derby lengths behind

1/4 17.5
1/2 17
3/4 10

Preakness

1/4 11
1/2 6.5
3/4 2.25

[dilanesp]

Not really, he was a lot closer at every call in the Preakness

Derby lengths behind

1/4 17.5
1/2 17
3/4 10

Preakness

1/4 11
1/2 6.5
3/4 2.25

I think the 17.5 versus 11 is just a matter of field size. You are always farther back in a 20 horse field if you are a deep closer. The important thing is that 1/2 mile pole one-- in the Derby, he hadn't started his move, but in the Preakness, because he was loving the slop, he moved way up.

[classhandicapper]

When watching the Preakness live I thought Exaggerator was making a bit a premature move inside, but then once he got into a good position KD more or less stopped the move and waited.

[cj]

I think the 17.5 versus 11 is just a matter of field size. You are always farther back in a 20 horse field if you are a deep closer. The important thing is that 1/2 mile pole one-- in the Derby, he hadn't started his move, but in the Preakness, because he was loving the slop, he moved way up.


Quite a difference from saying the announcer made a mistake.

Kent said before the race he wanted to keep him closer FYI. Can't blindly just attribute it to loving the slip.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Not really, he was a lot closer at every call in the Preakness

Derby lengths behind

1/4 17.5
1/2 17
3/4 10

Preakness

1/4 11
1/2 6.5
3/4 2.25

Yep. 6 1/2 back after 4F was a massive difference in the races. And after 6F he was in perfect stalking position to pounce; which is exactly what he did.

I imagine that if we asked Kent for his honesty about the Derby, he'd tell us he had him too far back, or he started his run too late. He may well have had the best horse on Derby day even with the great race and trip that Nyquist had. He took the Preakness into his own hands not wanting to let Nyquist too far ahead and almost completely relying upon other speed to wear him down.

[ronsmac]

Exaggerator was already 11 lengths behind after 2f. Cherry Wine 24 lengths behind. Stradivari 5 lengths behind. Lani 27 lengths behind. They finished many lengths ahead of the other horses that were near the lead at that point. It was an absolutely wild opening 2f.
It didn't look like 24 and 27 lengths to me. It's just an estimate anyway. I'm not saying it wasn't quick but Slew and Cormorant were really moving. If they didn't post the fractions, i would not have predicted 22. 36. The fastest in Preakness history. Maybe they had the wind at their backs. I don't know.

[dilanesp]

Quite a difference from saying the announcer made a mistake.

Kent said before the race he wanted to keep him closer FYI. Can't blindly just attribute it to loving the slip.

Collmus said he was much closer today AFTER the mid-race move. I think it wasn't a great description.

And honestly I don't buy Kent's explanation. Nobody moves, stops, and then moves again. The horse moved up and Kent actually had to hit the brakes.

[dilanesp]

Yep. 6 1/2 back after 4F was a massive difference in the races. And after 6F he was in perfect stalking position to pounce; which is exactly what he did.

I imagine that if we asked Kent for his honesty about the Derby, he'd tell us he had him too far back, or he started his run too late. He may well have had the best horse on Derby day even with the great race and trip that Nyquist had. He took the Preakness into his own hands not wanting to let Nyquist too far ahead and almost completely relying upon other speed to wear him down.

This seems wrong to me. The obvious difference is the mud.

I frankly do not understand everyone's reluctance to say that Exaggerator is a mud horse.

Compare the Preakness and Santa Anita Derby videos. In both races, watch how much faster he is going than the rest of the horses at the top of the stretch. He blows by them, much much faster than most moves horses make.

He has never shown the same explosive turn of foot on a fast track. Never. He's better on the mud.

Nyquist is better on the fast track. That's why Exaggerator lost that day.

[ronsmac]

The chart caller is doing the best he can. Horses are moving at different speeds at the same time and the visibility isn't great, but if you pause the race 1/16th after the wire. I think most estimates would place the margins as being closer. It's no big deal just a personal observation.

[ronsmac]

The chart caller is doing the best he can. Horses are moving at different speeds at the same time and the visibility isn't great, but if you pause the race 1/16th after the wire. I think most estimates would place the margins as being closer. It's no big deal just a personal observation.
I just watched Slew again. Maybe they weren't going as fast as I remembered. They seemed to pick it up after the first quarter.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

This seems wrong to me. The obvious difference is the mud.

I frankly do not understand everyone's reluctance to say that Exaggerator is a mud horse.

Compare the Preakness and Santa Anita Derby videos. In both races, watch how much faster he is going than the rest of the horses at the top of the stretch. He blows by them, much much faster than most moves horses make.

He has never shown the same explosive turn of foot on a fast track. Never. He's better on the mud.

Nyquist is better on the fast track. That's why Exaggerator lost that day.

Exaggerator gained nearly 8 lengths on Nyquist in the final quarter of the Derby. Nyquist got the perfect trip and the perfect race set up to win by just over a length.

Make the Derby a 12 horse field, and I'm not so sure we have a different winner that day.

[classhandicapper]

This seems wrong to me. The obvious difference is the mud.

I frankly do not understand everyone's reluctance to say that Exaggerator is a mud horse.

Compare the Preakness and Santa Anita Derby videos. In both races, watch how much faster he is going than the rest of the horses at the top of the stretch. He blows by them, much much faster than most moves horses make.

He has never shown the same explosive turn of foot on a fast track. Never. He's better on the mud.

Nyquist is better on the fast track. That's why Exaggerator lost that day.


I think the reason people are reluctant to concede he's better on mud is that he also got really good setups in a few of his mud races. That makes it harder to pin down the cause. My best guess (and obviously it's just that) is that he's a little better on mud but he'll do fine on a fast track if he gets some pace to run into like he did in the Preakness and SA derby.