The Haskell

[PowerUpPaynter]

This race is loaded with talent. I think Nyquist wins based on the speed bias in this race and on this track. If i can get 2-1 or even 3-1 im going heavy on him. Exaggerator was aided by the Nyquist running the fastest 1/4 in Preakness history and the wet track. Gun Runner can't be slept on but my ultimate sleeper is American Freedom, Baffert knows how to win the Haskell. Brody's Cause has proven to be a cut below the top horses of this crop. Sunny Ridge is interesting as a back end bomber because they have been pointing him here since last fall. The Haskell has really become a great race at a nice track, very much looking forward to it.

Thoughts?

[onefast99]

This race is loaded with talent. I think Nyquist wins based on the speed bias in this race and on this track. If i can get 2-1 or even 3-1 im going heavy on him. Exaggerator was aided by the Nyquist running the fastest 1/4 in Preakness history and the wet track. Gun Runner can't be slept on but my ultimate sleeper is American Freedom, Baffert knows how to win the Haskell. Brody's Cause has proven to be a cut below the top horses of this crop. Sunny Ridge is interesting as a back end bomber because they have been pointing him here since last fall. The Haskell has really become a great race at a nice track, very much looking forward to it.

Thoughts?
I would count on a fast track but I wouldn't say the track will be speed biased until we see how they run beginning at 12 noon Sunday. Nyquist seems to be a logical choice.

[castaway01]

I would count on a fast track but I wouldn't say the track will be speed biased until we see how they run beginning at 12 noon Sunday. Nyquist seems to be a logical choice.

Good chance of thunderstorms on Sunday---granted it's 4 days out---so we'll have to see about that fast track.

[bobphilo]

In a strange move after being withdrawn from the Jim Dandy because he wasn't training well, Exaggerator will face Nyquist in the tougher Haskell instead.
Has Keith D taken up brother Kent's drinking habit ????
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/213654/exaggerator-to-run-in-haskell

[Redboard]

In a strange move after being withdrawn from the Jim Dandy because he wasn't training well, Exaggerator will face Nyquist in the tougher Haskell instead.
Has Keith D taken up brother Kent's drinking habit ????
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/213654/exaggerator-to-run-in-haskell

This is a head-scratching move. Desormeaux didn’t like the way Exaggerator was working out at the SPA, even though the colt has a win there last year. He liked the track last year but not this year? hhhhmmmm, The workout times were ok ,I believe, but the gallop outs were disconcerting. It was my understanding that he planned to work him up to the Travers; maybe the bosses had second thoughts about that plan.

Looks like a toss to me.

[bobphilo]

This is a head-scratching move. Desormeaux didn’t like the way Exaggerator was working out at the SPA, even though the colt has a win there last year. He liked the track last year but not this year? hhhhmmmm, The workout times were ok ,I believe, but the gallop outs were disconcerting. It was my understanding that he planned to work him up to the Travers; maybe the bosses had second thoughts about that plan.

Looks like a toss to me.
I would pick Nyquist over Exaggerator even if both were in top form and now that Desormeaux didn't feel Ex was fit enough for the easier Jim Dandy I'm even more skeptical about his chances in the Haskell.
I agree with Redboard that this looks like an owner overruling the best judgement of the trainer.
Nyquist should win this and it looks like American Freedom presents the biggest challenge.

[oddsmaven]

I like Gun Runner...his odds can be higher than they should be.

You have the Derby & Preakness winners which makes them overly popular and both might be off form a bit...the latter will take a lot of extra play because of the sloppy track...I think that factor can be overdone.

Then you have Baffert - who won 5 of the last 6 renewals...if he entered the stable billygoat it might go 3:1 off of that history...maybe his charge is ok, but hasn't accomplished much yet.

I think Gun Runner is very good and might be sitting on a big race after an easy tune-up.

[PressThePace]

I just don't see a way to go against Nyquist in this spot. He'll be overplayed, but I still can't find enough value in the others.

[Tom]

Nyquist not worth a look at any low odds.
He might win, but not with my money on him.
I'll be playing some nickel baten claimers somewhere else.

[Robert Fischer]

I have no idea of a value bet here.

Nyquist is a grade 1 horse

Exaggerator was starting to look better than Nyquist before his 'dud' in the Belmont

Both have question marks coming in

Nyquist and American Freedom have a good style for the Haskell

Just going to watch and hope to see a couple horses run big.

[letswastemoney]

Go American Freedom!

[Tom]

Late breaking news!
Crisi in the Nyquist camp.

They forgot to bring the silks. :eek:

Trying to get some down from Saratoga.

[plainolebill]

I'm going to take a little shot with Awesome Slew.

[chenoa]

Exaggerator will pays have him 4th choice in DD, third in P3.
Toss him!!!!

It's GUN POWER!!!!! ;)

[Tee]

Gun Runner should get a very nice trip. Exaggerator has always run well on the off going. We will find out shortly as they are now loading.

[zico20]

I am absolutely stunned by the final odds with the race being on a sloppy track. I thought Exaggerator would be 4-5 or lower. It is rare that the public blew a race this much.

[depalma113]

Songbird would have destroyed those horses.

[bobphilo]

Deja vous all over again for Exaggerator. A crazy fast early pace in the slop, taking back while the idiots on the lead knock themselves out. Just like the the Santa Anita Derby and the Preakness.

[dilanesp]

I am absolutely stunned by the final odds with the race being on a sloppy track. I thought Exaggerator would be 4-5 or lower. It is rare that the public blew a race this much.

At some point people need to stop denying that Exaggeratpr loves the mud.

[bobphilo]

At some point people need to stop denying that Exaggerator loves the mud.
True. He also loves it when the front runners burn themselves out with a crazy early pace.

[Fager Fan]

True. He also loves it when the front runners burn themselves out with a crazy early pace.

I don't have his pps in front of me. Has there not been a fast pace in any of the fast track races that he lost?

[cj]

At some point people need to stop denying that Exaggeratpr loves the mud.

Of course he does, but he has also run well on fast tracks. Pace is at least as much of a plus as the surface IMO. His trip in the Belmont was brutal, not putting that effort on the fast track.

[bobphilo]

I don't have his pps in front of me. Has there not been a fast pace in any of the fast track races that he lost?
In those races he ran closer to more reasonable paces in which the front-runners where not knocking out themselves out with crazy early paces. When Nyquist was ridden more intelligently he was not able to beat him on a fast track. Whether the slop or a favorable pace scenario is the main factor why Exaggerator can beat Nyquist is a matter for discussion.

[anotherCAfan]

I'm not expecting there to be a muddy track at The Great Race Place come November for the BC -- I wonder how Exaggerator (and Nyquist, for that matter) would fare then.

[cj]

Since TimeformUS adds a pace element to our speed figures, the Haskell field figures are going to look a bit different than other speed figure providers.

[dilanesp]

Of course he does, but he has also run well on fast tracks. Pace is at least as much of a plus as the surface IMO. His trip in the Belmont was brutal, not putting that effort on the fast track.

I really don't get this. It's as if the notion of a mud horse is just unacceptable to some handicappers.

Check out his Delta Downs race from last year. There was no pace set up. Just an off track. And he made the same mid race move.

[dilanesp]

I'm not expecting there to be a muddy track at The Great Race Place come November for the BC -- I wonder how Exaggerator (and Nyquist, for that matter) would fare then.

Exaggerator has gotten very lucky with his off tracks in big races. Maybe he will do another rain dance in the stable before the BC.

[magwell]

I really don't get this. It's as if the notion of a mud horse is just unacceptable to some handicappers.

Check out his Delta Downs race from last year. There was no pace set up. Just an off track. And he made the same mid race move.Facts are he's a mudder he runs his ass off on "off tracks"....:cool:

[CincyHorseplayer]

Forget the mud. Nyquist has lost twice to this horse and got smoked in this one.

Mud is your salvation? I thought Nyquist looked good rerallying in the Preakness. Looked like like a turd nailed to the wall in this one. On a runaway and hide track like Monmouth I did not think this was possible. But blew doors off and looked good doing it. Figures are gettin fast for the big dogs and this was a comeback race for these. Going to be an interesting picture moving forward.

[clocker7]

It's my conviction that Exaggerator would have won the KD if not for the insane field size. Fast track, fast time, 10f. I completely write off the Belmont as a bounce. As Cincy says, it's gonna get real interesting.

[Robert Fischer]

Since TimeformUS adds a pace element to our speed figures, the Haskell field figures are going to look a bit different than other speed figure providers.

American Freedom ran a big race.

Also a bit wide as well.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Deja vous all over again for Exaggerator. A crazy fast early pace in the slop, taking back while the idiots on the lead knock themselves out. Just like the the Santa Anita Derby and the Preakness.

I am not even guessing you know zero about Monmouth. Cheap speed goes to the front. Orders grilled cheese and tomato soup. Consumes it. Then cruises to the wire. Routinely. Other than the mud puddle, this was an inordinate circumstance especially for a closer to draw away.

[Redboard]

What Jerry Bailey said after the race made the most sense to me. The trainer saw that the Haskell had more speed than the Jimmy D. The thing about the workouts was all smokescreen. He wasn’t going to announce “I’m running in the Haskell because it’s a more favorable pace scenario…..” The others would have saw that and adjusted accordingly. Even sent his wife down to avoid the spotlight and got the slop to boot.

That’s one for Keith. Well played.

[classhandicapper]

American Freedom ran a big race.



I agree with this.

[classhandicapper]

Overall, I think Exaggerator is better on wet tracks. I think most people forget that it poured on Derby day before the race. That track may have had some moisture in too it even though the official label was fast. I'm not saying he can't run on fast tracks. He can. But at this point the evidence is accumulating about which surface he prefers. I think he's eventually going to get exposed as just a decent horse. Between all the wet tracks and terrific setups, he's had way more good fortune than any horse deserves.

Nyquist's effort did not shock me. They may say otherwise, but I don't think he was 100%.

The horses I like out of this race are Gun Runner and American Freedom, but for different reasons.

[Valuist]

At some point people need to stop denying that Exaggeratpr loves the mud.

Bingo. I did not get to see the race or even watch it yet. But I am shocked he wasn't favored in the slop. I guess people still were in denial.

[castaway01]

Forget the mud. Nyquist has lost twice to this horse and got smoked in this one.

Mud is your salvation? I thought Nyquist looked good rerallying in the Preakness. Looked like like a turd nailed to the wall in this one. On a runaway and hide track like Monmouth I did not think this was possible. But blew doors off and looked good doing it. Figures are gettin fast for the big dogs and this was a comeback race for these. Going to be an interesting picture moving forward.

Not saying Nyquist is a great bet going forward, but between the slop and four of the six horses trying for the lead in a 22 3/5 opening quarter, he and everyone who wasn't Exaggerator certainly have valid excuses. American Freedom looked the best out of the rest.

[Redboard]

We may never know about Exaggerator until the Breeders Cup. His path will probably be the Travers and PA Derby, which both could very well be wet tracks.
He certainly likes a wet track but whether his competition hates them is up for debate.

[burnsy]

I think it's clearly proven this is the best 3 yo around. Mud or no mud. Second in the Derby then wins in the Preakness and Haskell. The Belmont is an outlier of a race these days. These horses just don't run as far any more. The results often don't line up with the other races. The horses that beat him looked like slugs going 9 furlongs Saturday. If he shows up right Travers day there could be hell to pay. His run sets up well for the track at that distance. Plus, I want to see it, of course. ;-)

[BIG49010]

That was a tough race American Freedom put up, I don't see him bouncing back to the races anytime in the near future. He ran great in the slop the SA Derby day also, so in my opinion that's the story of the top two, I just hope they all continue to race this fall.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

:5: American Freedom ran the best race IMO. Up on the lead and battled with Nyquist and Gun Runner throughout while giving up extra ground. When it came time, he was the only one left.

Some can say :6: Exaggerator got the perfect trip and perfect track, but his move on the backside to roll into the stretch on the lead was pretty impressive. For what reason I have no clue? He has been moved too early and too late a number of times, but the horse is simply that good that he wins.

Personally, I think Keith needs to get his brother off the horse. He simply does so many stupid things to make it seem like he is making great rides and trips out of this horse.

[dilanesp]

:5: American Freedom ran the best race IMO. Up on the lead and battled with Nyquist and Gun Runner throughout while giving up extra ground. When it came time, he was the only one left.

Some can say :6: Exaggerator got the perfect trip and perfect track, but his move on the backside to roll into the stretch on the lead was pretty impressive. For what reason I have no clue? He has been moved too early and too late a number of times, but the horse is simply that good that he wins.

Personally, I think Keith needs to get his brother off the horse. He simply does so many stupid things to make it seem like he is making great rides and trips out of this horse.

Wow, that's dead wrong. The horse makes multiple runs, especially on off tracks where he likes the surface. And Kent, who is one of the greatest of all time and someone who I would take on any horse, fits this horse perfectly and wins on him.

[PressThePace]

I am not even guessing you know zero about Monmouth. Cheap speed goes to the front. Orders grilled cheese and tomato soup. Consumes it. Then cruises to the wire. Routinely. Other than the mud puddle, this was an inordinate circumstance especially for a closer to draw away.

I respectfully disagree. We're not talking about cheap speed and we're not talking about a single horse going to the front in uncontested fashion. There was pace pressure from the outset, setting quick fractions. There's not a doubt in my mind that the leaders were somewhat compromised.

[SuperPickle]

I respectfully disagree. We're not talking about cheap speed and we're not talking about a single horse going to the front in uncontested fashion. There was pace pressure from the outset, setting quick fractions. There's not a doubt in my mind that the leaders were somewhat compromised.

You're right and Cincy is wrong. It was only a six horse field. The :2: checked out at the start. Then three of the four horses lined up for the first half mile. They went :46.3 and 1:11. Nyquist never got a breather. For point of reference when Bayern wired the Haskell in2014 he was a length and a half clear to a second slower half mile split.

Yeah the slop moves up the horse but he got a good setup.

People think because a track has a speed bias any horse that closes did something amazing. The reality is on days like this jockeys figure things out too. Everyone guns and closers sometimes win.

Also he would have been 3-2/9-5 in this spot if it wasn't for the gossip about his works. The whales thought he was a bad bet because of the works. If the clockers endorsed the works he would have been bet more.

Between the track playing to speed, the whole Haskell was a plan b, and the clockers hating the works he was an underlay at 5-2.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I completely disagree. I see cheap speed get into pace duels all the time at Monmouth and it's multiple horses dueling wire to wire and they are separated from the pack and stay like that. Doesn't happen all the time but it happens plenty. Because Nyquist is NOT a cheap speed horse and he has withstood being up front all year, on this particular track he SHOULD have lasted. Not folded. I simply think right now Exaggerator is the better horse. And yes when a closer at Monmouth is hard used to keep up on the backstretch, makes a big move and not only gets there but also starts to draw away that is a big god damn deal! This pace wasn't so brutal and taxing that this should have occurred . I don't buy that at all. If this was a 16 N2L sure, not here.

[PressThePace]

I completely disagree. I see cheap speed get into pace duels all the time at Monmouth and it's multiple horses dueling wire to wire and they are separated from the pack and stay like that. Doesn't happen all the time but it happens plenty. Because Nyquist is NOT a cheap speed horse and he has withstood being up front all year, on this particular track he SHOULD have lasted. Not folded. I simply think right now Exaggerator is the better horse. And yes when a closer at Monmouth is hard used to keep up on the backstretch, makes a big move and not only gets there but also starts to draw away that is a big god damn deal! This pace wasn't so brutal and taxing that this should have occurred . I don't buy that at all. If this was a 16 N2L sure, not here.

Cincy, I've been wrong many times before. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. This is what I enjoy about this game...many differing opinions.

[PressThePace]

I will add this as well. After looking at the USTF figs, I'm more convinced that Exaggerator was aided by the fractions. I'm still not a big time believer.

[Robert Fischer]

Hard to quantify Nyquist's trip.

From memory, he was 'down inside' on that medium-hot pace.
Sometimes that type of trip is stressful, especially when you have a horse like American Freedom on your flank, not allowing you any breathers.


Aside from the Belmont (which was a hard trip for Exaggerator), Exaggerator has hinted that he's probably a better all around horse than Nyquist.

Nyquist at one point was a 3yo that could take the initiative and then from that advantage point on, keep the initiative.

Not sure he is that sharp right now. Preakness and Haskell were tough, but he didn't show a ton of horse.

American Freedom almost went really wide early(and we may have learned even more). AF's effort was impressive in the sense that he was either best in the Haskell, or right there at the table, with Exaggerator. That was very impressive in it's own right, because aside from trainer angles, it wasn't obvious that AF was just as good as the favorites.
I don't think it was a jaw-dropping awesome performance, although it's debatable.

lot of subtle trips going on around the 3yo division, several horses that are at the Grade I level on their day.

[classhandicapper]

I completely disagree. I see cheap speed get into pace duels all the time at Monmouth and it's multiple horses dueling wire to wire and they are separated from the pack and stay like that. Doesn't happen all the time but it happens plenty. Because Nyquist is NOT a cheap speed horse and he has withstood being up front all year, on this particular track he SHOULD have lasted. Not folded. I simply think right now Exaggerator is the better horse. And yes when a closer at Monmouth is hard used to keep up on the backstretch, makes a big move and not only gets there but also starts to draw away that is a big god damn deal! This pace wasn't so brutal and taxing that this should have occurred . I don't buy that at all. If this was a 16 N2L sure, not here.

You know I respect your opinion and fully understand what you are saying about MTH and the quality of these horses, but let's look at this another way.

The horses that were part of the pace were American Freedom, Nyquist, and Awesome Slew. Gun Runner was there early, eased back, and then got involved again a little early.

Of those horses, Awesome Slew quit badly, Nyquist ran below what most expected given his Derby and Preakness form, Gun Runner was a disappointment, and American Freedom ran very well.

So 3 of the 4 horses up close ran worse than expected.

The closers were Exaggerator (who ran well) and Sunny Ridge (who exceeded expectations).

When you combine that with a pre race analysis of the horses' running styles that suggested the pace could be lively and a post race analysis of the fractions that suggest it was in fact lively, it's hard to conclude anything other than the pace and race flow probably favored the off the pace horses.

There COULD be other reasons Nyquist and Gun Runner disappointed (Nyquist missed some training and Gun Runner may not be as good on an off track), but I think the evidence still suggests the pace and race development was at least part of the issue.

[bello]

The bias on Sunday changed from outside closer earlier to fair later on. This race is why Horizontals are great. On Saturdays inside rail bias review Nyqust was my single...with the mud and fair track I used both and pounded a Win bet on Exaggerator due to the 5-2 price.

Now for Nyquist....not sure if it's O'Neill or Mario, but it is time they stop making this horse the victim of fast paces by refusing to yield and stalk. It is obvious this horse has a tremendous will to win but he also has a target on his back and will not be allowed an easy lead. LET HIM STALK. I believe his running style is more human ego that he can resist all early challenges and still
win than the horses need to be on the lead. If this guy was allowed to stalk and not get victimized in insane speed duels the results just may have been different.

[CincyHorseplayer]

You know I respect your opinion and fully understand what you are saying about MTH and the quality of these horses, but let's look at this another way.

The horses that were part of the pace were American Freedom, Nyquist, and Awesome Slew. Gun Runner was there early, eased back, and then got involved again a little early.

Of those horses, Awesome Slew quit badly, Nyquist ran below what most expected given his Derby and Preakness form, Gun Runner was a disappointment, and American Freedom ran very well.

So 3 of the 4 horses up close ran worse than expected.

The closers were Exaggerator (who ran well) and Sunny Ridge (who exceeded expectations).

When you combine that with a pre race analysis of the horses' running styles that suggested the pace could be lively and a post race analysis of the fractions that suggest it was in fact lively, it's hard to conclude anything other than the pace and race flow probably favored the off the pace horses.

There COULD be other reasons Nyquist and Gun Runner disappointed (Nyquist missed some training and Gun Runner may not be as good on an off track), but I think the evidence still suggests the pace and race development was at least part of the issue.

I know, we have a mutual and mutuel respect Class. I am looking at it in a completely different way than anybody trying to make sense of it in any traditional manner. I am looking specifically at Exaggerator's trip. To break back, need to be forced up on the backstretch early, go wide, get to the lead, AND start to draw away. This was NOT an ideal trip where he sat in the garden spot and made the balcony move on a course like Belmont. It was such a topsy turvy ride for him that between that and what I see regularly with my own eyes at Monmouth I am impressed with the way he did what he did. Because I have seen soooo many races where the number of entrants involved in a duel nor the speed of the fractions matter. I just believe in what I am saying and really only seeing some performances of these entrants later well help me validate or discredit my own thinking. Having someone change my mind beforehand is NOT going to happen! :cool:

[CincyHorseplayer]

And for the record I had no stake in this race. When I have 2 or more horses relative equals and all are 3-1 or less I immediately pass the race. For me it's a waste of a bet. Just how I operate. I don't split hairs. I look forward.

[PressThePace]

I know, we have a mutual and mutuel respect Class. I am looking at it in a completely different way than anybody trying to make sense of it in any traditional manner. I am looking specifically at Exaggerator's trip. To break back, need to be forced up on the backstretch early, go wide, get to the lead, AND start to draw away. This was NOT an ideal trip where he sat in the garden spot and made the balcony move on a course like Belmont. It was such a topsy turvy ride for him that between that and what I see regularly with my own eyes at Monmouth I am impressed with the way he did what he did. Because I have seen soooo many races where the number of entrants involved in a duel nor the speed of the fractions matter. I just believe in what I am saying and really only seeing some performances of these entrants later well help me validate or discredit my own thinking. Having someone change my mind beforehand is NOT going to happen! :cool:

This is why I respect the hell out of you as well. I want you to know I'm not trying to change your mind. You've proven yourself enough to not have to defend your position. Again, this is why I love the game. Much respect.

[CincyHorseplayer]

This is why I respect the hell out of you as well. I want you to know I'm not trying to change your mind. You've proven yourself enough to not have to defend your position. Again, this is why I love the game. Much respect.

Thanks man. Much appreciated and mutual.

[bobphilo]

I am not even guessing you know zero about Monmouth. Cheap speed goes to the front. Orders grilled cheese and tomato soup. Consumes it. Then cruises to the wire. Routinely. Other than the mud puddle, this was an inordinate circumstance especially for a closer to draw away.
Sorry but you know nothing about my knowledge of Monmouth. You apparently know little about the laws of physics and physiology, that do not change from track to track.
I see that you believe there is some mysterious force at play in which the track can magically sense the the hooves of frontrunners and favors them over closers.
You also discount the proven physiological fact that a hot pace is a disadvantage to frontrunners, anywhere in the known universe. I'll take science over myth any day. The results of the Haskell clearly show that the fast pace helped the closers and put the early speed at a disadvantage as Classhandicapper explained so well.
Anyone who has studied research methods knows that when the raw numbers do not make sense and defy the laws of science one must look for confounding variables and find an explanation that makes sense.

[dilanesp]

The bias on Sunday changed from outside closer earlier to fair later on. This race is why Horizontals are great. On Saturdays inside rail bias review Nyqust was my single...with the mud and fair track I used both and pounded a Win bet on Exaggerator due to the 5-2 price.

Now for Nyquist....not sure if it's O'Neill or Mario, but it is time they stop making this horse the victim of fast paces by refusing to yield and stalk. It is obvious this horse has a tremendous will to win but he also has a target on his back and will not be allowed an easy lead. LET HIM STALK. I believe his running style is more human ego that he can resist all early challenges and still
win than the horses need to be on the lead. If this guy was allowed to stalk and not get victimized in insane speed duels the results just may have been different.

I totally agree with that last point. He's not a speed horse. Stop sending him (at least unless a race comes up with no early speed or something).

[cj]

I totally agree with that last point. He's not a speed horse. Stop sending him (at least unless a race comes up with no early speed or something).

I didn't understand it all in the Preakness given all the speed signed on. I kind of expected it in the Haskell given the draw, but why not just ask a little early for position and see how things shake out?

[bobphilo]

I didn't understand it all in the Preakness given all the speed signed on. I kind of expected it in the Haskell given the draw, but why not just ask a little early for position and see how things shake out?
You would have thought that O'Neil would have learned his lesson after the Preakness when he even admitted after the race to making a mistake and sending him early. I guess he has a short memory or he bought the myth that you have to go for the lead at all costs on "speed favoring" tracks. It's a shame to see such a good horse compromised by such poor tactics. Kent D ignored this nonsense and wisely kept off the fast pace. The results speak for themselves.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Sorry but you know nothing about my knowledge of Monmouth. You apparently know little about the laws of physics and physiology, that do not change from track to track.
I see that you believe there is some mysterious force at play in which the track can magically sense the the hooves of frontrunners and favors them over closers.
You also discount the proven physiological fact that a hot pace is a disadvantage to frontrunners, anywhere in the known universe. I'll take science over myth any day. The results of the Haskell clearly show that the fast pace helped the closers and put the early speed at a disadvantage as Classhandicapper explained so well.
Anyone who has studied research methods knows that when the raw numbers do not make sense and defy the laws of science one must look for confounding variables and find an explanation that makes sense.

If science has led you to believe that tendencies if not biases don't exist then science has failed you miserably. It does exist. I have no problem disagreeing with anybody and I left the door open that I can't validate or discredit my own opinion til I see these horses run again to get a better take. After 20 years I have seen the impacts fast paces have on races plenty. I am just not buying into it here. To my ears your post sounds like the sour grapes of a Nyquist fan. Myself other than making a few small observations for a later date saw this as a completely worthless betting race as many of our stakes turn out to be. But these "mysterious forces" have made me plenty of $ over the years and they are real. The laws of physics tell me that because my wallet has gotten fatter and it's bulging in my pocket and making me uncomfortable! :cool:

[bobphilo]

If science has led you to believe that tendencies if not biases don't exist then science has failed you miserably. It does exist. I have no problem disagreeing with anybody and I left the door open that I can't validate or discredit my own opinion til I see these horses run again to get a better take. After 20 years I have seen the impacts fast paces have on races plenty. I am just not buying into it here. To my ears your post sounds like the sour grapes of a Nyquist fan. Myself other than making a few small observations for a later date saw this as a completely worthless betting race as many of our stakes turn out to be. But these "mysterious forces" have made me plenty of $ over the years and they are real. The laws of physics tell me that because my wallet has gotten fatter and it's bulging in my pocket and making me uncomfortable! :cool:
Lets get away from bragging about how rich we are. Leave that to Donald Trump. The issue here is whether to disregard the effect pace had on the Haskell as well as the Preakness. All this this talk about how the track is "biased" towards front-runners often fails to recognize some important confounding variables. Many of the races where the track was allegedly "speed favoring" were won by front runners who either got away with an early pace within their capabilities or were superior enough to their rivals that they could overcome the disadvantage of a very fast early pace or where the closers had traffic problems or went wide. Exclude these cases and the "track bias" shrinks to insignificance. Every race must be approached as a unique challenge where the abilities and pace capabilities of the horses running in that are the deciding factors. This is true at any track.
The Haskell was a perfect example were we had 2 horses, Nyquist and Exagerator, of roughly equal ability, where the early pace was a major factor in the outcome and the myth of track "speed bias" was exposed as junk science with Nyquist's defeat. The same was true of the Preakness, another so-called "speed favoring' track, where Nyquist's connections also bought into that myth and got him beat.
Andy Beyer, in his early writings, claimed pace had no effect on speed ratings. He fortunately later corrected himself and acknowledged the importance of fast early fractions.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Lets get away from bragging about how rich we are. Leave that to Donald Trump. The issue here is whether to disregard the effect pace had on the Haskell as well as the Preakness. All this this talk about how the track is "biased" towards front-runners often fails to recognize some important confounding variables. Many of the races where the track was allegedly "speed favoring" were won by front runners who either got away with an early pace within their capabilities or were superior enough to their rivals that they could overcome the disadvantage of a very fast early pace or where the closers had traffic problems or went wide. Exclude these cases and the "track bias" shrinks to insignificance. Every race must be approached as a unique challenge where the abilities and pace capabilities of the horses running in that are the deciding factors. This is true at any track.
The Haskell was a perfect example were we had 2 horses, Nyquist and Exagerator, of roughly equal ability, where the early pace was a major factor in the outcome and the myth of track "speed bias" was exposed as junk science with Nyquist's defeat. The same was true of the Preakness, another so-called "speed favoring' track, where Nyquist's connections also bought into that myth and got him beat.
Andy Beyer, in his early writings, claimed pace had no effect on speed ratings. He fortunately later corrected himself and acknowledged the importance of fast early fractions.

I'm just trying to inject some humor into this because it's obvious we disagree and I'm fine with that Bob! I get what you are saying completely. And I am not entrenched in my opinion as I alluded to. This is what makes the game. Nothing to debate really. Nothing to "win" by trying to convince each other of what we think. If a horse stops winning running in the same manner he did to rack up a bunch of wins maybe he has topped out. It was possible with his sire to that the precocity runs out of gas. I think that Exaggerator ran a better race than given credit for and Nyquist ran a worse effort than many believe. Pure pace duel in fast fractions for top shelf horses in my mind can be an overblown factor. And we can leave any trace of any bias discussion out of it because I still think that regardless. I still need more evidence of what I suspect so I cannot proceed any further with my argument til then. I am out of gas til I see more races. Just like Nyquist was out of gas!

[whodoyoulike]

... The laws of physics tell me that because my wallet has gotten fatter and it's bulging in my pocket and making me uncomfortable! :cool:

Is it really the laws of physics or just simply biology which is causing the bulge in your pocket and making you uncomfortable?

And, just for clarification that you're getting this bulge from watching horses?

[CincyHorseplayer]

Is it really the laws of physics or just simply biology which is causing the bulge in your pocket and making you uncomfortable?

And, just for clarification that you're getting this bulge from watching horses?

Pleading the 5th!

[chadk66]

Considering the expected field right now for the BC I think the connections of Nyquist will have a big question mark on whether or not they want to tangle with those horses.

[rastajenk]

Dirt Mile might be a better fit for him.

[cj]

Dirt Mile might be a better fit for him.

Why in the world would the Derby winner bother with the Dirt Mile? If that is the best he can do may as well send him to the shed.

[rastajenk]

Maybe they're more sporting than that; I don't know. :D Good seats, free money...

[chadk66]

The derby winner isn't what he was on Derby day anymore. And I can't imagine they would want to run against CC, Dortmund, a couple other tough older horses and let alone Exagerator again. If he had a chance at horse of the year it would be one thing. But that ship sailed.

[anotherCAfan]

Nyquist ought to take it easy for a couple of weeks. Perhaps he could come back in the Los Al Derby as a prep race, or the Awesome Again.

It's probably going to be 90 degrees and bone dry for BC at Santa Anita. I like his chances more than Exaggerator's.

[chadk66]

grass?