Espinoza blow It? CC Breeders Cup Cl

[JustRalph]

I've watched the replay several times

I think Victor got his horse beaten. He should have been all out earlier and maybe his horse would have gotten into a better rhythm.

Look at the demeanor of Smith and Arrogate and the "all out" rhythm they got into in the last 1/16th. Compare that with Espinoza standing half way up, etc.

I think he thought he had it won. Not today........

[horses4courses]

I've watched the replay several times

I think Victor got his horse beaten. He should have been all out earlier and maybe his horse would have gotten into a better rhythm.

Look at the demeanor of Smith and Arrogate and the "all out" rhythm they got into in the last 1/16th. Compare that with Espinoza standing half way up, etc.

I think he thought he had it won. Not today........

The pace was fast.
Two excellent horses, and one came up half a length short.
Could Espinoza have ridden a different race to get the win?
Possibly, but we'll never know, and it's hardly worth discussing.

[EMD4ME]

I've watched the replay several times

I think Victor got his horse beaten. He should have been all out earlier and maybe his horse would have gotten into a better rhythm.

Look at the demeanor of Smith and Arrogate and the "all out" rhythm they got into in the last 1/16th. Compare that with Espinoza standing half way up, etc.

I think he thought he had it won. Not today........

I am kinda happy he lost but calling a spade a spade, it was a piss poor ride on a horse getting the ultimate trip.

This is why I hate it when people shout accollades to all these average joe shmos.

They're not perfect, not anywhere near it.

I had the winner but how stupid and dense was Castellano on Flintshire from the 3/4 to the 1/2? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[SuperPickle]

Ever the shit stirrer......... :rolleyes:

The pace was fast.
Two excellent horses, and one came up half a length short.
Could Espinoza have ridden a different race to get the win?
Possibly, but we'll never know, and it's hardly worth discussing.

The only exception I take is with the fast pace. He was on a clear lead to a :47 half. Also it was a two horse race with the other horse stalking. Considering there was no threat from behind and the track organically favors speed he got his trip and then some. The pace was not fast.

He got beat by a better horse and a better rider.

In terms of legacy Crome was one of the top horses of his time. A great horse? Absolutely not.

[WJ47]

I think he blew it. Twitter was so funny with many critiques of his ride. :)

[PaceAdvantage]

Possibly, but we'll never know, and it's hardly worth discussing.I'll be sure to have every post made here forwarded to your email address for you to review and approve before it goes live.

[GMB@BP]

Its so easy to be critical after the race....top of the stretch chrome was 1/5 to win that race with that trip...he got beat by a better horse.

Also, Victor never looks good in the saddle, saying he is not the most fluid of riders is not something that means much in regard to this race.

[JustRalph]

I'll be sure to have every post made here forwarded to your email address for you to review and approve before it goes live.

I saw his original post before your edit. The usual BS, as he continues to stalk me. He a loser.

The more I watch the replay, the more I think Espinoza blew it. In spite of H4C's pace comment, it was not a fast pace for Chrome. If Espinoza had been riding him all out from the top of the turn, I think he wins

[PaceAdvantage]

I saw his original post before your edit. The usual BS, as he continues to stalk me. He a loser.

The more I watch the replay, the more I think Espinoza blew it. In spite of H4C's pace comment, it was not a fast pace for Chrome. If Espinoza had been riding him all out from the top of the turn, I think he winsHis pace advantage was negated by Espinoza in the stretch then, turning it into an even matchup. Don't forget how wide Arrogate was on the turns...no way is anyone going to tell me Arrogate had a better trip...

[menifee]

Once Arrogate didn't go, I thought VE's mistake was not setting a fast pace and forcing Arrogate to keep up in the early part of the race. I expected quicker fractions.

I've watched a lot of racing and I think the worst thing you can do when you are quality speed is to not use it if the race is longer than your horse's ideal distance. I've always thought of Chrome as being best at a mile and an eighth (though he has won plenty at a mile and quarter). He needed to bottom out that field. If you slow your horse down up front and let Arrogate gallop comfortably behind you then you are turning the race into an all out sprint in the last quarter which is not Chrome's best quarter. If he goes early, then he forces Arrogate to chase at a high speed and pass in the stretch which is extremely hard to do.

I'm not sure it made a difference, perhaps Arrogate is the better horse right now, but I would be curious to see that race if Arrogate was forced to keep up early.

[Rex Phinney]

BS on the ride.

Chrome is not a sustained grinder type horse, he is a blaster. He holds the lead or lingers within a length of the lead and has a blast of a run usually good for one furlong.

Watch his races, never in a 10 furlong race has he been able to carry his speed to the line, even when he has won it was because the cannon blast buried the field, not because he stayed on with it. Always he was slowing by the time he hit the wire.

The idea he could start doing his best running a half mile from the wire and win against a field like this one at 10 furlongs is crazy.

[depalma113]

Chrome had one shot to hold off Arrogate and Espinoza knew it. He waited until the last possible second to ask for everything Chrome had. Chrome gave it to him. He ran the race of his life.

[classhandicapper]

I rarely complain about a ride, but I didn't really like the ride on CC either (I had no bet in the race).

First, I didn't see much of a sign the rail was bad yesterday (pending review of the card), yet Espinoza had him well out on the track while loose on the lead on the second turn. Why? He ran over 20 feet further than Frosted and Hoppertunity. One of the reasons speed is dangerous even though the horse is being used harder early is that you get to save ground.

Second, the one advantage CC has always had against other Grade 1 horses is his turn of foot. He's simply a lot quicker than most horses. I think the correct move would have been to use him at the top of the stretch to open up 2-3 lengths instead of waiting until the 1/8th pole to get into him. Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference. It might have even been worse. But I'd rather open up once you get to the top of the stretch than wait until the 1/8th pole and keep the potentially better finisher in the game.

[Robert Fischer]

Chrome got an easy lead, set reasonable fractions and fired his 'A' race.

The rest is trivial minutiae. Trifling, even. :p :D


Arrogate ran 17 more feet of ground, had to manage a few paths on the turn, and finished his final furlong in under 12 seconds.

Espinoza's ride was fine. He gets somewhere between an A- and an A+ for the ride.

Mike Smith's finish was pretty good. Inside Melatonin, and then back outside Chrome. We can quibble about his early position, when we've had enough of the petty banter about Espinoza. Mike gets somewhere between an A- and an A+ as well.

This was a high quality race and two good horses ran huge, and the better horse, won.

[classhandicapper]

I have one comment on the pace. I don't think the pace was fast relative to the outstanding final time, but I think it was fast compared to the norms/PAR for Grade 1 horses the way that track was playing. That's why the other horses that were close stopped so badly.

Melatonin ran a final figure of 96.

Frosted ran a 91.

Effinex ran a an 84.

They didn't ALL just happen to run bad races in a race they were aiming for. They all got used up chasing CC because he was motoring at a much higher level than they are capable of - on a track that would not carry them.

That's not the race flow of a race with a soft pace. It's the race flow of a solid pace relative to the surface yesterday with only 2 horses good enough to handle it.

[classhandicapper]

I had the winner but how stupid and dense was Castellano on Flintshire from the 3/4 to the 1/2? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That was a bad ride.

The winner picked it up in the quarter where he opened up, but in nothing close to an extreme enough way where the right thing to do was to be patient. Even if he allowed the winner to to open a little by being used (which I would be fine with), you can't let him totally run away with the race while he's not even using his horse super hard. To be fair, I'm not sure many other horses in the world could have pulled than off and lasted, but he had to know who that was on the lead.

[Exotic1]

His pace advantage was negated by Espinoza in the stretch then, turning it into an even matchup. Don't forget how wide Arrogate was on the turns...no way is anyone going to tell me Arrogate had a better trip...

:ThmbUp:

[ArlJim78]

Chrome ran the race of his life, I'm sure the figures will bear that out. He was 11 lengths clear of Keen Ice at the wire. He accelerated at the top of the stretch, increased his lead and looked unbeatable for a moment. He simply got beat by a freakishly talented horse. Chrome beats every horse in the country with that effort save for one. I'm a huge Chrome fan and that race did not change my admiration for him one bit and there was nothing Victor could have done to prevent what happened. Arrogate was 3 wide on the first turn. I hope this horse races some more because what he did and how he moves is really something special.

[burnsy]

Chrome got an easy lead, set reasonable fractions and fired his 'A' race.

The rest is trivial minutiae. Trifling, even. :p :D


Arrogate ran 17 more feet of ground, had to manage a few paths on the turn, and finished his final furlong in under 12 seconds.

Espinoza's ride was fine. He gets somewhere between an A- and an A+ for the ride.

Mike Smith's finish was pretty good. Inside Melatonin, and then back outside Chrome. We can quibble about his early position, when we've had enough of the petty banter about Espinoza. Mike gets somewhere between an A- and an A+ as well.

This was a high quality race and two good horses ran huge, and the better horse, won.

Agreed, and that cost me two doubles when CC lost. Arrogate is better than I thought he was. Those horses were 11 lengths ahead of the field at the end. He is by far the best 3 yo and probably the fastest dirt horse in the world right now at 10 furlongs. What can you say about Bob Baffert? He gets 3 in a row and two of them "prep" in the Travers. If this horse continues on, the sky is the limit.

The way the last month has been going gambling wise, I should of known. I've been slumping and taking right turns where I should of gone left. I cashed two tickets, but it was minor money and could not make up for my other loses. When I posted CC would beat this horse I should of known better and thrown him in one double. After Cigar Mile weekend, I'll take a break, my intuition has been awful lately.

If they ran that race 10 times, this horse probably wins 8 or 9. He had dead aim on Chrome once Smitty got him going. Espinoza did what he's done for the last three years (damn he gets good horses), the other horse is a world beater. The track was really fair this year for SA standards and several of them were "reeled in" late. The fact that Arrogate won it the way he did, makes it even more impressive though.

[Robert Fischer]

Agreed, and that cost me two doubles when CC lost. Arrogate is better than I thought he was. Those horses were 11 lengths ahead of the field at the end. He is by far the best 3 yo and probably the fastest dirt horse in the world right now at 10 furlongs. What can you say about Bob Baffert? He gets 3 in a row and two of them "prep" in the Travers. If this horse continues on, the sky is the limit.

The way the last month has been going gambling wise, I should of known. I've been slumping and taking right turns where I should of gone left. I cashed two tickets, but it was minor money and could not make up for my other loses. When I posted CC would beat this horse I should of known better and thrown him in one double. After Cigar Mile weekend, I'll take a break, my intuition has been awful lately.

If they ran that race 10 times, this horse probably wins 8 or 9. He had dead aim on Chrome once Smitty got him going. Espinoza did what he's done for the last three years (damn he gets good horses), the other horse is a world beater. The track was really fair this year for SA standards and several of them were "reeled in" late. The fact that Arrogate won it the way he did, makes it even more impressive though.

take a break, keep an open mind, and 'bet a little to win a lot' for a while :ThmbUp:



for the Espinoza critics:

If Ifs and Ands were pots and pans,
’Twould cure the tinker's cares:
if ladies did not carry fans,
They’d give themselves no airs:
If down the starry skies should fall,
The starlings would be cheap:
If Belles talk'd reason at a ball,
The band might go to sleep.

[EMD4ME]

Awesome move by mike smith at the 3/8, ducking in with momentum, to save ground instead of spending wide to pass a tired chaser.

Excellent move.

[bobphilo]

Once Arrogate didn't go, I thought VE's mistake was not setting a fast pace and forcing Arrogate to keep up in the early part of the race. I expected quicker fractions.

I've watched a lot of racing and I think the worst thing you can do when you are quality speed is to not use it if the race is longer than your horse's ideal distance. I've always thought of Chrome as being best at a mile and an eighth (though he has won plenty at a mile and quarter). He needed to bottom out that field. If you slow your horse down up front and let Arrogate gallop comfortably behind you then you are turning the race into an all out sprint in the last quarter which is not Chrome's best quarter. If he goes early, then he forces Arrogate to chase at a high speed and pass in the stretch which is extremely hard to do.

I'm not sure it made a difference, perhaps Arrogate is the better horse right now, but I would be curious to see that race if Arrogate was forced to keep up early.

It is to a front runner's advantage to try to to slow the pace. If Chrome goes faster early he tires more at the end. Besides what makes you think that Arrogate would tire more chasing than Chrome who would in going even faster? Best horse won.

[EMD4ME]

I find it amazing how even in 6 million dollar races , jocks don't know how and when to whip left handed.

Mind boggling how bad these guys are at being great.

[Tom]

I thought the ride was ok.
Both Smith and Baffert said they thought Chrome was drawing away in the stretch, but Arrogare dug in.

I think we are looking at the heir apparent.
Too run his travers and me and then back it up takes more than race riding.

The 3yo is the goods.

Of course, I could be wrong.

[bobphilo]

I find it amazing how even in 6 million dollar races , jocks don't know how and when to whip left handed.

Mind boggling how bad these guys are at being great.

That's why Beyer calls them "little pinheads".

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

[Secondbest]

The race was run in 2:00. Chrome never ran faster.He was all out and lost to a better horse .

[Hank]

A tough and seasoned 5 year old champion loose on the lead and running the race of his life, is run down by a 3 yo colt that was a maiden 6 months ago AND............... the jock got him beat. :lol: :lol:

[Robert Fischer]

Awesome move by mike smith at the 3/8, ducking in with momentum, to save ground instead of spending wide to pass a tired chaser.

Excellent move.

Agreed, awesome turn by Mike Smith. Mastery.


also, clean out some old messages from your PM box. It's 'full':

EMD4ME has exceeded their stored private messages quota and can not accept further messages until they clear some space.

[Rex Phinney]

His entire career people have questioned Chrome's willingness with horses to his outside.

As Mike Smith brought Arrogate off the rail for the stretch run that's all I could think about.

Money Mike is pretty damn good.

[bobphilo]

Both horses duplicated their best TimeformUS figures and both jocks got the best out of their horses. Result was not an upset. Best horse won.

[ronsmac]

His pace advantage was negated by Espinoza in the stretch then, turning it into an even matchup. Don't forget how wide Arrogate was on the turns...no way is anyone going to tell me Arrogate had a better trip...Arrogate wasn't that wide on the 2nd turn, in fact the winning move was when he angled in.

[bobphilo]

His entire career people have questioned Chrome's willingness with horses to his outside.

Outside, shmoutside. How are they supposed to ride this horse, keep him in the middle of the track and lose multiple lengths? Chrome lost last years Classic due to his wide trip.

He duplicated the best race of his life. He just met a better horse.

[bobphilo]

Arrogate wasn't that wide on the 2nd turn, in fact the winning move was when he angled in.

True, angling in on the far turn was a good move. However, he was 3-wide on the first turn, which is where going wide is more damaging due to to the faster pace there. Beyer describes this.
Arrogate had an OK trip did not have a better one than Chrome.

[Rex Phinney]

Outside, shmoutside. How are they supposed to ride this horse, keep him in the middle of the track and lose multiple lengths? Chrome lost last years Classic due to his wide trip.

He duplicated the best race of his life. He just met a better horse.

I'm making no excuses for Chrome. I'm pointing out the thinking mans nature of Mike Smith.

His ride on Shared Belief against Chrome in 2015 is the best ride any of us will ever see.

[Rex Phinney]

Arrogate changed paths several times on the far turn. That impressed me.

[bobphilo]

I'm making no excuses for Chrome. I'm pointing out the thinking mans nature of Mike Smith.

His ride on Shared Belief against Chrome in 2015 is the best ride any of us will ever see.

No argument with that. Smith is a smart rider.
My point was the reason his swinging out on Chrome in the stretch was a good move had more to do with going outside a horse near the rail in the stretch to keep from getting the door shut on him than with Chrome's supposed idiosyncrasies.

[Rex Phinney]

No argument with that. Smith is a smart rider.
My point was the reason his swinging out on Chrome in the stretch was a good move had more to do with going outside a horse near the rail in the stretch to keep from getting the door shut on him than with Chrome's supposed idiosyncrasies.

Yeah maybe. Espinoza doesn't put Chrome on the rail though, ever. Even yesterday the rail was there for anyone who would take it on either turn inside Chrome. I've long suspected he does this to try and set Chrome up outside any challengers.

It was a classic moment at the top of the stretch when Espinoza looked over his inside shoulder and for whatever reason, Smith wasn't there anymore.

[classhandicapper]

1. Arrogate is a freak that was best.

2. Chrome ran his eyeballs out.

3. Espinoza did not give Chrome his best chance to win given how the race developed.

All 3 of these can be true.

When you are loose on the lead on the second turn and the rail is fine, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be in the 3 path giving up 20+ feet. A major advantage of speed is the ability to save ground over the horses behind you. He should have been on the rail or just off it. Even if he was trying to sucker Smith into coming inside of him into the stretch because he wanted Chrome outside, you can spin out of the turn into the 3-4 path and force him to come even wider or go inside. Instead, he came in out of the turn and made it even easier for Smith to be outside without doing anything.

He also waited until the 1/8th pole to get into him, which allowed the slower footed Arrogate to stay with him for 1/8 of a mile and slowly grind him down. I would have tried to spurt away at the top of the stretch (his usual successful move) and hope the bigger lead would carry him.

This is extreme nitpicking. In 90% of all races he gave Chrome a great ride. But when you get beat in the last 20 yards, these things sometimes matter.

It would be great if we got a rematch in the Pegasus. They are two special horses.

[bobphilo]

Yeah maybe. Espinoza doesn't put Chrome on the rail though, ever. Even yesterday the rail was there for anyone who would take it on either turn inside Chrome. I've long suspected he does this to try and set Chrome up outside any challengers.

It was a classic moment at the top of the stretch when Espinoza looked over his inside shoulder and for whatever reason, Smith wasn't there anymore.
I agree Chrome is almost always ridden wide. This has cost him important races like in last years BC Classic and last years Dubai World Cup.

True Chrome wasn't on the rail, but he was close enough to it to shut down any attempt to pass him on the inside. That's why Espinoza was looking over his inside shoulder.

[bobphilo]

1. Arrogate is a freak that was best.

2. Chrome ran his eyeballs out.

3. Espinoza did not give Chrome his best chance to win given how the race developed.

All 3 of these can be true.

When you are loose on the lead on the second turn and the rail is fine, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be in the 3 path giving up 20+ feet. A major advantage of speed is the ability to save ground over the horses behind you. He should have been on the rail or just off it. Even if he was trying to sucker Smith into coming inside of him into the stretch because he wanted Chrome outside, you can spin out of the turn into the 3-4 path and force him to come even wider or go inside. Instead, he came in out of the turn and made it even easier for Smith to be outside without doing anything.

It would be great if we got a rematch in the Pegasus. They are two special horses.

Chrome is always ridden wide and sometimes it costs him. He mostly gets away with this because of superiority to the horses he faces. Arrogate was the exception. Actually Arrogate lost more ground than Chrome so CC actually had the advantage there.

It would be great to see a rematch in the Pegasus and that would change my mind about caring about the race, but I don't think Arrogate is entered.

[bobphilo]

I'm making no excuses for Chrome. I'm pointing out the thinking mans nature of Mike Smith.

His ride on Shared Belief against Chrome in 2015 is the best ride any of us will ever see.

I'm sad everytime I hear about Shared Belief. He was screwed out of HOY because he was mugged in the Classic, though he went on to beat the HOY in their next meeting.
He would would have given American Pharoah a good fight the next year but had an untimely death. Sad.

[bobphilo]

Chrome is always ridden wide and sometimes it costs him. He mostly gets away with this because of superiority to the horses he faces. Arrogate was the exception. Actually Arrogate lost more ground than Chrome so CC actually had the advantage there.

It would be great to see a rematch in the Pegasus and that would change my mind about caring about the race, but I don't think Arrogate is entered.

What's ironic is that Espinoza himself said in Dubai that Chrome had matured and no longer feared the inside (if he ever did, IMO). I guess the connections ruled otherwise.

[tanner12oz]

was an awful lot of looking around by victor...don't see that a lot with a veteran rider in a big race

[classhandicapper]

Chrome is always ridden wide

I agree. The idea has generally been to get out of the gate fast, shift outside, and make sure they can't pin him down inside under the assumption that he doesn't run as well in there. But when you are already on the lead and clear, that's not much of a threat. When you are clear you can save ground (like he actually did on the first turn yesterday) and spin out later. That's what he should have done on turn 2. He gave up his potential ground advantage as a clear leader for no good reason.

I'm not arguing he was the better horse. I'm arguing that he gave up his chance to win with a mildly inferior horse by not saving ground on turn two and not trying to open up into the stretch.

Let me put it another way, imo, Angel Cordero would have won that race on Chrome. :lol:

[EMD4ME]

I agree. The idea has generally been to get out of the gate fast, shift outside, and make sure they can't pin him down inside under the assumption that he doesn't run as well in there. But when you are already on the lead and clear, that's not much of a threat. When you are clear you can save ground (like he actually did on the first turn yesterday) and spin out later. That's what he should have done on turn 2. He gave up his potential ground advantage as a clear leader for no good reason.

I'm not arguing he was the better horse. I'm arguing that he gave up his chance to win with a mildly inferior horse by not saving ground on turn two and not trying to open up into the stretch.

Let me put it another way, imo, Angel Cordero would have won that race on Chrome. :lol:

100% right :ThmbUp:

[JustRalph]

I agree. The idea has generally been to get out of the gate fast, shift outside, and make sure they can't pin him down inside under the assumption that he doesn't run as well in there. But when you are already on the lead and clear, that's not much of a threat. When you are clear you can save ground (like he actually did on the first turn yesterday) and spin out later. That's what he should have done on turn 2. He gave up his potential ground advantage as a clear leader for no good reason.

I'm not arguing he was the better horse. I'm arguing that he gave up his chance to win with a mildly inferior horse by not saving ground on turn two and not trying to open up into the stretch.

Let me put it another way, imo, Angel Cordero would have won that race on Chrome. :lol:

Agree. I think chrome could have run a new top by just laying it down from the top of the stretch to the wire. By the time Victor gets into him Mike Smith is riding for all he's worth. Just look at the two riders alone in the last 100 yards.

[horses4courses]

The usual BS, as he continues to stalk me. He a loser.

I certainly do not stalk you. You flatter yourself.
Three quarters of the crap you post, I don't go near.

You are negative on just about everything.
When it comes to horse racing, I call you out.
No chance that it was merely the better horse winning?

You, and others, are correct about the pace.
It was not very fast, but it was a true run race.
No excuses for either horse.

[cj]

It would be great to see a rematch in the Pegasus and that would change my mind about caring about the race, but I don't think Arrogate is entered.

Nobody is entered. Slots were bought, and Arrogate's connections can buy one. Surely they wouldn't mind coughing up at least the one million asking price, probably more, but hard to think they would have to do so.

[cj]

Arrogate was not losing that race no matter what Victor tried. The best horse won.

[bobphilo]

Arrogate was not losing that race no matter what Victor tried. The best horse won.

Agreed. I'm no fan of Espinoza but he is getting a bum rap here. Funny how nobody was criticizing him when he looked like a a winner until the very end.

It's not like Chrome was coming into the stretch with a full tank. Victor knew how much horse he had left and tried to sustain whatever energy he had left to the wire. If he had squeezed the lemon dry too soon he would have tired more and lost by even more. Arrogate was just too good.

[dilanesp]

Agreed. I'm no fan of Espinoza but he is getting a bum rap here. Funny how nobody was criticizing him when he looked like a a winner until the very end.

It's not like Chrome was coming into the stretch with a full tank. Victor knew how much horse he had left and tried to sustain whatever energy he had left to the wire. If he had squeezed the lemon dry too soon he would have tired more and lost by even more. Arrogate was just too good.

I like Espinosa more than you do, but I agree. Best horse won.

[dilanesp]

Agreed, and that cost me two doubles when CC lost. Arrogate is better than I thought he was. Those horses were 11 lengths ahead of the field at the end. He is by far the best 3 yo and probably the fastest dirt horse in the world right now at 10 furlongs. What can you say about Bob Baffert? He gets 3 in a row and two of them "prep" in the Travers. If this horse continues on, the sky is the limit.

The way the last month has been going gambling wise, I should of known. I've been slumping and taking right turns where I should of gone left. I cashed two tickets, but it was minor money and could not make up for my other loses. When I posted CC would beat this horse I should of known better and thrown him in one double. After Cigar Mile weekend, I'll take a break, my intuition has been awful lately.

If they ran that race 10 times, this horse probably wins 8 or 9. He had dead aim on Chrome once Smitty got him going. Espinoza did what he's done for the last three years (damn he gets good horses), the other horse is a world beater. The track was really fair this year for SA standards and several of them were "reeled in" late. The fact that Arrogate won it the way he did, makes it even more impressive though.

Remember that what a gambler perceives as bad decisionmakimg is usually just statistical variance.

[ronsmac]

True, angling in on the far turn was a good move. However, he was 3-wide on the first turn, which is where going wide is more damaging due to to the faster pace there. Beyer describes this.
Arrogate had an OK trip did not have a better one than Chrome.
The ground loss was minimal. There's very little separating both horses.

[bobphilo]

The ground loss was minimal. There's very little separating both horses.

Didn't someone post that according to Trakus Arrogate ran 17 feet (about 2 lengths) further than Chrome. Fortunately it wasn't enough to affect the outcome.

[no breathalyzer]

first time i been on since yesterday.. good to see people out there see it the way i did and i wasn't acting delusional yesterday. That ride sucked period.. Mike Smith always cost me money :mad: but his ride was great once again

[bobphilo]

Nobody is entered. Slots were bought, and Arrogate's connections can buy one. Surely they wouldn't mind coughing up at least the one million asking price, probably more, but hard to think they would have to do so.
Doesn't putting up a million bucks mean you are entered? I guess if all the slots are bought you can buy someone else's slot/entry.

[PaceAdvantage]

first time i been on since yesterday.. good to see people out there see it the way i did and i wasn't acting delusional yesterday. That ride sucked period.. Mike Smith always cost me money :mad: but his ride was great once againIf you're going to hang your hat on a jock not giving a 100% perfect ride...well...then...I guess Chrome ain't as good as you thought he was.


OR


Arrogate is just a freakin' monster who deserves HOY... :lol:

[JustRalph]

Arrogate was not losing that race no matter what Victor tried. The best horse won.

On your numbers, Did he improve in any facet over his last race?

I wonder if he's peaked?

[pandy]

I picked Arrogate and it was obvious that if he ran anywhere near as good yesterday as he did in his sensational Travers win no one could beat him. Chrome is a fast horse, Arrogate is faster. Both of my computer sytems picked Arrogate. Bris speed figs had Arrogate with a whopping 124 to Chrome's 112. Timeform had him faster. He's the only horse in history who ran 10 furlongs at Saratoga faster than two minutes, which I personally felt was one of the most powerful performances i've ever seen, maybe the best in the last twenty years. The fact that Chrome was so close to this monster is a testament to his class.

The result had nothing to do with either jockey. A few people said that Chrome should have tried to bottom out the field. It was not a one mile race. If Espinoza pushed Chrome to a faster pace, he still would have finished 2nd, but he would have gotten even more criticism from people who would have wondered why the heck he set such a fast pace.

[bobphilo]

Doesn't putting up a million bucks mean you are entered? I guess if all the slots are bought you can buy someone else's slot/entry.
If Arrogate's connections want to go to the Pegasus I'm sure they can buy Runhappy's slot for cheap. :D

So far they're just talking about bringing him back next year. Baffert is talking about sending Hoppertunity there.

[bobphilo]

I picked Arrogate and it was obvious that if he ran anywhere near as good yesterday as he did in his sensational Travers win no one could beat him. Chrome is a fast horse, Arrogate is faster. Both of my computer sytems picked Arrogate. Bris speed figs had Arrogate with a whopping 124 to Chrome's 112. Timeform had him faster. He's the only horse in history who ran 10 furlongs at Saratoga faster than two minutes, which I personally felt was one of the most powerful performances i've ever seen, maybe the best in the last twenty years. The fact that Chrome was so close to this monster is a testament to his class.

The result had nothing to do with either jockey. A few people said that Chrome should have tried to bottom out the field. It was not a one mile race. If Espinoza pushed Chrome to a faster pace, he still would have finished 2nd, but he would have gotten even more criticism from people who would have wondered why the heck he set such a fast pace.
:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[bobphilo]

The ground loss was minimal. There's very little separating both horses.
I agree the two are close. No one out there can touch them.

[pandy]

I wonder if Jerry Brown or some of the other "sheets" style players picked against Arrogate based on their "bounce theory".

[threegoldstars]

Awesome move by mike smith at the 3/8, ducking in with momentum, to save ground instead of spending wide to pass a tired chaser.

Excellent move.

Best observation yet IMHO. Everything else is conjecture.

[SuperPickle]

Arrogate was not losing that race no matter what Victor tried. The best horse won.

Exactly. It's less about Victor giving a "bad ride" and more about Mike Smith giving his horse a better ride.

I pointed out before the race Smith would stalk with Arrogate and Victor would put Crome on the lead. I think where people are being unfair is once your the lead you are a hunted animal. The downside is you're at the mercy of the other riders. This idea that Victor should/could have opened up forgets the question "how do you know Mike Smith would have let him open up?"

It's just monday morning quarterbacking.

[ultracapper]

BS on the ride.

Chrome is not a sustained grinder type horse, he is a blaster. He holds the lead or lingers within a length of the lead and has a blast of a run usually good for one furlong.

Watch his races, never in a 10 furlong race has he been able to carry his speed to the line, even when he has won it was because the cannon blast buried the field, not because he stayed on with it. Always he was slowing by the time he hit the wire.

The idea he could start doing his best running a half mile from the wire and win against a field like this one at 10 furlongs is crazy.

Excellent post. The strength of California Chrome in his derby trials in SoCal was the explosion he unleashed at the 3/16ths pole. It's what he has done ever since. He either separates from the field, or he puts overwhelming pressure on his running company as they turn for home.

[AltonKelsey]

Agree with most of this.

Watched it again, he sets CC down at the 3/16 where he changed leads.

Still have a hunch the outside paths were better. Espinoza actually did a decent job of staying off the rail except for very late. Smith wanted no part of the rail except for that brief, clever move at the 5/16 .

1. Arrogate is a freak that was best.

2. Chrome ran his eyeballs out.

3. Espinoza did not give Chrome his best chance to win given how the race developed.

All 3 of these can be true.

When you are loose on the lead on the second turn and the rail is fine, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be in the 3 path giving up 20+ feet. A major advantage of speed is the ability to save ground over the horses behind you. He should have been on the rail or just off it. Even if he was trying to sucker Smith into coming inside of him into the stretch because he wanted Chrome outside, you can spin out of the turn into the 3-4 path and force him to come even wider or go inside. Instead, he came in out of the turn and made it even easier for Smith to be outside without doing anything.

He also waited until the 1/8th pole to get into him, which allowed the slower footed Arrogate to stay with him for 1/8 of a mile and slowly grind him down. I would have tried to spurt away at the top of the stretch (his usual successful move) and hope the bigger lead would carry him.

This is extreme nitpicking. In 90% of all races he gave Chrome a great ride. But when you get beat in the last 20 yards, these things sometimes matter.

It would be great if we got a rematch in the Pegasus. They are two special horses.

[bobphilo]

Excellent post. The strength of California Chrome in his derby trials in SoCal was the explosion he unleashed at the 3/16ths pole. It's what he has done ever since. He either separates from the field, or he puts overwhelming pressure on his running company as they turn for home.
This tactic may have worked against weaker competition but there is no way it would have worked against Arrogate. He only would have tired sooner and got beaten worse.
If you look at the fractions he ran a faster split on the turn (that was his breakaway move) but tired enough in the last quarter to get caught by Arrogate. Espinosa rode him as well as he could with what he had in the final quarter and put away the field even more impressively than ever, except for a freak called Arrogate. You're forgetting that he duplicated his lifetime best time and figure. He just faced a rival who topped it.

[bobphilo]

Agree with most of this.

Watched it again, he sets CC down at the 3/16 where he changed leads.

Still have a hunch the outside paths were better. Espinoza actually did a decent job of staying off the rail except for very late. Smith wanted no part of the rail except for that brief, clever move at the 5/16 .

No evidence for a poor rail. TimeformUS analysis confirms this. None of the riders said anything about the rail condition in their comments on strategy. Espinoza kept Chrome wide because he always does.
Smith was not trying to avoid any dead rail. He was forced wide because he had a wide post and faster horses inside of him so he went wider than he wanted to get stalking position.

[CincyHorseplayer]

As players wins and losses matter. And likewise for their records, winnings etc. As fans when we see races this close I just don't see any horse being superior to the other. But I am not butt hurt about either outcome in both the big races. Unless you had some serious short sightedness you had both photo finishers on tickets. Only if you were a homer or a fatal attraction type should either outcome upset you! This is the game at it's best.

[AskinHaskin]

Its so easy to be critical after the race....top of the stretch chrome was 1/5 to win that race with that trip...he got beat by a better horse.



That is all that need be stated in complete summation of the 2016 BC Classic.

[rsetup]

Let me put it another way, imo, Angel Cordero would have won that race on Chrome. :lol:

No. Not against a horse that was able to kick it into another gear.

[cj]

Doesn't putting up a million bucks mean you are entered? I guess if all the slots are bought you can buy someone else's slot/entry.

Most of the people that bought spots don't even own horses if I remember correctly.

[ultracapper]

This tactic may have worked against weaker competition but there is no way it would have worked against Arrogate. He only would have tired sooner and got beaten worse.
If you look at the fractions he ran a faster split on the turn (that was his breakaway move) but tired enough in the last quarter to get caught by Arrogate. Espinosa rode him as well as he could with what he had in the final quarter and put away the field even more impressively than ever, except for a freak called Arrogate. You're forgetting that he duplicated his lifetime best time and figure. He just faced a rival who topped it.

Well then all he has ever faced up to this year's BCC is weak competition because it's the way he's won damn near every race of his career.

[pandy]

Chrome was able to dominant this year, and he drew post 1 a few times, so yeah, Victor rode him aggressively. But before this year he was a horse that rated, stalked, and grinded out a win, so I don't see how anyone can call him a blaster or speed horse. No way he could have reversed the decision with different riding tactics. When you go faster early you come home slower, so he still would've got caught, but in a slower final quarter. Historically, trying to bottom out the field in 10 furlong races has produced very few wins as compared to rating tactics. Espinoza did everything he could and would have won if he had the best horse.

[bobphilo]

Well then all he has ever faced up to this year's BCC is weak competition because it's the way he's won damn near every race of his career.
Nobody is saying Chrome faced weak opposition. He had just never met a horse like Arrogate before.

[pandy]

Nobody is saying Chrome faced weak opposition. He had just never met a horse like Arrogate before.


And imagine if Arrogate wasn't in the race Saturday. Chrome would have went wire to wire and won by 10 lengths or so. He ran a strong race.

[mountainman]

Aside from tactics and the fact that Espinoza's seat looked just putrid on the horse, all those looks backward had to cost his mount some momentum.

Oddly enough, some of those looks struck me as showboating arrogance, while others seemed more apprehensive. Either way, it was an unprofessional ride that I think over-relaxed his mount.

Even on the easiest of leads, good jocks keep subtly busy with the occasional chirp or mild push- just to signal,,"Hey, big guy, reserve yourself, but don't forget we're at work here." Conversely, Espinoza's message seemed: "THIS IS OVER, AND I MIGHT NOT ASK YOU AT ALL."

The rider wanted attention on himself-equal billing with his mount. And that was a fatal mistake.

Just my opinion.

[Mulerider]

Mike Smith's account of the race:

"I'm gonna fool him..." (http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/im-gonna-fool-smith-describes-ride-aboard-arrogate-bc-classic/)

[chenoa]

Aside from tactics and the fact that Espinoza's seat looked just putrid on the horse, all those looks backward had to cost his mount some momentum.

Oddly enough, some of those looks struck me as showboating arrogance, while others seemed more apprehensive. Either way, it was an unprofessional ride that I think over-relaxed his mount.

Even on the easiest of leads, good jocks keep subtly busy with the occasional chirp or mild push- just to signal,,"Hey, big guy, reserve yourself, but don't forget we're at work here." Conversely, Espinoza's message seemed: "THIS IS OVER, AND I MIGHT NOT ASK YOU AT ALL."

The rider wanted attention on himself-equal billing with his mount. And that was a fatal mistake.

Just my opinion.

Agreed, a garbage ride.

[PaceAdvantage]

Aside from tactics and the fact that Espinoza's seat looked just putrid on the horse, all those looks backward had to cost his mount some momentum.

Oddly enough, some of those looks struck me as showboating arrogance, while others seemed more apprehensive. Either way, it was an unprofessional ride that I think over-relaxed his mount.

Even on the easiest of leads, good jocks keep subtly busy with the occasional chirp or mild push- just to signal,,"Hey, big guy, reserve yourself, but don't forget we're at work here." Conversely, Espinoza's message seemed: "THIS IS OVER, AND I MIGHT NOT ASK YOU AT ALL."

The rider wanted attention on himself-equal billing with his mount. And that was a fatal mistake.

Just my opinion.He was looking for Arrogate...and Smith was playing hide and seek with him...I swear, a few times when Espinoza looked right, Smith was sneaking up left, and when Espinoza looked left, Smith was switching and sneaking up right....then when Espinoza looked right again, it was OMG time.... :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

Mike Smith's account of the race:

"I'm gonna fool him..." (http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/im-gonna-fool-smith-describes-ride-aboard-arrogate-bc-classic/)And that article basically confirmed what I wrote on this board right after the race as well as just now in my last reply....thanks for that link!

It's actually pretty damn hilarious and genius on Mike's part if that was what he was actually thinking...of course he got lucky too....

After Mike Smith said Zenyatta was the best horse he had ever ridden, I lost some respect for him, being the giant Holy Bull fan that I am....but he's back in my good graces now...he doesn't get nearly the credit he deserves IMO...he's been just amassing giant wins and giant horses after giant wins and giant horses...he keeps himself in tremendous shape and just keeps chugging along...and although I have never met him, I get the feeling he's the nicest guy in the world.

Bravo Mikey.... :ThmbUp:

[mountainman]

Mike Smith's account of the race:

"I'm gonna fool him..." (http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/im-gonna-fool-smith-describes-ride-aboard-arrogate-bc-classic/)

All this does is confirm that Espinoza was much, much, much, much, much too concerned with what was happening behind him.

At one point Smith actually says "He was waiting for me....."

[Grits]

I think Smith's an incredible rider. He can judge ... when to move as fine as any I've ever watched. JMHO ;)

[mountainman]

He was looking for Arrogate...and Smith was playing hide and seek with him...I swear, a few times when Espinoza looked right, Smith was sneaking up left, and when Espinoza looked left, Smith was switching and sneaking up right....then when Espinoza looked right again, it was OMG time.... :lol:

Ironically, had he been less obsessed with the boogeyman, the boogeyman might have been beaten.

[PaceAdvantage]

All this voluminous self-aggrandizing on Smith's part does is confirm that Espinoza was much, much, much, much, much too concerned with what was happening behind him.

At one point Smith actually says "He was waiting for me....."And it showed...why else would he be looking back like that...he was trying to see if he would have to use his horse...they wanted to save something for the Pegasus... :lol:

[Rackon]

Nobody is saying Chrome faced weak opposition. He had just never met a horse like Arrogate before.

For sure. *No* current dirt horse in the world has met a horse like Arrogate before. The big A is a freak. Plus, A and CC were 11 lengths in front of a bunch of Gr1 horses at the finish.

Arrogate looks like an improving 3YO, can't imagine what he could be at 4.

[PaceAdvantage]

Ironically, had he been less obsessed with the boogeyman, the boogeyman might have been beaten.That's a pretty big might.

Aren't you the least bit blown away with what this horse (Arrogate) has done in his brief career?

Yeah, we have often seen a horse come along and run a giant speed figure under ideal conditions, only to follow up with duds the rest of their career.

But man, to see what he did in the Travers and to see that followed up with something even better...you have to be a pretty jaded horse player or a complete 100% devoted Chromie to not sit in at least some AWE of Arrogate at this point.

[the little guy]

But man, to see what he did in the Travers and to see that followed up with something even better...you have to be a pretty jaded horse player or a complete 100% devoted Chromie to not sit in at least some AWE of Arrogate at this point.


I'm with you. I'm in awe of Arrogate, and think it's great that he came along to remind people what greatness actually looks like. I hope people are able to cut through the fog and understand things both specifically and relatively.

[GMB@BP]

I just wish the pace was faster, not because it would have made it easier for Arrogate but that the final time would have been faster, only reason why the fig was lower, Arrogate can run all day and does it fast.

[EasyGoer89]

Aside from tactics and the fact that Espinoza's seat looked just putrid on the horse, all those looks backward had to cost his mount some momentum.

Oddly enough, some of those looks struck me as showboating arrogance, while others seemed more apprehensive. Either way, it was an unprofessional ride that I think over-relaxed his mount.

Even on the easiest of leads, good jocks keep subtly busy with the occasional chirp or mild push- just to signal,,"Hey, big guy, reserve yourself, but don't forget we're at work here." Conversely, Espinoza's message seemed: "THIS IS OVER, AND I MIGHT NOT ASK YOU AT ALL."

The rider wanted attention on himself-equal billing with his mount. And that was a fatal mistake.

Just my opinion.

Thank you!

78 posts it took to get to this comment about how Espinosa looked like his knees were shot, he was 'cheating' with his seat essentially sitting down on chromes back and his back at a 50 degree angle and not parallel to the ground like every other normal jock has, there's a reason victor has or had less mounts at that current SA fall meet, it was just a matter of time they lost a massive check because of the failure to secure an elite rider.

Was there no elite jock available to ride California chrome? Nobody wanted the mount?

[mountainman]

That's a pretty big might.

Aren't you the least bit blown away with what this horse (Arrogate) has done in his brief career?

Yeah, we have often seen a horse come along and run a giant speed figure under ideal conditions, only to follow up with duds the rest of their career.

But man, to see what he did in the Travers and to see that followed up with something even better...you have to be a pretty jaded horse player or a complete 100% devoted Chromie to not sit in at least some AWE of Arrogate at this point.

Yes..simply amazing. And how about the job Baffert did in training the horse up to it????. However you feel about Espinoza's ride, CC came up big, and it took a titanic effort to beat him.

[Spalding No!]

Yes..simply amazing. And how about the job Baffert did in training the horse up to it????. However you feel about Espinoza's ride, CC came up big, and it took a titanic effort to beat him.
Espinoza rode like he was finally given that controversial breeding right to American Pharoah he always wanted just prior to the Classic.

That's not to say Arrogate wouldn't have beaten him anyways, in fact his antics basically detract from what the younger colt did.

Kind of like when Smith thought about pulling up Zenyatta heading down the Churchill stretch the first time in 2010, often cited as the cause of her monumental upset and detracting from the performance of Blame (and Garrett Gomez).

[Mulerider]

Ironically, had he been less obsessed with the boogeyman, the boogeyman might have been beaten.

Art Sherman:

“It was quite a race. If I had to do it again, I'd like to see Victor (Espinoza) open up turning for home,” said California Chrome's trainer Art Sherman. “He rides him with so much confidence every time. Everybody's upset that he was looking around. He wanted to see where the other horse was. That doesn't bother me. I'd just like to have seen him open up three or four. Maybe he'd have still beaten us.”

I had no dog in this fight, since I didn't bet it and, though I respect Chrome, I'm by no means a Chromie. I will only say that, from my riding experience (and by golly you don't know what fast fractions are until you've been on a mule spooked by a wild hog!), a horse is intensely attuned to what the human on his back is doing...and I think Espinoza turning around two or three times was not a good thing for the horse's focus. And while I know PA wasn't serious about Espinoza wanting to save something for the Pegasus, I don't discount the possibility that Victor might have read too many of his own headlines for races like the Pacific Classic where he coasted Chrome to a win under a hand ride. I agree with Art Sherman in wishing Espinoza had opened him up earlier, and I agree with him when he says that Chrome might have been beaten anyway.

I was surprised by the result only because the order of finish, 10-4, was how my handicapping predicted it. Of course I had Melatonin ranked 3rd and Keen Ice next to last, so there you go.

Arrogate is clearly a monster. I sincerely hope he's not rushed off to the shed, and that we get to see what this magnificent horse can do in 2017.

[bobphilo]

I just wish the pace was faster, not because it would have made it easier for Arrogate but that the final time would have been faster, only reason why the fig was lower, Arrogate can run all day and does it fast.
The final time and figure could have been faster? They ran 2:00 flat on an average track.
The both matched their previous figure tops. The pace was perfect for their best races. If they'd gone faster early they just would have come home slower.

[LottaKash]

Yes..simply amazing. And how about the job Baffert did in training the horse up to it????. However you feel about Espinoza's ride, CC came up big, and it took a titanic effort to beat him.

I agree...CC ran his best race, and, as in many stretch duels between the great and best ones that I have witnessed thru the years, it was simply a sprint to the wire, and the youngster came out on top of that lead and chase scenario....CC gave it his all, imo.. And so too for Arrogate...Great Race !

Oh to be young again... :cool:

[Robert Fischer]

It is hard to be objective.

It is generally not easy to have an accurate insight. On top of that, we have behavioral instincts that insidiously arrogate our point of perspective. - We make a commitment to a strong opinion, and naturally allow our perspective to be governed by an insight that attempts consistency to our commitment.

[rsetup]

Nice to read about the minutiae of the rides. Fact is, Arrogate was zooming by CC at the end. Another stride and he's a length ahead. He broke CC down. If CC goes faster earlier, as his trainer wanted, he collapses earlier. Arrogate was just too much.

[ebcorde]

to see who's behind you. AND RIDE BOY RIDE !!!!!!!!!!! RIDE LIKE M SMITH RIDES.
I think Victor felt he had it, He felt Chrome had enough Pace to hold on.

Chrome would have maintained that lead if Victor urged him to move
Watch his hands he urges Chrome the last 2 jumps.

While Mike urges Arrogate down the entire stretch. That's why Mike is the best. When Mike senses he's got a healthy strong horse in a big race. He drains every ounce from the Horse.

It's okay I enjoyed the day.

[ebcorde]

He was looking for Arrogate...and Smith was playing hide and seek with him...I swear, a few times when Espinoza looked right, Smith was sneaking up left, and when Espinoza looked left, Smith was switching and sneaking up right....then when Espinoza looked right again, it was OMG time.... :lol:

:lol: that's about right.

[delayjf]

Arrogate was not losing that race no matter what Victor tried. The best horse won.

I agree, and I would like to point out that both horses accelerated in the final quarter.

I bet Arrograte because of what he showed in the Travers, and because I felt he was an underlay as the second choice at 9/5, and as a three year old he could even improve. He was the now horse. Watching the stretch run, I felt sorry for CC - he ran a winning race but lost none the less.

[bobphilo]

It is hard to be objective.

It is generally not easy to have an accurate insight. On top of that, we have behavioral instincts that insidiously arrogate our point of perspective. - We make a commitment to a strong opinion, and naturally allow our perspective to be governed by an insight that attempts consistency to our commitment.

So true. That applies to all of us. Some of us realize this and try to minimize our biases.

[ultracapper]

Art Sherman:

“It was quite a race. If I had to do it again, I'd like to see Victor (Espinoza) open up turning for home,” said California Chrome's trainer Art Sherman. “He rides him with so much confidence every time. Everybody's upset that he was looking around. He wanted to see where the other horse was. That doesn't bother me. I'd just like to have seen him open up three or four. Maybe he'd have still beaten us.”

I had no dog in this fight, since I didn't bet it and, though I respect Chrome, I'm by no means a Chromie. I will only say that, from my riding experience (and by golly you don't know what fast fractions are until you've been on a mule spooked by a wild hog!), a horse is intensely attuned to what the human on his back is doing...and I think Espinoza turning around two or three times was not a good thing for the horse's focus. And while I know PA wasn't serious about Espinoza wanting to save something for the Pegasus, I don't discount the possibility that Victor might have read too many of his own headlines for races like the Pacific Classic where he coasted Chrome to a win under a hand ride. I agree with Art Sherman in wishing Espinoza had opened him up earlier, and I agree with him when he says that Chrome might have been beaten anyway.

I was surprised by the result only because the order of finish, 10-4, was how my handicapping predicted it. Of course I had Melatonin ranked 3rd and Keen Ice next to last, so there you go.

Arrogate is clearly a monster. I sincerely hope he's not rushed off to the shed, and that we get to see what this magnificent horse can do in 2017.

I agree entirely with everything I highlighted.

[Robert Fischer]

So true. That applies to all of us. Some of us realize this and try to minimize our biases.

definitely. I'm not immune.

This type of knowledge has been advanced with a lot of energy put into behavioral finance, but it's perhaps most valuable as knowledge of self.

Also, could not resist putting the word 'arrogate' in a sentence. :p

[JustRalph]

Glad to see the thread come back to me a little. Including Art Sherman making the same observation I did.

Not Victor's best moment in my opine

[AndyC]

to see who's behind you. AND RIDE BOY RIDE !!!!!!!!!!! RIDE LIKE M SMITH RIDES.
I think Victor felt he had it, He felt Chrome had enough Pace to hold on.

Chrome would have maintained that lead if Victor urged him to move
Watch his hands he urges Chrome the last 2 jumps.

While Mike urges Arrogate down the entire stretch. That's why Mike is the best. When Mike senses he's got a healthy strong horse in a big race. He drains every ounce from the Horse.

It's okay I enjoyed the day.

So in your opinion CC was loafing and just needed some urging to run faster? I have always had the opinion that a jockey can make a horse run slower but not make em run faster. You don't have to ask a good horse to run faster, they know they are in a race and want to win.

[nijinski]

Glad to see the thread come back to me a little. Including Art Sherman making the same observation I did.

Not Victor's best moment in my opine

You may be right but it's so often damned if you do or don't in this sport
and Saturday the pressure was really on . He would have been crucified if he opened up and and lost by a nose .
Chrome has been well traveled in his career . He's a very professional horse
by all means and I think Victor knew how much horse he had on BC day
And how fit Arrogate was coming into the race .
It was kind of sad to see but Baffert's barn is tough to beat in these situations .
Who knows that better than Victor .

[no breathalyzer]

Aside from tactics and the fact that Espinoza's seat looked just putrid on the horse, all those looks backward had to cost his mount some momentum.

Oddly enough, some of those looks struck me as showboating arrogance, while others seemed more apprehensive. Either way, it was an unprofessional ride that I think over-relaxed his mount.

Even on the easiest of leads, good jocks keep subtly busy with the occasional chirp or mild push- just to signal,,"Hey, big guy, reserve yourself, but don't forget we're at work here." Conversely, Espinoza's message seemed: "THIS IS OVER, AND I MIGHT NOT ASK YOU AT ALL."

The rider wanted attention on himself-equal billing with his mount. And that was a fatal mistake.

Just my opinion.


5 star post here!

[classhandicapper]

I wonder if Jerry Brown or some of the other "sheets" style players picked against Arrogate based on their "bounce theory".

I'm pretty sure they picked CC as a clear most likely winner, but I don't know how much of that was related to a likely bounce. They didn't have the gap between the two horses nearly as large as some other figures and CC had obviously reached his level multiple times and was probably more likely to do so again even without believing in bounce theory.

[classhandicapper]

Yes..simply amazing. And how about the job Baffert did in training the horse up to it????. However you feel about Espinoza's ride, CC came up big, and it took a titanic effort to beat him.

I considered Arrogate's freshening to be a plus for the probability of him running back (or close) to his Travers performance. Baffert excels at training horses up to big races. One could argue that Dortmund's best race of the year came off a layoff.

[dilanesp]

I'm pretty sure they picked CC as a clear most likely winner, but I don't know how much of that was related to a likely bounce. They didn't have the gap between the two horses nearly as large as some other figures and CC had obviously reached his level multiple times and was probably more likely to do so again even without believing in bounce theory.

I should mention this-- Arrogate won, but I still don't think he was worth 8 to 5. Too many things could have gone wrong, and he only won by 1/2 a length full out as it is.

[classhandicapper]

There is a trade off between the extra energy you consume asking a horse to open up and the extra lengths you put between yourself and you opposition by doing so.

The harder you have to ask the horse to open up, the more likely it will cost you late and become a net negative. But if you can open up without asking the horse too hard, you are better off opening up.

I think that's the formula for evaluating that part of the ride.

If he asked for more at the top of the stretch and opened up (as he has often done with CC and as Sherman says he would have preferred), I am close to 100% sure he would have spurted away by another length or two because he was still pretty fresh and IMO he clearly has a better turn of foot than Arrogate.

The question is whether it would have been a net negative or positive.

Maybe it would have been a negative. But I also know that having a little over a length lead at the 1/8th pole in a 10F race is not a very good spot for CC to be in with another very talented foe bearing down on him. He has faded or hung a little late going longer than 9F before.

Cordero would have opened up with a horse like Chrome.

[classhandicapper]

I should mention this-- Arrogate won, but I still don't think he was worth 8 to 5. Too many things could have gone wrong, and he only won by 1/2 a length full out as it is.

I agree.

Before people started discussing this race publicly I was privately thinking of making my biggest bet of the year on Arrogate in the 5/2 or 3/1 range. I was hoping I could get that price because he was coming off a single big effort and sheet players might also think he was going to bounce. My feeling was that he was less likely to run a huge race than Chrome, but more likely to win if he did. I had a higher opinion of Chrome than his Beyer figures, but not as high as Arrogate's Travers. I was counting on Baffert to have him ready to fire another big one more often than the typical horse with a set of PPs like that. I didn't even consider betting him in the 8/5 range. I thought they were both underlays. I wanted no part of betting on or against either one of them at those prices. He was no mortal lock to run that huge again and he didn't dominate anyway.

[rsetup]

Valadorna couldn't get Champagne Room

Mind Your Biscuits couldn't get Masochistic (let alone Drefong)

Not this Time couldn't get Classic Empire

But

Arrogate got California Chrome

and it's all Victor's fault .....

[classhandicapper]

No. Not against a horse that was able to kick it into another gear.

Maybe you are right. I hope we get to find out in a rematch in the Pegasus at 9F next time. I think Arrogate is the better horse (if he can sustain this level), but CC has the better turn of foot. However, he certainly doesn't have the better turn of foot at the 1/8th pole in a 10F race. It appears that Arrogate is just starting to get going at that point. Arrogate looks like a throwback to the freaks that could run all day too.

I didn't say it was Victor's fault.

I said that in 90% of all races he gave the horse a great ride, but imo it was not optimal. If he was my horse I would have preferred he saved ground on the 2nd turn and opened up. Probably would have lost anyway. He, Sherman, and even Smith to some extent seem to agree, but of course Espinoza and Sherman are looking for excuses.

[cj]

I agree.

Before people started discussing this race publicly I was privately thinking of making my biggest bet of the year on Arrogate in the 5/2 or 3/1 range. I was hoping I could get that price because he was coming off a single big effort and sheet players might also think he was going to bounce. My feeling was that he was less likely to run a huge race than Chrome, but more likely to win if he did. I had a higher opinion of Chrome than his Beyer figures, but not as high as Arrogate's Travers. I was counting on Baffert to have him ready to fire another big one more often than the typical horse with a set of PPs like that. I didn't even consider betting him in the 8/5 range. I thought they were both underlays. I wanted no part of betting on or against either one of them at those prices. He was no mortal lock to run that huge again and he didn't dominate anyway.

I can save your keyboard some wear and tear. When you discuss a race, just type "I passed" and press enter. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[cj]

Maybe you are right. I hope we get to find out in a rematch in the Pegasus at 9F next time. I think Arrogate is the better horse (if he can sustain this level), but CC has the better turn of foot. However, he certainly doesn't have the better turn of foot at the 1/8th pole in a 10F race. It appears that Arrogate is just starting to get going at that point. Arrogate looks like a throwback to the freaks that could run all day too.

I didn't say it was Victor's fault.

I said that in 90% of all races he gave the horse a great ride, but imo it was not optimal. If he was my horse I would have preferred he saved ground on the 2nd turn and opened up. Probably would have lost anyway. He, Sherman, and even Smith to some extent seem to agree, but of course Espinoza and Sherman are looking for excuses.

Do we really know Chrome has the better turn of foot? I'm not so sure. I think the post positions dictated the strategies more than anything else. I'd take Arrogate in a match race if he drew inside.

[classhandicapper]

I can save your keyboard some wear and tear. When you discuss a race, just type "I passed" and press enter. :lol: :lol: :lol:


:lol:

I made 3 serious bets on the BC races. 1 for 3. ;)

[classhandicapper]

Do we really know Chrome has the better turn of foot? I'm not so sure. I think the post positions dictated the strategies more than anything else. I'd take Arrogate in a match race if he drew inside.

I agree that post position mattered in how the race developed and that Arrogate is the better horse.

A few times in the first 1/8th mile out of the gate I thought CC made other Grade 1 speed horses look like total slugs when Espinoza asked while trying to get position. That doesn't mean he still has it late in a race.

Arrogate looked fast in the Travers, but I don't think he's as quick as CC and he didn't look at quick on the backside of the Classic. Maybe he hasn't shown it yet.

[mountainman]

I considered Arrogate's freshening to be a plus for the probability of him running back (or close) to his Travers performance. Baffert excels at training horses up to big races. One could argue that Dortmund's best race of the year came off a layoff.

And I would counter that a regression race between the Travers and Bc would even better have optimized the chance of a huge effort Sat.

Don't underestimate the trainer's importance-even with a freak like Arrogate.
Bringing him up to it on works alone required skill and a fine touch.

Bottom line:Baffert knew his horse.

Nor would I so quickly assume that Baffert considered the post-Travers rest period a perfect option-or freshened the horse only to avoid a bounce.

There ARE signs that Arrogate might have physical issues-perhaps serious ones. The kind that dictated scheduling.

Thoroughbred racing doesn't stop being a trainer's game just because the horse's are supremely talented.

[classhandicapper]

And I would counter that a regression race between the Travers and Bc would even better have optimized the chance of a huge effort Sat.

Don't underestimate the trainer's importance-even with a freak like Arrogate.
Bringing him up to it on works alone required skill and a fine touch.

Bottom line:Baffert knew his horse.

Nor would I so quickly assume that Baffert considered the post-Travers rest period a perfect option-or freshened the horse only to avoid a bounce.

There ARE signs that Arrogate might have physical issues-perhaps serious ones. The kind that dictated scheduling.

Thoroughbred racing doesn't stop being a trainer's game just because the horse's are supremely talented.

I was giving Baffert all the credit. If it was almost anyone else, I'd have considered the short layoff a small negative.

[PaceAdvantage]

I should mention this-- Arrogate won, but I still don't think he was worth 8 to 5. Too many things could have gone wrong, and he only won by 1/2 a length full out as it is.I posted Arrogate at 7/5 here on the board, so he was an overlay for me. The only thing I got right on Saturday after a pretty good Friday.

[PaceAdvantage]

There ARE signs that Arrogate might have physical issues-perhaps serious ones.I take it you're talking about not having raced as a 2yo etc.? Or is there something else you've noticed?

[the little guy]

I posted Arrogate at 7/5 here on the board, so he was an overlay for me. The only thing I got right on Saturday after a pretty good Friday.


The way he won, 2:5 may have been the right price. Other than losing the rider, etc, what were the circumstances that would have led to him losing?

Saying 8:5 proved a poor price is...well, for that guy, par for the course.

[dilanesp]

The way he won, 2:5 may have been the right price. Other than losing the rider, etc, what were the circumstances that would have led to him losing?

Saying 8:5 proved a poor price is...well, for that guy, par for the course.

TLG, he won by 1/2 a length. A lot of stuff could have gone wrong.

You accused me of not understanding pace, but this is betting value 101. 8 to 5 shots need to be pretty sure things to represent value

And 2 to 5? I'm sorry, you can't be serious.

[the little guy]

TLG, he won by 1/2 a length. A lot of stuff could have gone wrong.

You accused me of not understanding pace, but this is betting value 101. 8 to 5 shots need to be pretty sure things to represent value

And 2 to 5? I'm sorry, you can't be serious.


We've also already established that you have no clue as to how race dynamics affect results....but, once again, thanks for padding your resume...and adding that in turn, it affects your understanding of what is ( or isn't ) ultimately betting value.

[classhandicapper]

The way he won, 2:5 may have been the right price. Other than losing the rider, etc, what were the circumstances that would have led to him losing?

Saying 8:5 proved a poor price is...well, for that guy, par for the course.

I don't judge the probabilities of horse races by the results anymore than I do with coin flips.

This was my thinking.

How many horses have not paired extreme jump up races like that, let alone paired 120s? (ans plenty)

The probability that Arrogate would duplicate such a incredible Travers performance in the Classic was nowhere near as high as the probability of the typical horse (like CC) running his A race.

If those probabilities were equal, then he would not have been 8/5. He would been 2/5 or 3/5 and deserved to have been that big a favorite.

Furthermore, while I agree with the Beyer figure for the Travers, Thorograph had the 2 horses much closer. So some very smart people didn't even think they were that far apart going in. They thought CC deserved to be favored.

The entire valuation formula for that race was a function of determining the probability of him duplicating it. That he did, says nothing about what a series of horses just like him would do over time.

Maybe I underestimated that probability. That's a tough number to come up with and I'm not that smart. But even if I did, there was no huge margin of safety in 8/5 when you are way less sure your horse is gong to run his A race. I'm not that smart, but I know I was thinking about that race properly before it was run.

[dilanesp]

How many horses have not paired extreme jump up races like that, let alone paired 120s? (ans plenty)

The probability that Arrogate would duplicate such a incredible Travers performance in the Classic was nowhere near as high as the probability of the typical horse (like CC) running his A race.

If those probabilities were equal, then he would not have been 8/5. He would been 2/5 or 3/5 and deserved to have been that big a favorite.

Furthermore, while I agree with the Beyer figure for the Travers, Thorograph had the 2 horses much closer. So some very reasonable people didn't even think they were that far apart going in. They thought CC deserved to be favored.

The entire valuation formula for that race was a function of determining the probability of him duplicating it. That he did, says nothing about what a series of horses just like him would do over time.

Maybe I underestimated that probability. That's a tough number to come up with and I'm not that smart. But even if I did, there was no huge margin of safety in 8/5 when you are way less sure your horse is gong to run his A race. I'm not that smart, but I know I was thinking about that race properly before it was run.

+1

Plus the possibility of a bounce, bad trip, the horse having lost a step during the layoff, Chrome running 3/4's of a length better than he did (1 or 2 Beyer points), the big Travers figure being due to Arrogate being a horse for course at Saratoga, etc.

Really, of all the things for me to get accused of, not understanding value betting is really a weird one. I play poker, and I play it well. Every time I play I calculate probabilities against odds and value bet.

[classhandicapper]

+1

Plus the possibility of a bounce, bad trip, the horse having lost a step during the layoff, Chrome running 3/4's of a length better than he did (1 or 2 Beyer points), the big Travers figure being due to Arrogate being a horse for course at Saratoga, etc.



If it was so easy none of us would be wasting our time discussing it.

I'm a little different than most horse players. I love the sport and intellectual challenge, don't necessarily love the "action". After 40 years I sort of know that my only chance to win is to stay in races where I have some special insights and give myself a solid margin of safety for error in the odds. So that's what I do.

[Robert Fischer]

Was Chrome was an 'A' or a 'B' ??

Conservative/longer sequences
:4::10:A Xb Xc

some even went
:4::10: Xb :2:...

('A+')Compromise longer sequences
an additional 'A' ticket punch, with Arrogate as a lone A.
eg AAA:10:


Cold-blooded value hunter:
:10:A :4:B Xc on the p3's and possibly 4's


I felt Arrogate was both a better horse, and had some value. I felt Chrome was an underlay, but that he could win if Arrogate had a mishap, and that the gap between Chrome's expected performance and the fringe, extreme-scenario-reaches Frosted or Melatonin, was significant.

I just went with 2A's on my p3.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I find it amazing how even in 6 million dollar races , jocks don't know how and when to whip left handed.

Mind boggling how bad these guys are at being great.

EMD, what is your take on left and right hand use of the whip? Are horses trained to respond differently here? I've seen jocks just tap shoulders to get a horse to change leads.....but is there more to whipping than just getting a horse angry so it will run faster, left or right, what does it matter?

[AndyC]

How many horses have not paired extreme jump up races like that, let alone paired 120s? (ans plenty)

The probability that Arrogate would duplicate such a incredible Travers performance in the Classic was nowhere near as high as the probability of the typical horse (like CC) running his A race.

If I am reading TG correctly it gave Arrogate a 42% chance for a new top and a 26% chance of pairing up. They gave CC a 9% chance at a new top and a 33% chance of pairing up.

[bobphilo]

So in your opinion CC was loafing and just needed some urging to run faster? I have always had the opinion that a jockey can make a horse run slower but not make em run faster. You don't have to ask a good horse to run faster, they know they are in a race and want to win.

Agreed. The whip is often overrated and overused. There was a study done with a speed gun that showed that horses actually tighten up when whipped. Many others eventually just ignore the abuse.

[classhandicapper]

If I am reading TG correctly it gave Arrogate a 42% chance for a new top and a 26% chance of pairing up. They gave CC a 9% chance at a new top and a 33% chance of pairing up.

That's from an automated formula. It's probably useful, but it often doesn't reflect what the full thinking over there. I can't recall what their actual bet recommendation was, but I saw their figures and the brief analysis sheet. The horses were closer on figures than on Beyer and they said CC was the most likely winner. I'm pretty sure they didn't recommend Chrome as a bet though.

It doesn't matter either way, but I gave both horses in the 40% range (Arrogate better but Chrome more likely to fire), Frosted in the 10% range, and 10% for a crazy result because I was less sure what Frosted and Arrogate would do . That would technically make Arrogate a small overlay, but I usually insist on a bigger margin of safety to compensate for my own idiocy.

[ebcorde]

Espinoza was trying down the stretch. I was worng on that. but all that looking around may have slowed Chrome down

[EMD4ME]

EMD, what is your take on left and right hand use of the whip? Are horses trained to respond differently here? I've seen jocks just tap shoulders to get a horse to change leads.....but is there more to whipping than just getting a horse angry so it will run faster, left or right, what does it matter?

Since I was in 4th grade, I realized the importance of the whip.

1) It's not to make a horse speed up.

2) It is to remind them of the task AND more IMPORTANTLY, it is a steering mechanism.

3) Since most little pin heads are, like most humans, right handed, they make the mistake of most often whipping right handed when the testosterone is flying through their little veins. HUGE MISTAKE.

4) It is an art. When on the lead, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE to whip your horse left handed WHEN YOU ARE 2 PLUS LENGTHS AHEAD. WHY? Because you are steering your horse outward (where the other pin head is more than likely coming from). As you drift out ever so slightly, you make the pin head behind you either A) check due to sheer stupidity B) decide to dart inside C) think (Jockey A wins right there :lol: ) and make a decision D) They need to come out as well, losing momentum.

4A) Since most pin heads are right handed, by whipping left handed, they also KEEP PUMPING with the stronger arm. THAT IS HUGE. The best jocks pump 1/100 of a second AHEAD of their horse's stride. By whipping right handed and pumping with the weak hand, you are creating a DOUBLE NEGATIVE. Actually triple....why?

5) When the leader whips right handed, pumps with the weak hand, they also are creating the red CARPET for the closer. WHY? Because the closer doesn't have to worry about the horse in front of them coming out. They simply run straight and by.

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


That is chapter #1. There are more chapters but in the interest of time, I will stop there.

[Exotic1]

Do we really know Chrome has the better turn of foot? I'm not so sure. I think the post positions dictated the strategies more than anything else. I'd take Arrogate in a match race if he drew inside.

:ThmbUp:

Swap post positions with CC in post #10 and Arrogate in post #4, does CC ever make it over to flank Arrogate - at any point? With SA track lover Melatonin in there, don't think CC ever gets a chance to flank Arrogate. The far turn shows up and Arrogate is gone.

Ok, so I'm little emotional. I'm a horseplayer.

[cj]

According to my pace figures, Chrome wasn't slowing down at all. The mile pace figure was 132, the final time figure 140 (139 for Chrome). He ran great, had plenty left to finish strong, was just beaten by a better horse.

[EMD4ME]

According to my pace figures, Chrome wasn't slowing down at all. The mile pace figure was 132, the final time figure 140 (139 for Chrome). He ran great, had plenty left to finish strong, was just beaten by a better horse.

And visually, I agree. CC bursted outside the 1/8 pole. Then was outsprinted home.

CC was a Ferrari
Big A was a Lamborghini

[dilanesp]

And visually, I agree. CC bursted outside the 1/8 pole. Then was outsprinted home.

CC was a Ferrari
Big A was a Lamborghini

They ran a fast last 1/4 mile fraction, they pulled 10 lengths clear of the third horse. They were both motoring. It's a great tribute to Arrogate that he was able to win that race, because California Chrome ran a race that wins 99 percent of Grade I's.

[dilanesp]

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


I hate that. In addition to everything you say, it's also animal abuse. If there's no realistic chance that hitting the horse will induce him to run faster (or is needed to steer him, as you say), the jockey shouldn't punish the animal.

[EMD4ME]

I hate that. In addition to everything you say, it's also animal abuse. If there's no realistic chance that hitting the horse will induce him to run faster (or is needed to steer him, as you say), the jockey shouldn't punish the animal.

I love animals more than people. So, yes, I agree with the excessive whipping.

However, I believe the new whips are not the same as old whips. They pop and jocks don't whip like they used to (smack on to skin). They almost hit with the middle of the whip and not the cropping part.

Nevertheless, if you're going to whip, whip the right away.

Victor whipped right handed and then when passed, he went to the left hand.

Now, I won't pretend to know CC inside out anymore. I studied him inside out for the TC but not lately. Some horses respond better to certain techniques. If he is a normal horse, then I see Victor's use of the whip in the BCC as plain STUPID.

When he was up 2 into the lane, it was imperative to go left handed. He didn't.

[AskinHaskin]

There ARE signs that Arrogate might have physical issues-perhaps serious ones. The kind that dictated scheduling.



You mean the scheduling which has had Arrogate going to the track for a work or race every 6 to 10 days for months and months and months now, as is the norm for the best of Baffert's lot?

Arrogate's recent scheduling was a dead ringer for that of American Pharoah.

[bobphilo]

Since I was in 4th grade, I realized the importance of the whip.

1) It's not to make a horse speed up.

2) It is to remind them of the task AND more IMPORTANTLY, it is a steering mechanism.

3) Since most little pin heads are, like most humans, right handed, they make the mistake of most often whipping right handed when the testosterone is flying through their little veins. HUGE MISTAKE.

4) It is an art. When on the lead, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE to whip your horse left handed WHEN YOU ARE 2 PLUS LENGTHS AHEAD. WHY? Because you are steering your horse outward (where the other pin head is more than likely coming from). As you drift out ever so slightly, you make the pin head behind you either A) check due to sheer stupidity B) decide to dart inside C) think (Jockey A wins right there :lol: ) and make a decision D) They need to come out as well, losing momentum.

4A) Since most pin heads are right handed, by whipping left handed, they also KEEP PUMPING with the stronger arm. THAT IS HUGE. The best jocks pump 1/100 of a second AHEAD of their horse's stride. By whipping right handed and pumping with the weak hand, you are creating a DOUBLE NEGATIVE. Actually triple....why?

5) When the leader whips right handed, pumps with the weak hand, they also are creating the red CARPET for the closer. WHY? Because the closer doesn't have to worry about the horse in front of them coming out. They simply run straight and by.

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


That is chapter #1. There are more chapters but in the interest of time, I will stop there.

I hear what you're saying. However as a steering mechanism Trevor Denman has said that in his experience use of the whip causes more interference and DQs than it prevents.

I agree that most of the little pinheads think that the harder they whip the horse the faster they go. Part of this comes from the fact that they are sensitive to charges that they are mere passengers and not real athletes. They have to appear busy.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Thanks EMD! Never realized there was so much to it but I can see what you say and mean here....I'll keep watching how they whip and pump, left and right, closers and speed, and see for myself if I can understand how this dynamic is working on the track, thanks again....maybe later chapter 2, huh?

[classhandicapper]

Since I was in 4th grade, I realized the importance of the whip.

1) It's not to make a horse speed up.

2) It is to remind them of the task AND more IMPORTANTLY, it is a steering mechanism.

3) Since most little pin heads are, like most humans, right handed, they make the mistake of most often whipping right handed when the testosterone is flying through their little veins. HUGE MISTAKE.

4) It is an art. When on the lead, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE to whip your horse left handed WHEN YOU ARE 2 PLUS LENGTHS AHEAD. WHY? Because you are steering your horse outward (where the other pin head is more than likely coming from). As you drift out ever so slightly, you make the pin head behind you either A) check due to sheer stupidity B) decide to dart inside C) think (Jockey A wins right there :lol: ) and make a decision D) They need to come out as well, losing momentum.

4A) Since most pin heads are right handed, by whipping left handed, they also KEEP PUMPING with the stronger arm. THAT IS HUGE. The best jocks pump 1/100 of a second AHEAD of their horse's stride. By whipping right handed and pumping with the weak hand, you are creating a DOUBLE NEGATIVE. Actually triple....why?

5) When the leader whips right handed, pumps with the weak hand, they also are creating the red CARPET for the closer. WHY? Because the closer doesn't have to worry about the horse in front of them coming out. They simply run straight and by.

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


That is chapter #1. There are more chapters but in the interest of time, I will stop there.

Very good post. :ThmbUp:

[classhandicapper]

According to my pace figures, Chrome wasn't slowing down at all. The mile pace figure was 132, the final time figure 140 (139 for Chrome). He ran great, had plenty left to finish strong, was just beaten by a better horse.

IMO, that may argue in favor of Espinoza moving him sooner. Had he spurt away at the top of the stretch CC may have kept running at a similar pace late and Arrogate would have had more ground to make up. Had he been tired late, then you could argue that even if he moved sooner, CC would have just tired even worse.

In either case, IMO, Arrogate was the better horse. But I think it's an interesting debate about how to ride and win with a loose leader.

[Robert Fischer]

Mike Smith had a much better horse and allowed himself to be in a position where it took a heads-up move on the turn and a long drive, to win in deep stretch.

The ride Mike Smith gave maximized Arrogate's chances of contending for the win and minimized Arrogates chances of bottoming out.

He could also have risked gradually come up to Chrome earlier and won by 2 or 3 increasing lengths.

Mike Smith had the option of actually running a faster race. Victor Espinoza did not. Nothing Victor could have done would have resulted in a faster time for Chrome.


Final 5/16 Mile
Arrogate 7.5F 6.20 6.20 5.97 5.97 6.00 FIN
Chrome 7.5F 6.29 6.26 5.97 6.00 6.29 FIN

[threegoldstars]

Since I was in 4th grade, I realized the importance of the whip.

1) It's not to make a horse speed up.

2) It is to remind them of the task AND more IMPORTANTLY, it is a steering mechanism.

3) Since most little pin heads are, like most humans, right handed, they make the mistake of most often whipping right handed when the testosterone is flying through their little veins. HUGE MISTAKE.

4) It is an art. When on the lead, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE to whip your horse left handed WHEN YOU ARE 2 PLUS LENGTHS AHEAD. WHY? Because you are steering your horse outward (where the other pin head is more than likely coming from). As you drift out ever so slightly, you make the pin head behind you either A) check due to sheer stupidity B) decide to dart inside C) think (Jockey A wins right there :lol: ) and make a decision D) They need to come out as well, losing momentum.

4A) Since most pin heads are right handed, by whipping left handed, they also KEEP PUMPING with the stronger arm. THAT IS HUGE. The best jocks pump 1/100 of a second AHEAD of their horse's stride. By whipping right handed and pumping with the weak hand, you are creating a DOUBLE NEGATIVE. Actually triple....why?

5) When the leader whips right handed, pumps with the weak hand, they also are creating the red CARPET for the closer. WHY? Because the closer doesn't have to worry about the horse in front of them coming out. They simply run straight and by.

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


That is chapter #1. There are more chapters but in the interest of time, I will stop there.

The operative word, of course, is "pinhead". Great post, as usual.

[bobphilo]

According to my pace figures, Chrome wasn't slowing down at all. The mile pace figure was 132, the final time figure 140 (139 for Chrome). He ran great, had plenty left to finish strong, was just beaten by a better horse.

One of the biggest optical illusions in racing is that horses are accelerating in the stretch. That only applies to turf races. Front runners are tiring and slowing and closers are just tiring less or just sustaining, giving the optical illusion to race watchers that they are accelerating.

Here are the quarter splits for the Classic:
1st 3 quarters: 23.28 -23.87 -23.81
Last 2 quarters: 24.76 - 24.39

CC was slowing and Arrogate was slowing less, or at best, sustaining. Nobody was accelerating despite the optical illusion that so many race watchers fall for.

This is no knock to either horse. They were both exceptional to come close to their early splits when the rest of the field was left far behind.

[pandy]

Funny, when a rider goes out in a big race, sets a rated pace and wins, people say, "masterful ride, beautifully rated, he stole the race!" Then when a rider sets a rated pace in a big race and loses, "He blew it, he should have set a faster pace!"

There are always second guessers, but the classic had little to do with the riders.

[Robert Fischer]

more trakus related info/interpretation from the battle


Start->1/4Mile:
Chrome jumps out to a relatively big advantage.
After 1/4Mile, Chrome leads in MPH 39.0mph to 38.3mph a 0.7mph lead. Chrome's largest lead in the race, and significant because the pace at which he attained this lead was not pressured. So Far Chrome's 'peak mph' has been 40.5mph, while Arrogate's 'peak MPH' has actually been a faster 40.7mph.

1/4Mile->7/16Mile:
Arrogate strikes back!
Arrogate does hard internal work during these oft overlooked 3/16ths.
By running faster and wider into the 1st turn, he has actually caught and passed Chrome in total MPH. Arrogate now leads in total MPH 38.8mph to Chrome's 38.7mph.

7/16Mile->5/8Mile:
Chrome returns a haymaker of his own!
Chrome stays busy during the next 3/16ths. Chrome has retaken the total MPH lead 38.6 to Arrogate's 38.4.

3/4Mile(6F)->Fin:
Arrogate wears down Chrome.
Arrogate outperforms chrome each of the next 9/16ths.
Final 9/16 Mile splits:
Arrogate 6F 5.97 5.97 6.17 6.14 6.20 6.20 5.97 5.97 6.00 FIN
Chrome 6F 6.03 6.00 6.17 6.29 6.29 6.26 5.97 6.00 6.29 FIN

[Robert Fischer]

aside from the unseemly 'look-backs' by Victor Espinoza, there wasn't a whole lot of room for improvement.

He could have pushed Chrome harder on the 1st turn. (too close to call)
He could have been 'hard urging' sooner before the 2nd turn.(futile)
He could have herded Arrogate out using the left hand whip. (may have been left up by the stewards)

The reality is that Chrome jumped out to a great advantage, and that Arrogate clearly outperformed him.

There is no evidence that Chrome had 'more in the tank'.

[Cratos]

One of the biggest optical illusions in racing is that horses are accelerating in the stretch. That only applies to turf races. Front runners are tiring and slowing and closers are just tiring less or just sustaining, giving the optical illusion to race watchers that they are accelerating.

Here are the quarter splits for the Classic:
1st 3 quarters: 23.28 -23.87 -23.81
Last 2 quarters: 24.76 - 24.39

CC was slowing and Arrogate was slowing less, or at best, sustaining. Nobody was accelerating despite the optical illusion that so many race watchers fall for.

This is no knock to either horse. They were both exceptional to come close to their early splits when the rest of the field was left far behind.
Using Trakus data, the pace for CC and Arrogate in feet/one-fifth second at distance travelled increments of the BC Classic were:

California Chrome:

1/4M = 11.43
1/2M = 11.33
3/4M = 11.28
1M = 11.19
1-1/8M = 11.18
1-1/4M = 11.13

Arrogate:

1/4M = 11.25
1/2M = 11.34
3/4M = 11.26
1M = 11.20
1-1/8M = 11.19
1-1/4M = 11.17

There is little doubt who was slowing down (and it was CC).

The telling point of the race was at the 1-1/8M point of the race at which CC was clocked in 1:47.99 and Arrogate in 1:48.05 which put Arrogate about 3 feet behind CC, but over the next 1/8M, Arrogate would gain to finish .14 seconds or about 8-1/2 feet ahead at the end of the race; a plus one length turnabout from the 1-1/8M point of the race.

[bobphilo]

Using Trakus data, the pace for CC and Arrogate in feet/one-fifth second at distance travelled increments of the BC Classic were:

California Chrome:

1/4M = 11.43
1/2M = 11.33
3/4M = 11.28
1M = 11.19
1-1/8M = 11.18
1-1/4M = 11.13

Arrogate:

1/4M = 11.25
1/2M = 11.34
3/4M = 11.26
1M = 11.20
1-1/8M = 11.19
1-1/4M = 11.17

There is little doubt who was slowing down (and it was CC).

The telling point of the race was at the 1-1/8M point of the race at which CC was clocked in 1:47.99 and Arrogate in 1:48.05 which put Arrogate about 3 feet behind CC, but over the next 1/8M, Arrogate would gain to finish .14 seconds or about 8-1/2 feet ahead at the end of the race; a plus one length turnabout from the 1-1/8M point of the race.

Interesting data. This confirms what I was saying that late acceleration is an optical illusion and the leaders are slowing and the closers are just slowing less, or sustaining at best. Nobody is accelerating. Arrogate was closer to sustaining.

This also shows that Chrome was already beginning to tire at the head of the stretch and tired more in the final 2 eights. It is folly to think that he would have have won had he used what energy he had left to break away at the head of the stretch. He would have just emptied the tank sooner. Espinoza did well to get him home with what he had left.

[EMD4ME]

Guys.....I think you number crunch way too much as it's fogged your super intelligent brains.

In what planet is a horse who just ran 3 sub 24 quarters and then a 24.76 4th quarter, SLOWING DOWN when they re accelerated their 5th quarter to 24.48????

Yes, maybe and PROBABLY CC's last Furlong was slower than his 9th furlong but he was RUNNING in the end, not slowing down more than the BIG A.

I'd understand and concur if the last quarter was in 24.77 or more but not when the 5th quarter was faster than the 4th quarter.

Chrome came home very well, Arrogate came home GREAT.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Since I was in 4th grade, I realized the importance of the whip.

1) It's not to make a horse speed up.

2) It is to remind them of the task AND more IMPORTANTLY, it is a steering mechanism.

3) Since most little pin heads are, like most humans, right handed, they make the mistake of most often whipping right handed when the testosterone is flying through their little veins. HUGE MISTAKE.

4) It is an art. When on the lead, it is ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE to whip your horse left handed WHEN YOU ARE 2 PLUS LENGTHS AHEAD. WHY? Because you are steering your horse outward (where the other pin head is more than likely coming from). As you drift out ever so slightly, you make the pin head behind you either A) check due to sheer stupidity B) decide to dart inside C) think (Jockey A wins right there :lol: ) and make a decision D) They need to come out as well, losing momentum.

4A) Since most pin heads are right handed, by whipping left handed, they also KEEP PUMPING with the stronger arm. THAT IS HUGE. The best jocks pump 1/100 of a second AHEAD of their horse's stride. By whipping right handed and pumping with the weak hand, you are creating a DOUBLE NEGATIVE. Actually triple....why?

5) When the leader whips right handed, pumps with the weak hand, they also are creating the red CARPET for the closer. WHY? Because the closer doesn't have to worry about the horse in front of them coming out. They simply run straight and by.

The most frustrating thing is watching a leader whip right handed,up 4 lengths, then watch the pin head, go to a left hand whip AS OR AFTER THEY ARE PASSED. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


That is chapter #1. There are more chapters but in the interest of time, I will stop there.

In weds Nov 9 2016, in Aqu 2nd race, jockey Jose Lescano changed whip hands and rein hands...study the :4: Jaunt, his mount, path....it looked like Jose changed to left hand whip and the horse took a left hand dive down to the rail to cause a disqualification....

[EMD4ME]

In weds Nov 9 2016, in Aqu 2nd race, jockey Jose Lescano changed whip hands and rein hands...study the :4: Jaunt, his mount, path....it looked like Jose changed to left hand whip and the horse took a left hand dive down to the rail to cause a disqualification....

To me, he saw the rail horse challenger, tried to herd inward and lost the young horse.

Horse didn't veer in due to a whip.


I'll have to rewatch when the HD head on is available to get a better idea.

[bobphilo]

Guys.....I think you number crunch way too much as it's fogged your super intelligent brains.

In what planet is a horse who just ran 3 sub 24 quarters and then a 24.76 4th quarter, SLOWING DOWN when they re accelerated their 5th quarter to 24.48????

Yes, maybe and PROBABLY CC's last Furlong was slower than his 9th furlong but he was RUNNING in the end, not slowing down more than the BIG A.

I'd understand and concur if the last quarter was in 24.77 or more but not when the 5th quarter was faster than the 4th quarter.

Chrome came home very well, Arrogate came home GREAT.

Chrome's last 1/8th was slower than Arrogates. That's when he got caught. That means he was slowing down or he would have won the race. That doesn't mean CC was not ridden well. It took a super race by Arrogate to beat him.

Remember the 4th quarter was run around a turn, where CC was wide, which slows things down.

Nobody is saying that CC did not come home well. I have made clear that Espinoza gave CC a good ride through the stretch. Arrogate, as the better horse, just came home better and tired less in the last 1/8th.

The point is that those that think that CC should have gone faster in the 9th 1/8th don't realize the he would have tired more in the final 1/8th and been beaten even worse.

[ultracapper]

Mike Smith had a much better horse and allowed himself to be in a position where it took a heads-up move on the turn and a long drive, to win in deep stretch.

The ride Mike Smith gave maximized Arrogate's chances of contending for the win and minimized Arrogates chances of bottoming out.

He could also have risked gradually come up to Chrome earlier and won by 2 or 3 increasing lengths.

Mike Smith had the option of actually running a faster race. Victor Espinoza did not. Nothing Victor could have done would have resulted in a faster time for Chrome.


Final 5/16 Mile
Arrogate 7.5F 6.20 6.20 5.97 5.97 6.00 FIN
Chrome 7.5F 6.29 6.26 5.97 6.00 6.29 FIN

The 5.97 and 6.00 that Chrome ran from the 3/16 to the 1/16 pole indicates that Victor actually did what he always does with Chrome, he let him loose at the 3/16ths pole. The more this gets discussed, the more it's apparent that Arrogate is something bigger than anything we've seen in quite some time.

[Cratos]

The 5.97 and 6.00 that Chrome ran from the 3/16 to the 1/16 pole indicates that Victor actually did what he always does with Chrome, he let him loose at the 3/16ths pole. The more this gets discussed, the more it's apparent that Arrogate is something bigger than anything we've seen in quite some time.

I think that you are correct about Arrogate and he reminds me somewhat of Wajima who was a late developing 3yo in 1975; and won the Travers, in addition he beat a stellar field in the 1975 Marlboro Cup (the BC Classic of that time) which included Forego and Foolish Pleasure among some other good horses.

If memory serves me well, he is bigger than Wajima with possible 1-1/2-mile stamina and speed.

[bobphilo]

I think that you are correct about Arrogate and he reminds me somewhat of Wajima who was a late developing 3yo in 1975; and won the Travers, in addition he beat a stellar field in the 1975 Marlboro Cup (the BC Classic of that time) which included Forego and Foolish Pleasure among some other good horses.

If memory serves me well, he is bigger than Wajima with possible 1-1/2-mile stamina and speed.

I was just thinking the same thing. A talented 3YO beating the top older horses.
Of course Forego was having some physical problems that day. He came back and beat Wajima when they next met. On the other hand I think Arrogate beat Chrome at his best and could do it again.

[ultracapper]

Chrome ran a sub 1:42 1-1/16. To think he could have gone much faster than the 11.97 he ran the next furlong in is asking a bunch. To say he should have opened up another 2 or 3 lengths there means you're asking him to follow up 1:41.98 with 11.60 give or take. He would have had ZERO the final 1/16. There are only 2 horse that I would have confidence being able to pull that off. One ran in 1972-1973 and the other ran last weekend.

The horse (CC) could not have run a much better race than he did. He really ran a championship race.

Arrogate is...................................... WOW!!

[bobphilo]

I have one comment on the pace. I don't think the pace was fast relative to the outstanding final time, but I think it was fast compared to the norms/PAR for Grade 1 horses the way that track was playing. That's why the other horses that were close stopped so badly.

Melatonin ran a final figure of 96.

Frosted ran a 91.

Effinex ran a an 84.

They didn't ALL just happen to run bad races in a race they were aiming for. They all got used up chasing CC because he was motoring at a much higher level than they are capable of - on a track that would not carry them.

That's not the race flow of a race with a soft pace. It's the race flow of a solid pace relative to the surface yesterday with only 2 horses good enough to handle it.

Good point. What is a reasonable pace for one horse is suicidal for a lesser horse.

I measure pace relative to final time of the race. However, when there is a large class disparity between horses perhaps we should measure pace relative to final time for each horse.

[dilanesp]

He could also have risked gradually come up to Chrome earlier and won by 2 or 3 increasing lengths.


I don't buy this at all.

[classhandicapper]

Agree with most of this.

Watched it again, he sets CC down at the 3/16 where he changed leads.

Still have a hunch the outside paths were better. Espinoza actually did a decent job of staying off the rail except for very late. Smith wanted no part of the rail except for that brief, clever move at the 5/16 .

I finally got a chance to watch all the races from the 11/4 and 11/5 cards again.

All imho....

Both Friday and Saturday were days that I noted as "outside ok". What that means is that imo being outside and losing ground was not an especially big disadvantage. It also means the rail was not dead or a big disadvantage.

It's more less like saying the outside paths were a little better than the rail, but since you are losing ground it's a wash unless you lost a TON of ground. There was a little evidence of the rail being worse on Saturday than on Friday, but my notes are the same.

So I'd have to take back my view that CC losing ground on the 2nd turn made no sense. He was fine there. I could then only question whether he would have been better off moving sooner. On flip side, I don't think Arrogate was at any big disadvantage racing 3w on both turns. IMO, that was also a pretty good spot to be on that track.

That would also mean that the gap between Beholder and Songbird is probably a lot less than a ground adjusted figure. They were very close on Friday just like the result suggested.

[pandy]

It took years, but it looks like Santa Anita finally has a decent racing surface. If you ran those same races on the biased track from their last two Breeders Cups the races would not have been as good.

[bobphilo]

I finally got a chance to watch all the races from the 11/4 and 11/5 cards again.

All imho....

Both Friday and Saturday were days that I noted as "outside ok". What that means is that imo being outside and losing ground was not an especially big disadvantage. It also means the rail was not dead or a big disadvantage.

It's more less like saying the outside paths were a little better than the rail, but since you are losing ground it's a wash unless you lost a TON of ground. There was a little evidence of the rail being worse on Saturday than on Friday, but my notes are the same.

So I'd have to take back my view that CC losing ground on the 2nd turn made no sense. He was fine there. I could then only question whether he would have been better off moving sooner. On flip side, I don't think Arrogate was at any big disadvantage racing 3w on both turns. IMO, that was also a pretty good spot to be on that track.

That would also mean that the gap between Beholder and Songbird is probably a lot less than a ground adjusted figure. They were very close on Friday just like the result suggested.
The fact that the rail was neither dead nor golden means that path was not a factor except for the ground lost by outside horses. That means that ground loss by going wide was not mitigated by the rail vs. outside. In both cases both Beholder (5 lengths) and Arrogate (a couple of lengths) overcame their ground loss by view of their superiority.

You seem to be implying that since better horses overcame their ground loss that ground loss is insignificant just because your visual impressions don't show that.

[classhandicapper]

The fact that the rail was neither dead nor golden means that path was not a factor except for the ground lost by outside horses. That means that ground loss by going wide was not mitigated by the rail vs. outside. In both cases both Beholder (5 lengths) and Arrogate (a couple of lengths) overcame their ground loss by view of their superiority.

You seem to be implying that since better horses overcame their ground loss that ground loss is insignificant just because your visual impressions don't show that.

In terms you would be comfortable with, I am saying imho the outside paths were just a little faster than the rail. So if you lost a length by being wide, you gained back something by being on the slightly faster path. The net being less than a length. (all imo)

[Cratos]

The fact that the rail was neither dead nor golden means that path was not a factor except for the ground lost by outside horses. That means that ground loss by going wide was not mitigated by the rail vs. outside. In both cases both Beholder (5 lengths) and Arrogate (a couple of lengths) overcame their ground loss by view of their superiority.

You seem to be implying that since better horses overcame their ground loss that ground loss is insignificant just because your visual impressions don't show that.
From the Trakus charts for the BC Classic it can be estimated that:

1st Turn

Arrogate lost about 36 feet or .64 seconds given his rate of pace in the race at that time.

CC lost about 4 feet or .07 seconds given his rate of pace in the race at that time.

2nd Turn

Arrogate lost about the same, 36 feet or .64 seconds given his rate of pace in the race at that time.

CC lost about 30 feet or .54 seconds given his rate of pace in the race at that time.

[Cratos]

In terms you would be comfortable with, I am saying imho the outside paths were just a little faster than the rail. So if you lost a length by being wide, you gained back something by being on the slightly faster path. The net being less than a length. (all imo)
California Chrome ran the fastest velocity of any horse in the race in the 1st quarter when he averaged 11.43 ft/one-fifth sec in path one; I don’t think he would have gone much faster in an outside path.

[no breathalyzer]

:ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: whatever tho