To be Fair To Andy - He said - in his Seminar .. as follows ..

[BeatTheChalk]

The horse with the best chance to win the Triple Crown is ....
( drum roll .. Flourish ) BARBARO. But .. in his comments during the seminar..
one would be hard pressed to know what he really liked :bang: He did talk
about AP Warrior and a few others who ran way up the track. It's a tough
business.

[PaceAdvantage]

His Official top pick in the Daily Racing form was A.P. Warrior. In all fairness, he did list Barbaro second.

Man, I still can't fathom how anyone could favor A.P. Warrior to win the Derby. Hell, even LAWYER RON finished ahead of A.P. Warrior....

[cj]

I think anyone that bet A.P. Warrior has to look in the mirror and say, "I just bet the wiseguy horse of 2006".

[the little guy]

I look in the mirror and say that after every bet I make.

[classhandicapper]

I think anyone that bet A.P. Warrior has to look in the mirror and say, "I just bet the wiseguy horse of 2006".

It's possible the whole CA group was overrated. Point Determined, AP Warrior, and Bob and John all ran poorly. Brother Derek ran OK, but hardly made the case that the CA horses were a very strong group.

I think people were assuming they were high quality races because Brother Derek beat Stevie Wonderboy, continued impressively after that, and the figures fit OK.

Another possibility is that you often learn more about a horse's real ability and seasoning when they get tossed into big competitive fields. All those CA preps were small fields - which was one thing I didn't like about BD and his potential trip in the Derby.

I think you have to give most of those horses another chance later in the year to show what they have. They ran too poorly relative to their figures to believe they fired their best shot. Same with Lawyer Ron. He can't be that bad.

[Niko]

I look in the mirror and say that after every bet I make.

Just saw this today..... :) Funny in a good way

[chickenhead]

I bet AP, so my head is in hung in shame....but only because he ran so poorly. I guess you could say he was the wiseguy, in that a lot of public people liked him, but that certainly wasn't seen at the windows. 14-1? Those aren't wiseguy odds...Steppenwolfer was 16-1, Point Determined was 9-1, Bob and John was 13-1.

I don't mind being on the wiseguy so long as I don't take short odds.

[twindouble]

I bet AP, so my head is in hung in shame....but only because he ran so poorly. I guess you could say he was the wiseguy, in that a lot of public people liked him, but that certainly wasn't seen at the windows. 14-1? Those aren't wiseguy odds...Steppenwolfer was 16-1, Point Determined was 9-1, Bob and John was 13-1.

I don't mind being on the wiseguy so long as I don't take short odds.

I'd like to point out a couple things, I mentioned getting lost in the mix when it comes to the Derby, with a 20 horse field with so many different attributes or negative ones that each horse brings with him, it's always obvious some horses won't be able to run their race.

The important thing is not to lose sight of the reasons why you liked a horse, getting beat in one race could very well be the ticket to good score down the road. So it doesn't bother me when someone say's "your horse was pig" because I know very well I had sound reasons to play him. The right conditions in most cases will come around, here I emphasize Right conditions. I'm not talking chacing a horse just because you bet him once or twice.

I can sight so many examples on the above through out my racing experience but like anything else the watch list gets old and you toss it. I remember on another forum, my pick was laughing matter, well the next time out he ran second at huge odds and I laughed all the way to the bank. Didn't get beat by much, if he wins, what can I say other than I'd still be laughing.

I'm sure AP Warrior, Brother Derek and others will get better conditions to show their stuff.

Good luck,

T.D.

[cj]

The only reason I said he was the "wiseguy" horse is that I couldn't see a single reason to bet him over Point Determined. He was beaten by PD in his last race, despite laying closer to a slow pace. I couldn't a faster pace helping AP more than PD.

In retrospect, he wasn't bet nearly as much as some of the early selections I heard made me think that he would be.

[chickenhead]

He was beaten by PD in his last race, despite laying closer to a slow pace. I couldn't a faster pace helping AP more than PD.

AP also beat PD in the race prior to that, despite PD laying closer to a slow pace. PD made a very late run while AP waited on him, before moving again.

The tape of the SA Derby was pretty clear as to why PD finished in front of AP I thought.

To me they are at worst even, at best AP is better (which I hope to see proven out in subsequent races), but I know which one went off 5 points higher. I think it's impossible to say PD deserved that sort of differential based on their two races, under any pace scenario. AP may not have been a huge overlay, but he certainly was relative to PD.

[Valuist]

AP Warrior was really the only horse that closed to win a major prep. There were very few horses that had both a) enough talent to win and b) a propensity to pass horses in a Derby which figured to have a fast pace. He also had beaten Bob & John in the San Felipe, and he came back to win the Wood.

While he was closer to the soft pace in the SA Derby, he may not really have wanted to be there. He was trying to win the race, and by going after Brother Derek on the far turn, he cost himself a shot at running second as Point Determined waited and passed him late.

I agree w/Chickenhead that the two were very even, but the odds differential made A.P. Warrior more attractive. My guess for the odds discrepancy was APW losing ground in the stretch.

[chickenhead]

and also, if it takes balls to pick one of these guys, imagine the sack it shows to defend them after they finish 18th!

Maybe I should contemplate a name change.....ChickenSack has a certain flair to it. Do chickens even have sacks?

[Hosshead]

....Maybe I should contemplate a name change.....ChickenSack has a certain flair to it. Do chickens even have sacks?

Hens don't. You could change it to HenHead ! <g>

[twindouble]

and also, if it takes balls to pick one of these guys, imagine the sack it shows to defend them after they finish 18th!

Maybe I should contemplate a name change.....ChickenSack has a certain flair to it. Do chickens even have sacks?

Chickens do have a sack, it's called a Gullet. Check this out.:D

http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/content_pages/record.asp?recordid=54463

[chickenhead]

that's awesome!