Different Perspectives On Trips

[pandy]

In the Derby, it was interesting how some handicappers felt that Shackleford raced poorly (slow pace) in the Derby and some thought he raced well (vs bias).

Today on TVG two of the Monmouth analysts (Lo Duca and Cassidy) had different opinions on how Dance City raced in the Preakness. Lo Duca said he had a tough trip because he was four wide throughout, Cassidy said he had no excuse and a perfect trip.

Personally, I feel that wide trips, especially in route races, are often much tougher than they appear to be on paper, sort of hidden rough trips, and I've hit a lot of longshot winners that came off wide trips, so I'm on the side that says that Dance City raced well in the Preakness. What do you think? Did Dance City race well or poorly?

[cj]

Wide in routes on the first turn is a big problem if the pace was fast. If the pace was slow early and the race picks up late, wide is a big problem on the second turn. That is how I view it anyway.

[pandy]

By the way, not to put words in Cassidy's mouth, he didn't say that Dance City had a perfect trip, he said he had the trip the wanted and didn't come through so he didn't think that he raced that well.

[Producer]

I think Dance City had a good trip in the Preakness and just didn't have it when it counted. He was my pick and I felt very good about him throughout until the stretch. Ramon got him to relax nicely early in 3rd, as I had hoped he would. He didn't go on though when he was asked too on the turn. Big disappointment.

Shackleford, on the other hand, I thought ran a huge race in the Derby. I posted this on another thread right after the derby was run and was questioned on it by a few posters. There was a strong bias against early speed at CD that day and even though the pace "seemed" slow early, to fight on until the end and hold 4th was huge. He was originally going to be my pick for the Preakness but I just felt that he ran 2 huge races in a row in the Fla derby and the Kentucky derby and having to take on Flashpoint early i thought he would get tired in the stretch. Big mistake on my part as I had a $200 Black eyed susan/Preakness DD with the #1 that won the first part and would have paid over $10,000 if I stuck with Shack. :bang:

[pondman]

Did Dance City race well or poorly?

Didn't see anything that I'd call trouble. The horse just wasn't on par with a number of these horses.

There have been horses in the past who got in trouble, but over came it, such as Alysheba, and you knew they'd be a super horse. But I didn't see anything remotely super in either triple crown race.

[Robert Fischer]

The horse just wasn't on par with a number of these horses.

He had a dream trip and a solid race but he wasn't of the stamina of the big 3 and Astrology.

Broke well, Dominguez eased him over prior to the turn, eased him out prior to the 2nd turn just off the pace(perfect spot to win at Pimlico) he actually ran well around the turn but once he changed leads he flattened out in the drive.

Good horse. Could overcome some of the issues. Pletcher is known for getting peak performances out of horses like this. Not a true graded level classic distance horse.

[PhantomOnTour]

I played Dance City also...anyone think he left some of his race at the gate while he was fighting God and everyone?
He didn't want to load and was pretty ornery about it. Had to cost him....

[ronsmac]

Outside trips are almost always better than inside trips . Clear sailing , momentum not interupted , and as a general rule, horses race better on the outside. The 3 wide trip in particular is the best trip.

[Edward DeVere]

Outside trips are almost always better than inside trips . Clear sailing , momentum not interupted , and as a general rule, horses race better on the outside. The 3 wide trip in particular is the best trip.

Also, bad conformation is better than good conformation, slow horses are better than fast horses (they're less likely to get hurt) and the best horses to bet on in sprints are deep closers coming out of route races.

[toetoe]

Wide in routes on the first turn is a big problem if the pace was fast. If the pace was slow early and the race picks up late, wide is a big problem on the second turn. That is how I view it anyway.


Hear, hear. :ThmbUp:

[garyscpa]

Also, bad conformation is better than good conformation, slow horses are better than fast horses (they're less likely to get hurt) and the best horses to bet on in sprints are deep closers coming out of route races.

Sounds just like jonnielu.:)

[classhandicapper]

I think ground loss is more significant if the pace is fast on the turn and the horse is being used harder to maintain or improve his position.

I am less geared towards literal ground loss calculations because I think there often offsetting advantages to running outside that make up for some the actual literal ground lost.