Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Valuist
SRU-
Thanks for the alert. I just watched the replay, and the stretch run is clearly a stiff job. But up until that point, Smith seemed to be trying. Old Man pointed out that the horse had been off for a year and a half. It would appear that Smith was doing what he could, and he realized the horse wasn't going to fire enough to win. Although one could wonder if he had been riding thru the stretch, he could've maybe got 3rd. But the biggest difference between this and Berrio's ride is that I don't think Smith prevented his mount from winning.
I'll be curious to see how this horse runs next out. If he's a big price, he'd probably be worth throwing into some gimmicks.
This brings to mind another question: who in their right mind bets a horse off an 18 month layoff? And worse yet, who takes a low price on a horse off a year and a half layoff? Its good to know there's plenty of bettors who will.
|
You're welcome!
I thought the same thing, AND, the horse was ridden by a guy like Smith who is going to be more "Conservative" than say a young jock trying to prove himself. It was a very silly bet by the public, they just bet the PPs and the numbers without taking into consideration the situation.
Sure, there are differences between the Smith ride and the Berrio ride, but can you really say Smith was "all in" and "hell bent to win" from the opening of the gate?
Smith didnt ride like he was the betting favorite and needed to give an aggressive ride, he rode like he was 50-1 and knew the horse "needed" the race.
Just wondering where we draw the line on this stuff.
