Salvatore Mile

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by the little guy

He's not a great horse. He's a terrific horse for sure....but not close to great.

Hot Rod Charlie isn't great either.

I used to use the term great a lot back in the day, too much, but compared to these horses I now feel justified.

[Maximillion]

To me the most interesting thing about Mind Control would be if he remains at 2 turns.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by PalaceOfFortLarned

Well, I think we all found that out yesterday.

No, we found it out every time they have run. Nothing about them displays greatness.

[PalaceOfFortLarned]

Originally Posted by the little guy

No, we found it out every time they have run. Nothing about them displays greatness.

Only thing I've learned is that our superlatives are vastly different.

You set a much higher standard.

I need to be more careful in my use of terms, and should not lightly present horses as 'great' till just due.

[MJC922]

Exciting stretch battle. I didn't bet on the race but I was rooting for Mind Control to pull another battle back like the Parx mile. As for betting, 2-1 left zero room for error so I wouldn't have wanted much of that anyway.

Digging into the post-race details Mind Control did get six pounds, in fact all of the Lasix horses ran at 118. To me that (6) was the difference. It would be nice to see some incentives to run without Lasix or maybe force then to run at equal top weight if opting in. I thought HRC may have gone to the well one too many times last season but in retrospect he was running without Lasix which I've long suspected allows for a more sustained schedule.

I'd have kept him away a bit longer but I understand they have a roadmap and that's the problem with chasing Dubai.

[classhandicapper]

IMO, greatness is never defined by a single race. Good horses can run “great looking” races if they catch the right surface for them, find the right field, or get the right race development and trip. Sometimes these things are too subtle to measure. Great horses win when the conditions (both the obvious and subtle) are against them and it requires the deepest of reserves and determination to get the job done against other very good horses.

The figures may look the same, but there are huge differences in the horses.

You see greatness. When you find yourself saying “I can’t believe this horse won against that pace, against that bias, with that start, despite that repeated trouble etc… over and over and the wins keep piling up against Grade 1 competition, imo that’s when you know you are watching a great horse. It’s that extra bit of reserve energy and determination to overcome and still put up the number that separates them.

[Tom]

Huge difference.
HRC 2nd 3 times in a row, twice at horrendously low odds.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

IMO, greatness is never defined by a single race. Good horses can run “great looking” races if they catch the right surface for them, find the right field, or get the right race development and trip. Sometimes these things are too subtle to measure. Great horses win when the conditions (both the obvious and subtle) are against them and it requires the deepest of reserves and determination to get the job done against other very good horses.

The figures may look the same, but there are huge differences in the horses.

You see greatness. When you find yourself saying “I can’t believe this horse won against that pace, against that bias, with that start, despite that repeated trouble etc… over and over and the wins keep piling up against Grade 1 competition, imo that’s when you know you are watching a great horse. It’s that extra bit of reserve energy and determination to overcome and still put up the number that separates them.

His 5M in earnings is great

His Belmont was impressive and promising.

I really wanted his Pennsylvania Derby to be a defining moment, and the speed figures were big numbers.

Didn't use him at all in the Classic, but I could have been wrong and lucky.

Dubai was a good placing and earning, but didn't do any big running.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by Tom

Huge difference.
HRC 2nd 3 times in a row, twice at horrendously low odds.

not only that i think you have to be pretty forgiving looking for excuses.

[Spalding No!]

Hot Rod Charlie is usually a bit sharper 2nd time off a freshening (when he can get one). Won the LA Derby and Meydan race 2nd time after a few weeks off.

He should still be capable of dealing with Mandaloun, Proxy, Express Train, and Stilleto Boy going forward.

No form to go off of, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was also competitive against There Goes Harvard, Dynamic One, Happy Saver, and First Captain.

Fortunately we have Life is Good, Olympiad, Flightline, and Country Grammer...which is like being thankful for having The Wicked North, Master Command, Mazel Trick, and Another Review as your top older horses.

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Absolutely. It was one the best races of his career, if not the best.

104 BEYER (new top)

Allan

[Maximillion]

Originally Posted by biggestal99

104 BEYER (new top)

Allan

Same as the Parx race.My opinion is he can do a little better than that.I know the competition wasnt that great in there except for Silver State,but still not that easy to roll up on that track first time and do something he had not been doing.

If thats his limit as a veteran its not good enough for the top....but this is a new path for him if he stays routing.His gameness certainly cannot be questioned.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by Tom

Huge difference.
HRC 2nd 3 times in a row, twice at horrendously low odds.

Yeah. And if you bet and care about winning. That’s all that matters really. The “whose great” talk is kind of ridiculous. As if either of these horses are close. Both horses are “good “ but their form has hot, tepid and cold all over the place. Cmon are people really this bored? How does the word “great” even enter this thread?