Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 09-02-2018, 11:31 PM   #31
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP View Post
The also rans were exactly my point, and agree, they have been useful bet backs.
There have been some good Belmont winners like Tonalist and Birdstone.

Obviously there have been bad Belmont winners too. But you can't just toss the race entirely.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-02-2018, 11:44 PM   #32
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
There have been some good Belmont winners like Tonalist and Birdstone.

Obviously there have been bad Belmont winners too. But you can't just toss the race entirely.
for me personally its just been a good angle, and your right, there certainly have been solid horses who have run very well.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-02-2018, 11:52 PM   #33
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobphilo View Post
I guess that means one should not get hung up on class and concentrate on the individual horse and its' current speed figures. Lots of Derby winners never won another race.
Lighten up, dude - stop guessing unless you have a clue.
Which you don't. I NEVER said any of the crap you are trying to put in my mouth. I was making a joke seeing how I bet a Belmont stakes winner who ran like shit.

Maybe you should count to 10 before you post multiple replies in ignorance.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-02-2018, 11:57 PM   #34
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,467
Quote:
Other also-rans from those Belmonts included:
So where on that list would you put Tapwrit and Gronk based on their records going into the Woodward. Outstanding, comparable, lacking, laughable?
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 02:12 AM   #35
Spalding No!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
So where on that list would you put Tapwrit and Gronk based on their records going into the Woodward. Outstanding, comparable, lacking, laughable?
Tapwrit wasn't a Belmont also-ran but he appears thoroughly toasted at this point. No surprise coming from a Todd Pletcher 4yo. The only shock really is he made it to September...

Gronkowski wasn't in the Woodward but theoretically he has a few more starts to validate his Belmont effort (and perhaps add his name to the list of subsequent G1 winners out of the Belmont) before giving up on him.
Spalding No! is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 09:18 AM   #36
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP View Post
While that is certainly true I think the Derby and Preakness are at least comparable to 9F compared to the obscure 12F race (is there another 12 furlong dirt race even run anymore other than on Belmont Day?). I can at least add some weight to those winners the Belmont winners have been for the most part a very mixed bag in the best light.
Even the most prestigious races have been subject to weak crops and slow winners, which is why I maintain that what is more important is the individual horse and its' speed figure.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 09:24 AM   #37
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post
In the last 16 runnings of the Belmont Stakes, not including this year's edition, only 4 horses in the runner-up spot failed to win a subsequent graded stakes.

They were:

1) Smarty Jones - retired after the Belmont
2) Denis of Cork - retired after the Belmont
3) Dunkirk - retired after the Belmont
4) Oxbow - retired one start after the Belmont (4th in the Haskell)

The runners-up in the other 12 runnings included Medaglia D'Oro, Curlin, Paynter, Stay Thirsty, Ten Most Wanted, and Frosted.

Other also-rans from those Belmonts included:

Game On Dude (G1), First Dude (G1), War Emblem (G1), Perfect Drift (G1), Funny Cide (G1), Rock Hard Ten (G1), Purge (G1), Eddington (G1), Hard Spun (G1), Tiago (G1), Big Brown (G1), Tale of Ekati (G1), Macho Again (G1), Shackleford (G1), Mucho Macho Man (G1), Dullahan (G1), Will Take Charge (G1), California Chrome (G1), Keen Ice (G1), Mubtaahij (G1), Exaggerator (G1), and Seeking The Soul (G1).

Seems like that puts Gronskowski in pretty good company.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 09:39 AM   #38
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
Lighten up, dude - stop guessing unless you have a clue.
Which you don't. I NEVER said any of the crap you are trying to put in my mouth. I was making a joke seeing how I bet a Belmont stakes winner who ran like shit.

Maybe you should count to 10 before you post multiple replies in ignorance.
Seems like you're the one having trouble with anger. I was arguing against the absurdity of degrading a Belmont performance due to the failure of one horse. There was no insult directed at you personally.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 10:05 AM   #39
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP View Post
The also rans were exactly my point, and agree, they have been useful bet backs.
And the fact that these horses ran well in the Belmont despite not winning is exactly my point that a good Belmont performance should not be disregarded.
Hadn't you argued that you found the Belmont was "non-productive" of future success?

Last edited by bobphilo; 09-03-2018 at 10:11 AM.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 10:36 AM   #40
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
Lighten up, dude - stop guessing unless you have a clue.
Which you don't. I NEVER said any of the crap you are trying to put in my mouth. I was making a joke seeing how I bet a Belmont stakes winner who ran like shit.

Maybe you should count to 10 before you post multiple replies in ignorance.
Let me try to further clarify this. If I mistook your remark about Taprit as another put down of Gronk when it was only meant as a joke, I apologize.
If not, I was merely arguing strongly against those trying to debunk Gronks' Belmont performance, which is what we do here.

Last edited by bobphilo; 09-03-2018 at 10:49 AM.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 11:26 AM   #41
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobphilo View Post
And the fact that these horses ran well in the Belmont despite not winning is exactly my point that a good Belmont performance should not be disregarded.
Hadn't you argued that you found the Belmont was "non-productive" of future success?
for the horse that won, or narrowly won, yes.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 11:28 AM   #42
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
also, there is no reason to get upset, its just a stupid race horse opinion. If its too much to have a civil discussion I dont mind lying in the weeds around here as I did for quite a long time (only 1k post for the first 14 years,2k this year)
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 01:33 PM   #43
bobphilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Palm Beach, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMB@BP View Post
also, there is no reason to get upset, its just a stupid race horse opinion. If its too much to have a civil discussion I dont mind lying in the weeds around here as I did for quite a long time (only 1k post for the first 14 years,2k this year)
Agreed. No need to get worked up over a misunderstanding and difference of opinion.
bobphilo is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 01:42 PM   #44
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,512
123 TFUS vs 99TFUS seems off , even if you viewed coming from far off the pace a disadvantage.

Are you sure those are the TimeformUS figs (eg 123-Gronk, 99-Hofburg, 99-Vino ?? )

Thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobphilo View Post
To answer your question I reviewed the chart, video replay, and PPs of both TimeformUS and DRF (Beyer). A lot more detail than you were expecting but I wanted to leave no stone upturned.

Gronk ran a TFUS of 123, Beyer 99, was 2w, 3w, beaten 1 3/4 lengths and lost several lengths at the start.
Hofburg ran TFUS about 99, Beyer 97, was 2w 4w, beaten 3 1/2 lengths and had an unventful trip.
Vino Rosso ran TFUS abt 99,
Beyer 97, 3w 3w, beaten 3 3/4 lengths and moved a bit too early for a closer. Ironically, this is the same mistake Gronks' jock made in the Travers but Gronks' riders' mistake was much more costly since he made his move much earlier on the backstretch while Vinos' rider made his move later on the far turn.

Overall, I think Gronk ran the better race as shown by his TFUS figure which includes pace with the poor break.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-03-2018, 02:04 PM   #45
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,467
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobphilo View Post
Let me try to further clarify this. If I mistook your remark about Taprit as another put down of Gronk when it was only meant as a joke, I apologize.
If not, I was merely arguing strongly against those trying to debunk Gronks' Belmont performance, which is what we do here.
We're good.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.