Is Game Winner Troubled?

[Blenheim]

Game Winner
1/09: 3f - 35.20 - Bullet
1/20: 4f - 48.60
1/30: 5f - 1:03.40
2/08: 5f - 1:00.02

Improbable
1/09: 3f - 38.00
1/14: 4f - 49.20
1/20: 4f - 48.00
1/26: 5f - 1:02.00
2/01: 5f - 58.40 - Bullet
2/08: 6f - 1:15.00

My interest is in Improbable. Game Winner is his nearest competitor so I’ve been following him closely to see how he matches up. Last year, except after a race, Game Winner worked every 5.68 days. This year he is working every 9.6 days. Why are his works so far apart? What is Baffert thinking here? Aren’t two-year-olds supposed to be getting stronger as three-year-olds? Why only four works compared to six works by Improbable?

After watching the video of his work on 1/20, I thought he was struggling; he doesn’t appear to be running with the élan of a two-year-old champion. I noticed in his 1/30 work what appears to be a problem with his right front - it wings out; didn’t see it before, saw it with his left front, but not his right.

In his 2/8 work, why is he working in company with Speed Freak, the same horse that worked in company with Coliseum? Why did Baffert send Speed Freak out front and have Game Winner play catch up? What is Baffert trying to figure out here? Take a look and compare the reins, plenty of slack . . . why isn’t he engaging? Has he lost the competitive drive and will to win he demonstrated in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile? What are those two marks at the top of his right forearm; weren't there on 1/30. Particularly troubling is in deep stretch he gets off his right lead and switches to his left; unprofessional for such a professional. “He got a little tired at the end,” Baffert told drf.com. “The track is a little deep.”

There is too much evidence that premature racing in pressure situations causes a downward-spiral for racing’s child prodigies. Surely, each trainer of a two-year-old wonder will have his own unique explanation for the subsequent aborted stardom and decline. Whether these reasons or causes has to do with condition problems, loss of interest in racing, or more esoteric excuses, premature racing activity will often play a major role in catalyzing a quick decline for a would be star. For handicappers, “reasons” are not always accessible and are rarely necessary. The pattern in the past performances is clear: a majority of two-year-old champs will have seen their best days before they become mature “adults.” (Cramer, 1990)

His next few works are critical. Who will go in the San Felipe and the Santa Anita? “Whoever is ready to run that week, then they’ll run”, Baffert said recently . . .

[bobphilo]

I think the workout pattern has more to do with when the 2 started their careers than anything else. With Game Winner, Baffert was pointing to the BC Juve and the 2YO title. After that he is merely trying to maintain condition and will step up his works for the Derby preps, and Derby. With Improbable, he was a late starter and he is only getting him ready for his 3YO campaign with a series of easier frequent works that are gradually getting faster.
He is using frequent works to build condition and less frequent works to maintain it.

[letswastemoney]

I think there is something to the longer space between works.

It's mid-February...he's going to race in a month or so. I would think Game Winner needs to ramp up his game right now.

[Blenheim]

It’ll be interesting to watch how Baffert manages these two in the coming few weeks.

Game Winner last raced on 11/2 in the BCJ, no works until 1/9, a 67-day layoff. Improbable last raced on 12/8 in the Los Al, no works until 1/9, a 31-day layoff. The San Felipe is 25 days out. Based on current schedules, Game Winner comes into the San Felipe w/7 works, Improbable comes in w/10 works. It’ll be interesting to see if Game Winner makes the cut here. Keep in mind one week later is the Rebel Stakes.

In my initial post, I mentioned two marks at the top of Game Winner’s right forearm. Here is the before picture here is the after picture.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by Blenheim

In my initial post, I mentioned two marks at the top of Game Winner’s right forearm. Here is the before picture here is the after picture.

Looks like saliva.

[f2tornado]

I find Improbable's 1:15 six panel jog more unusual. Not sure how much conditioning such a light work provides. I tend to not get too caught up in works after the first couple starts for a horse. Knicks Go was working well at Tampa and we saw how well that translated, granted the tactics potentially compromised chances from the start.

We know both Game Winner and Improbable are fast. Neither had any trouble going 8.5F. Now it's time to see how each runs when it counts.

[Blenheim]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Looks like saliva.

I agree, sure does. Lookin' forward to the next photo.

Originally Posted by f2tornado

I find Improbable's 1:15 six panel jog more unusual. Not sure how much conditioning such a light work provides. I tend to not get too caught up in works after the first couple starts for a horse. Knicks Go was working well at Tampa and we saw how well that translated, granted the tactics potentially compromised chances from the start.

We know both Game Winner and Improbable are fast. Neither had any trouble going 8.5F. Now it's time to see how each runs when it counts.

I’m no trainer, but his work pattern progresses in distance and speed - that’s nothing new. The 1:15 is the beginning of his stamina works. There are 25 days before the San Felipe, so I figure (4) works. His previous prerace work pattern shows (2) works in 1:12.80, a 7f work, then a sharp 5f work. Game Winner must show a longer work[s] soon as time is runnin’ short.

We all have differing perspectives w/respect to works. I think they’re mission critical and can provide insights into what the trainer is thinking. W/respect to Knicks Go, every horse is different. The winner of that race, Well Defined, showed a 6f gate work in 1:16.1. Before the Belmont Justify breezed twice, went 46.80 and 59.60 in the first breeze then 1:13.60 and 127.20 in the second breeze; Baffert left nothing to chance.