Wood Memorial

[Tread]

CJ could you be more specific about the points I've made here that you disagree with?

[Tread]

Originally Posted by RXB

Did I say Governor Charlie should be one of the favourites? I've never written his name in a post before, but nice try.

You, on the other hand, I could quote arguing to improve the case for Verrazano based on a final fraction that is largely the function of a very soft pace.

And your posts make me think very much of a former poster on this board. Very, very much. In fact, I still might be using "very" too few times. Smart guy, almost as smart as he thought he was, who frequently tossed insults at other posters in both direct and vaguely couched fashion. I almost feel like posting a link to his most infamous moment on this board, although for some strange reason I feel I might be less inclined to do so if your own decorum were to improve.

I never said you mentioned GC. But I implied that if you are arguing that the final overall time of a race makes it "tough" or not (which is the original post you responded to) you are making an indirect argument for GC.

The final split does improve the case for Verrazano, if the discussion point is whether or not he will have trouble with 10F. No matter how slow the early pace, only a true route horse can close with those kinds of fractions in a 9F race.

[RXB]

Originally Posted by Tread

I never said you mentioned GC. But I implied that if you are arguing that the final overall time of a race makes it "tough" or not (which is the original post you responded to) you are making an indirect argument for GC.

The final split does improve the case for Verrazano, if the discussion point is whether or not he will have trouble with 10F. No matter how slow the early pace, only a true route horse can close with those kinds of fractions in a 9F race.

Thank you for the reasonable reply.

Allow such a soft pace to a frontrunner and they can fire surprisingly fast final fractions that won't be replicated under normal pace circumstances, especially at a longer distance. It reduces the stamina component and increases the value of speed, which we already know Verrazano has.

The ideal stretchout pattern for an early runner is a fast finish off of an average or near-average pace, not a super fast finish after a dawdling pace. The longer distance under normal circumstances will require a little more stamina, a little less speed. A very slow pace, especially at a shorter distance reduces the aerobic component enough that you really don't know whether the horse will have the ability or the conditioning to hack a legit pace over a longer distance. And in the Ky Derby, where the pace is typically fast, that's a cause for doubt-- especially regarding a horse whose style so far has been to be very forwardly placed.

I'd rather take my chances on dirt with adjusted final times in most cases rather than final fractions, but of course we don't need to choose: we can incorporate fractional handicapping, final-time handicapping, running style, the class line, all sorts of elements.

[RXB]

Originally Posted by cj

Isn't Tread the guy that was touting El Padrino last year? I ask, because I think he just finished.

I think Tread is a fairly sharp handicapper, just like that other guy.

My reference was less about handicapping, more to do with character. But I'd rather just hope that my point has been taken and happily leave it at that.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Tread

CJ could you be more specific about the points I've made here that you disagree with?

I never said I did. But before I take someone's post too seriously, I like to see some reason that I should. Anyone can talk a good game, was just looking for results. I haven't really found any.

I've been doing this a long time. I tend to remember the people that make good points that come to fruition later on. I haven't seen you post much, so I did some research. That is all.

[Maximillion]

Originally Posted by RXB

Thank you for the reasonable reply.

Allow such a soft pace to a frontrunner and they can fire surprisingly fast final fractions that won't be replicated under normal pace circumstances, especially at a longer distance. It reduces the stamina component and increases the value of speed, which we already know Verrazano has.

The ideal stretchout pattern for an early runner is a fast finish off of an average or near-average pace, not a super fast finish after a dawdling pace. The longer distance under normal circumstances will require a little more stamina, a little less speed. A very slow pace, especially at a shorter distance reduces the aerobic component enough that you really don't know whether the horse will have the ability or the conditioning to hack a legit pace over a longer distance. And in the Ky Derby, where the pace is typically fast, that's a cause for doubt-- especially regarding a horse whose style so far has been to be very forwardly placed.

I'd rather take my chances on dirt with adjusted final times in most cases rather than final fractions, but of course we don't need to choose: we can incorporate fractional handicapping, final-time handicapping, running style, the class line, all sorts of elements.

Sharp post....no doubt V has ability but he is very likely to face a completely different pace scenario in the derby...how he reacts I have zero idea, but my gut feeling is there will be no value in him whatsoever.

Still impressed with Java's War power move placing (knifing thru a large field) and atm he is my pick if he makes it in.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Tread

The final split does improve the case for Verrazano, if the discussion point is whether or not he will have trouble with 10F. No matter how slow the early pace, only a true route horse can close with those kinds of fractions in a 9F race.

Does it improve it? I don't really think so. Plenty of front running horses finish fast when allowed to set easy paces. The horses most likely to be successful are those that don't quit when on or near a contested pace. By don't quit, I mean they are competitive to the wire, even if finishing slowly.

[Tread]

Originally Posted by cj

I never said I did. But before I take someone's post too seriously, I like to see some reason that I should. Anyone can talk a good game, was just looking for results. I haven't really found any.

I've been doing this a long time. I tend to remember the people that make good points that come to fruition later on. I haven't seen you post much, so I did some research. That is all.

A wise position to take. By making no statement as to what you agree and don't agree with, you can come back later and pile on any incorrect statements without ever having to own up to your own opinions. Excellent.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by RXB

Thank you for the reasonable reply.

Allow such a soft pace to a frontrunner and they can fire surprisingly fast final fractions that won't be replicated under normal pace circumstances, especially at a longer distance. It reduces the stamina component and increases the value of speed, which we already know Verrazano has.

I don't disagree with this, but I'd tweak it a little. I don't think all horses who have speed are compromised by a slow pace. I'd call these horses ones who have tactical speed but are more versatile, and who can relax off the pace -- whatever it is -- and are able to have a closing kick just like closers. The horses who are compromised, I believe, are those who have a high cruising speed and to throttle them back is actually uncomfortable for them, expending energy that is totally wasted energy. That is why they appear their stamina would appear reduced.

I don't know that I think Verrazano was compromised by the slow pace. I didn't see a horse who appeared uncomfortable going that slow.

The Wood was a strange race that wouldn't make me jump off any of the top 3 if I liked them going in. But I'm also not sure that I like any of the top 3 any better afterwards.

What has me concerned about Verrazano are his antics 2 races back. I'll toss him completely if he draws inside.

[Tom]

Don't TREAD on me!

You obviously don't know CJ at all.
He has put his own opinions up many times in the past.
He bows to no one when it comes to handicapping.

And something else you don't know - I don't pick one pace line and whatever nonsense you posted about it. I am looking at the whole cycle of V and I do not see a Derby winner in there.

Oh, yes, and talk about switch hitting, you make a (typical) no nothing comment about Beyer figs, CJ shows a 60% hit rate last 10 years, so you change the subject to 20-30 years...nice.

You should be happy idiots like me will betting against your lock - all the more money for you to take home.

[sammy the sage]

Tread...be quiet WILL ya...

you're gonna ruin THE odds....

I'll write this ONCE...then I'm done...don't bet Pletcher's in the Derby normally....HOWEVER...this one is different...

The horse hasn't EVEN BEEN really asked to go all out EVEN once...e's just galloped along...

They're doing MANY different things as far as training with THIS one....if you're NOT taking notes...well you're going to FLUNK the test...

[RXB]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I don't disagree with this, but I'd tweak it a little. I don't think all horses who have speed are compromised by a slow pace.

You've reversed what I meant. Perhaps something in my writing wasn't clear.

Runners with speed are typically favoured, not compromised by a slow pace. That's what I meant.

[mostpost]

The truth is we will not find out who is right and who is wrong until the evening of May 4. We may find out then that we were all wrong. I presented my opinion. You all presented yours. Just because I disagree with your opinions, does not mean I do not enjoy reading them and discussing them.

[Tom]

That's why they let us bet 'em.

[Leparoux]

Originally Posted by cj

But before I take someone's post too seriously, I like to see some reason that I should.

Is there a certain ROI you require from posters to talk to you? C'mon man.