Tacitus

[Tom]

Two horse race to me! YOUR two.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

A bit difficult to see him missing the board against this field.

9/5 is the right ML.

When you say this about a 9/5 shot...you are not exactly going out on a limb.

[letswastemoney]

Tacitus runs like a true marathoner. Just keeps grinding evenly the entire way around. I'll accept him as the favorite.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

When you say this about a 9/5 shot...you are not exactly going out on a limb.

You can not take my Captain Obvious cape away from me. It is mine.

[classhandicapper]

I think Tacitus was best yesterday.

It was not easy to take the overland route either Friday or Saturday at Belmont.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I think Tacitus was best yesterday.

It was not easy to take the overland route either Friday or Saturday at Belmont.

He was clearly best, ran further than he lost by. Had nothing to do with the Belmont track. Going wide cost the same amount of ground regardless of size of turns because increasing length of radius increases circumference the same on any size circle. Geometry. Ainslie pointed this out in one of his books. Actually the more gradual turns at Belmont mitigates somewhat the energy lose from going wide by making it more gradual. That's why wide sweeping moves at Big Sandy work more often than at other tracks, as per Beyer. He just was forced too wide.

As for the ride. I had first blamed Ortiz for the ground loss but after looking at the replay realized he didn't have any chance to come in from his wide post in a tightly packed field. Just bad luck of the draw.

[cj]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

He was clearly best, ran further than he lost by. Had nothing to do with the Belmont track. Going wide cost the same amount of ground regardless of size of turns because increasing length of radius increases circumference the same on any size circle. Geometry. Ainslie pointed this out in one of his books. Actually the more gradual turns at Belmont mitigates somewhat the energy lose from going wide by making it more gradual. That's why wide sweeping moves at Big Sandy work more often than at other tracks, as per Beyer. He just was forced too wide.

As for the ride. I had first blamed Ortiz for the ground loss but after looking at the replay realized he didn't have any chance to come in from his wide post in a tightly packed field. Just bad luck of the draw.

He didn't even really try though. At some point you have to make the decision to get inside at the expense of giving up some distance to the leader. Watch the ride on the filly in the Acorn from the 7 post, that was a masterpiece.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

...Had nothing to do with the Belmont track. Going wide cost the same amount of ground regardless of size of turns because increasing length of radius...

Class is referring to the inside-bias and the fast surface this weekend (as opposed to Belmont's physical configuration).

[GMB@BP]

The inside was definitely the place to be, and I think it got worse as you went out each path.

Take a horse like McKinzie, the pace was about average for that level race, yet he was able to come to the leaders with little to no effort on the inside from well back while all the other horses who made moves on the outside spun their wheels. Yes he was one of the better horses in the race and saved ground but the sheer ease which he closed on the inside to me is always a clear tipoff that the inside is best.

Sir Winston essentially had the same trip without the traffic.

Joveia at 31-1, distance challenged was able to stay within 2 lenths of winning. Borracho rode the rail to a third at long odds. So did Jeltrin at 50/1.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Class is referring to the inside-bias and the fast surface this weekend (as opposed to Belmont's physical configuration).

Didn't know about the inside speed bias at Belmont. That would definitely hurt horses going wide. I stand corrected. Don't see how track speed would affect wide trips though unless the inside was disproportionately fast though that's still inside bias.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by cj

He didn't even really try though. At some point you have to make the decision to get inside at the expense of giving up some distance to the leader. Watch the ride on the filly in the Acorn from the 7 post, that was a masterpiece.

I agree, you do sometimes have to give up some distance to the leader to save ground and too many riders underestimate the effects of ground loss in the name of position. However, all Ortiz could do was take back and track behind War of Will, who figured to be his main rival, and then out-kick him to the finish. He couldn't get closer to the rail than that without going into the horses inside him. Unfortunately they were both forced wide on the far turn and the only way around WoW was to his outside.

[cj]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

I agree, you do sometimes have to give up some distance to the leader to save ground and too many riders underestimate the effects of ground loss in the name of position. However, all Ortiz could do was take back and track behind War of Will, who figured to be his main rival, and then out-kick him to the finish. He couldn't get closer to the rail than that without going into the horses inside him. Unfortunately they were both forced wide on the far turn and the only way around WoW was to his outside.

The other option, of course, it to push a little harder to get a more forward position. Either one is better than what he did. Particularly in a mile and a half race there is some recovery time if you use your horse some early.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by cj

The other option, of course, it to push a little harder to get a more forward position. Either one is better than what he did. Particularly in a mile and a half race there is some recovery time if you use your horse some early.

I think what his thinking was when War of Will outran him to the first turn was he wasn't going to get into a speed duel with a horse who was expected to be near the lead. He tucked behind him and actually maneuvered inside WoW on the backstretch but couldn't get any more inside due to traffic. He could only hope something would clear up inside later, in which case he could have gotten a great trip. When it didn't and the horses in front of and inside him were starting to slow down his only path was behind WoW and then around him who was being forced wide around the turn.
He might have had a chance to beat WoW to the path inside him just before the turn but that's where a lot of riders have messed up by making premature moves at Belmont. In any case that would have only saved him about a length and he still would have been forced wide like WoW was.
Rosario did give Sir Winston a terrific ride but he was also lucky that he was able to get outside and clear after saving ground on the rail. Ortiz was not as lucky and could only get clear by taking the overland route.

You know I've frequently been critical of riders who cavalierly underestimate the cost of ground loss but in this case I'm reluctant to 2nd guess Ortiz.

[Afleet]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

He was clearly best, ran further than he lost by. Had nothing to do with the Belmont track. Going wide cost the same amount of ground regardless of size of turns because increasing length of radius increases circumference the same on any size circle. Geometry. Ainslie pointed this out in one of his books. Actually the more gradual turns at Belmont mitigates somewhat the energy lose from going wide by making it more gradual. That's why wide sweeping moves at Big Sandy work more often than at other tracks, as per Beyer. He just was forced too wide.

As for the ride. I had first blamed Ortiz for the ground loss but after looking at the replay realized he didn't have any chance to come in from his wide post in a tightly packed field. Just bad luck of the draw.

How many extra lengths did WOW run. He was 5 wide for 1 1/2-nice ride

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by Afleet

How many extra lengths did WOW run. He was 5 wide for 1 1/2-nice ride

According to Trakus, WoW: 57 feet or about 7 lengths
Tacticus: 65 feet or about 8 lengths
That about matches my own observation from the video.