Overthinking

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by LoneF

Mendelssohn at 60-1 ? Nice Job. You must of got that action really early on .

I like all your underneath horses except Noble Indy. I actually think Noble Indy is a underrated horse but the KY Derby does not seem like it’s shaping up to be a race that suits his style but I think he can win a nice stakes race down the road.

Bravazo I think could clunk up at what might be the second or third biggest price in the field. Draw a line through the LA Derby as just a case of him getting off to a funky start and never really getting in the race and eventually eased and he doesn’t look bad as a clunk up prospect at all. If you look at his pp’s he throws in these strange clunker races for no apparent reason now and than but he has not done it twice in a row yet and when he’s on he usually runs really well. I think a lot of people forget he was basically a co favorite in the LA Derby. Went off 3-1. Most people will just see he finished 21 lengths behind and quickly dismiss him. Worth a shot at least ....

Lone Sailor looks like he is shaping up to be the wise guy horse. They were pumping him up on TVG today so you won’t get the huge price like Bravazo but still should get decent odds and he is getting some steam for good reason. He could possibly be very legit. He might just end up completing not just supers but also exactas and tri’s. Must use underneath in my opinion.

Flameaway just shows up every time. Impossible to leave out underneath

You are not using Combatant ? ( The poor man’s flameaway lol )

I also disagree about Good Magic. He will be one of the few horses I use both on top and underneath. Think he is set up to run huge. Although if he draws post 1 or 2 than I will probably toss out completely. With his lack of really good gate speed he could never overcome those posts.

It amazes me you think so highly of Good Magic for his form cycle and Bolt has the exact same cycle except he has faced better this year and ran faster as a 2yo. I guess all you see is one beat the other, case closed. The thing about GM is he could be as bad of an underlay as Justify for exactly the reasons you like him.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by LoneF

I also disagree about Good Magic. He will be one of the few horses I use both on top and underneath. Think he is set up to run huge. Although if he draws post 1 or 2 than I will probably toss out completely. With his lack of really good gate speed he could never overcome those posts.

Good Magic broke on top in the BC Juvenile. He broke right with Strike Power and Promises Fulfilled in the FOY. He broke alongside Flameaway in the Blue Grass and was no more than a neck behind that one right out of the gate.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by Mc990

Bolt and Justify lay over the field

Based on what?


Their one-two parade in an SA Derby featuring the slowest dirt splits in decades?


Now some idiots cite the track surface as having been slow for the SA Derby, but consider that the Oaks splits are routinely slower than those of the SA Derby (run on the same day) and that the 2018 Oaks had faster early splits than its counterpart for males.

Aside from that, Justify has found success in a pair of 5-horse fields, one a sprint, the other in the mud.


Justify could be far superior to any 3yo society has ever witnessed but to suggest you know so at this point is foolhardy.


PS - it would probably be wrong of you to question the quality of the last few SA Oaks winners.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Now some idiots cite the track surface as having been slow for the SA Derby, but consider that the Oaks splits are routinely slower than those of the SA Derby (run on the same day) and that the 2018 Oaks had faster early splits than its counterpart for males.

Amazingly, you have the audacity to call people "idiots" for highlighting the very real fact that the Santa Anita surface has been slower than in prior years. Of course:

(1) This year's SA Oaks--like the SA Derby this year-- also had the slowest early splits in the past 6 years. Evidence that the track is indeed slower than prior seasons.

(2) The SA Oaks has only been run on the same day as the SA Derby for only the past 6 runnings. Prior to that it was earlier on the calendar. In fact, several fillies have run in both races.

(3) This year's SA Oaks had a one-dimensional frontrunner, Thirteen Squared, loose on the front end for a routine pop-and-stop effort since she stretched out from sprints. The SA Derby, meanwhile, featured not a single dedicated frontrunner.

(4) While the SA Derby has had marginally faster fractions than the Oaks in recent years, only 2016 had dramatically faster fractions. That was the year the clear run-off and future sprinter Danzig Candy went out on a solo kamikaze mission on the front end. The Oaks featured Songbird on an uncontested lead.

(5) In 2017, 2014, and 2013 the SA Derby featured a speed duel while the Oaks had a lone frontrunner. No surprise that the fractions would be faster in the former.

(6) Prior to this year, the SA Oaks had a speed duel develop in only one of the past 5 runnings, 2015, when closer Stellar Wind benefited and looped the field. Other than that, the race has featured a lone front runner enjoying a clear, unpressured lead--quite ripe for slow fractions.

I won't go so far as to call you an idiot...

..but from your post I would have to guess that you're somewhere between a moron and an imbecile...

[boys at tosconova]

both seem solid. but since justy put him away, do you really think bolt can turn the tables? not to mention beat the other fig horses he'll have to deal with. i don't think he can, but it won't be impossible, or really that much of an epic call if he does

[SharpCat]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Based on what?


Their one-two parade in an SA Derby featuring the slowest dirt splits in decades?


Now some idiots cite the track surface as having been slow for the SA Derby

I guess I am one of the idiots. Here is what I posted in the Beyer fig thread on 4-13-2018.

I've said I think Santa Anita is playing much slower and I mean much slower than I can ever remember. I have played it long enough to know even the cheapest horses can put up quick sectionals. The past year has been pretty much no can do.

I did a little checking to see if my opinion would change. Let's just say I confirmed my own opinion. It was nothing fancy or scientific but it was more than enough for me. Since were talking Derby I checked the 6F call for every 2 turn race including todays races on a fast track this meet at Santa Anita. It is 88 races and here is the break down.

1:10-1:10.99 1 race and just barely Unique Bella 1:10.95
1:11-1:11.99 10 races
1:12-1:12.99 42 races
1:13-1:13.99 25 races
1:14-1:14.99 10 races

I looked at sprint races and it just made the case even stronger.

[PowerUpPaynter]

Originally Posted by Blenheim

I agree w/you and I like the horse and its been tough for me to rule him out, but he will be racing against fresh, late developing and highly talented swiftys; they are now what Bolt was when he was racing at two. The only knock against them is inexperience while Bolt is likely suffering from the rigors of the long two-year-old campaign and the three-year-old campaign - it takes its toll. Is he the same horse now he was last year? There was a time when types like Bolt ruled, but not now, not like they used to - not anymore. I think his type, they're fading . . .

So what do ya' do, go with the fresh swifty or the aching and tired classic type? Seems a pretty easy decision for me.

ummm. 3 of the last 4 were big time 2 year olds... foundation matters

[PowerUpPaynter]

Originally Posted by LoneF

Mendelssohn at 60-1 ? Nice Job. You must of got that action really early on .

November 9th

Still dont beat my 200-1 on Bolt on Sept 6th and again at 40-1 on October 2nd

Also picked up Audible 80-1 January 30th


offshore futures bets are fantastic, really changes the way u bet derby day. flexibility to the max

[Mc990]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Based on what?


Their one-two parade in an SA Derby featuring the slowest dirt splits in decades?


Now some idiots cite the track surface as having been slow for the SA Derby, but consider that the Oaks splits are routinely slower than those of the SA Derby (run on the same day) and that the 2018 Oaks had faster early splits than its counterpart for males.

Aside from that, Justify has found success in a pair of 5-horse fields, one a sprint, the other in the mud.


Justify could be far superior to any 3yo society has ever witnessed but to suggest you know so at this point is foolhardy.


PS - it would probably be wrong of you to question the quality of the last few SA Oaks winners.

Based on what? Based on the fact that they've been the fastest horses of this crop. The race doesn't always go to the swift, but that's the way it should be bet. Bolt is shaping up to be the biggest derby overlay in quite some time if he really does go off 4-5th choice.

Also, it seems obvious that you have no idea how figures are made. I guess Timeform, Rag and TG all just independently came to the wrong conclusion on these two horses.... what a joke!

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Amazingly, you have the audacity to call people "idiots" for highlighting the very real fact that the Santa Anita surface has been slower than in prior years. Of course:

(1) This year's SA Oaks--like the SA Derby this year-- also had the slowest early splits in the past 6 years. Evidence that the track is indeed slower than prior seasons.

(2) The SA Oaks has only been run on the same day as the SA Derby for only the past 6 runnings. Prior to that it was earlier on the calendar. In fact, several fillies have run in both races.

(3) This year's SA Oaks had a one-dimensional frontrunner, Thirteen Squared, loose on the front end for a routine pop-and-stop effort since she stretched out from sprints. The SA Derby, meanwhile, featured not a single dedicated frontrunner.

(4) While the SA Derby has had marginally faster fractions than the Oaks in recent years, only 2016 had dramatically faster fractions. That was the year the clear run-off and future sprinter Danzig Candy went out on a solo kamikaze mission on the front end. The Oaks featured Songbird on an uncontested lead.

(5) In 2017, 2014, and 2013 the SA Derby featured a speed duel while the Oaks had a lone frontrunner. No surprise that the fractions would be faster in the former.

(6) Prior to this year, the SA Oaks had a speed duel develop in only one of the past 5 runnings, 2015, when closer Stellar Wind benefited and looped the field. Other than that, the race has featured a lone front runner enjoying a clear, unpressured lead--quite ripe for slow fractions.

I won't go so far as to call you an idiot...

..but from your post I would have to guess that you're somewhere between a moron and an imbecile...

Maybe you should actually pay attention to what is written.

I stated nothing about any assessment of the general sense of the speed of the SA main track during the winter race meet.

The idiots are citing a slow surface (whether it be on Derby day, or all season) as the reason why Justify crawled on the front end... posting the slowest splits in decades for the SA Derby (while on the same day the SA Oaks had faster splits than the Derby for the rare time).


A reference to the slowest Oaks splits in "six years" pales by comparison to the slowest SA Derby 6-furlongs in decades and the slowest SA Derby half-mile run on dirt in decades.


Why don't you drivel through a synopsis of every SA Derby back to Terlago and tell us why there is some excuse for this Derby or that Derby to have known a faster pace than that of Justify's? Be sure to add factors relating to brilliant wagers you made on some of them, and how you were screwed out of your money for this reason or that reason.


What amuses me most is that, in your limited world, 6 runnings of the SA Oaks is enough for "evidence that the track (in 2018) is indeed slower than prior seasons", and yet the slowest SA Derby splits in 20+ years isn't even noteworthy.


Justify could be anything at this point... but he hasn't been tested by any respectable measure to date, and thus might not be the greatest bet to continue the string of winning KY Derby favorites.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Maybe you should actually pay attention to what is written.

I presume this is your segue into what you really meant to say in your previous post...

I stated nothing about any assessment of the general sense of the speed of the SA main track during the winter race meet.

...yes because you ignored the very important tidbit which pretty much negates any direct comparison to previous decades of Santa Anita Derbies in favor of making the dubious and ill-founded comparison to another race, for a different gender, at a different distance, and often-times run weeks before the SA Derby...

The idiots are citing a slow surface (whether it be on Derby day, or all season) as the reason why Justify crawled on the front end... posting the slowest splits in decades for the SA Derby (while on the same day the SA Oaks had faster splits than the Derby for the rare time).

Let me get this straight. Despite the fact that the SA surface is 1-2 seconds slower from a historical standpoint, you are still shocked that the SA Derby this year had some of the slowest splits ever?

A reference to the slowest Oaks splits in "six years" pales by comparison to the slowest SA Derby 6-furlongs in decades and the slowest SA Derby half-mile run on dirt in decades.

Goal post change much? You're the one who directly compared the SA Oaks to the SA Derby, basing this on the fact that its run on the same day. It has only been on the same day for the past 6 runnings. Not much of a sample when you also completely ignore the respective pace scenarios of each race.

Why don't you drivel through a synopsis of every SA Derby back to Terlago and tell us why there is some excuse for this Derby or that Derby to have known a faster pace than that of Justify's?

Once again its been established that the track is slower, so who cares about prior runnings? And why do you continue to ignore the pace scenarios? Are all races run with the same number of horses, at the same distance, with the same diversity of running styles, with negligible track conditions, traffic issues, etc.?

What amuses me most is that, in your limited world, 6 runnings of the SA Oaks is enough for "evidence that the track (in 2018) is indeed slower than prior seasons", and yet the slowest SA Derby splits in 20+ years isn't even noteworthy.

I guess you missed the part where I said "--like the SA Derby this year--".

Nevertheless, I didn't say that that single observation was strong evidence. Another poster did a more thorough analysis that showed that only Grade 1 triple digit Beyering Unique Bella has been able to break the 1:11 barrier for a 3/4 split in any dirt route at SA this meet. Does that register in the slightest?

Justify could be anything at this point... but he hasn't been tested by any respectable measure to date, and thus might not be the greatest bet to continue the string of winning KY Derby favorites.

Any idiot knows that...

But none of that means he didn't run a fast race in the SA Derby...

[CincyHorseplayer]

Well since were throwing around idiot analysis here...

Idiots are the ones citing historical numbers for Santa Anita when it's not the same track at all after have been ripped up and rebuilt twice, especially with plenty of new data to back up the change. That negligence is the real stupidity in the room!

And if we are ignoring speed and using fractions, heads up Mendelssohn isn't wiring a damn thing going 25 and 48 to start a race. Fact punks, fact!

[Mc990]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Well since were throwing around idiot analysis here...

Idiots are the ones citing historical numbers for Santa Anita when it's not the same track at all after have been ripped up and rebuilt twice, especially with plenty of new data to back up the change. That negligence is the real stupidity in the room!

And if we are ignoring speed and using fractions, heads up Mendelssohn isn't wiring a damn thing going 25 and 48 to start a race. Fact punks, fact!

Just one more fact.... there is no run up in Meydan, so adjust accordingly

Btw I still think he's a toss

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

historical numbers for Santa Anita when it's not the same track at all after have been ripped up and rebuilt twice

Has the surface changed since the Pro-Ride was ripped out in December 2010? One has to go back to Swaps in 1955 and Hail Gail in 1952 to find slower Santa Anita Derby winners to Kentucky Derby winners. Every handicapper knows there are track variants but one must put a lot of faith in the radically changed variant to go against 63 years of history. It's hard to even get good graded stakes pars this year since many were run on a sealed track. I'll be watching any Santa Anita horses at Churchill before the Derby to see how their raw times correlate.

[LoneF]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Well since were throwing around idiot analysis here...

Idiots are the ones citing historical numbers for Santa Anita when it's not the same track at all after have been ripped up and rebuilt twice, especially with plenty of new data to back up the change. That negligence is the real stupidity in the room!

And if we are ignoring speed and using fractions, heads up Mendelssohn isn't wiring a damn thing going 25 and 48 to start a race. Fact punks, fact!

Mendelssohn does not have to wire this field to win. Watch the replay of the BC Turf. Although he does have the ability to go wire to wire if that’s how the race sets up.