Awesome Again

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

You are downplaying a lot of things there. Listen to Mike Smith after the race, he's been around a while and he knew exactly what was going on. Sky kingdom was out there on a kamikaze mission.

Your last sentence sums it up best!

[Rex Phinney]

Originally Posted by onefast99

Your last sentence sums it up best!

Being there live it was pretty nasty, right out of the gate before they even got to the turn the 3 was leaning out on the 4, Smith first tried hustling SB then slowing him, the 3 mirrored Everything he did in order to block the inside

[thespaah]

I think the Classic sets up to produce a winner of a race that falls apart.
I'm wondering if in the minds of trainers going in will be reconsidering tactics.
We could all end up shocked what we might witness 100 yards our of the gate.
One thing is on my mind is that the betting favorite will be at least 3-1.
That's GOOD....

[cj]

Originally Posted by thespaah

I think the Classic sets up to produce a winner of a race that falls apart.
I'm wondering if in the minds of trainers going in will be reconsidering tactics.
We could all end up shocked what we might witness 100 yards our of the gate.
One thing is on my mind is that the betting favorite will be at least 3-1.
That's GOOD....

I think there is about 0% chance Shared Belief is 3 to 1 or higher.

[Rex Phinney]

Originally Posted by thespaah

I think the Classic sets up to produce a winner of a race that falls apart.
I'm wondering if in the minds of trainers going in will be reconsidering tactics.
We could all end up shocked what we might witness 100 yards our of the gate.
One thing is on my mind is that the betting favorite will be at least 3-1.
That's GOOD....

I agree with you. I like Shared Belief but I see something like Candy Boy or Tapiture winning, maybe a Euro invader, Majestic Harbor picking up the pieces. It will be the last thing that any of us expect.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

I think you are greatly underestimating his trip. He wasn't only wide, he was forced wide and being harassed while up close to a fairly hot pace. He was then wide again around the second turn while the pace was still strong. All wide isn't the same; his was pretty bad.

I think you are misunderstanding or overstating what I am saying.

I am saying there is evidence the outside paths were a little better than the inside paths yesterday. If so, that would offset some of the theoretical impact of ground loss and energy use running out there. He may have been running further, but since he was doing it on a slightly better part of the track than the rail, the net of it had less effect that 66 feet.

IMO, had he run on the rail he would have won by more, but it wouldn't have been ~ 7+ lengths of ground loss plus depleted energy being used hard and harassed. Maybe 3-5 lengths??? A solid effort for sure, but less than the literal interpretation I am reading.

But that's why there's gambling. I could easily be wrong in my interpretation of how SA was playing yesterday. If I am, then he ran great. He also may not have been totally wound up yesterday.

I'm looking at the BC Classic as "he's clearly the favorite", but I'm less afraid of betting against him now. I think people are going to overrate that effort. I can see a scenario where he runs well and still gets beat by a legit Grade 1 horse with a moderately better trip.

[Robert Fischer]

I haven't "spent any energy" determining the quality of that field, but Shared Belief was probably between 3 and 10 lengths better.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

I haven't "spent any energy" determining the quality of that field, but Shared Belief was probably between 3 and 10 lengths better.

IMO track bias is way more nuanced subject than just "good rail" or "bad rail" as described in the early books on the subject.

There are rails that dictate results, rails that move horses up/down, and rails that are just very subtly different than the outside paths.

Sometimes it's 2 paths that are golden, but if you are outside that it's a disaster. Sometimes it's 2 or even 3 paths along the rail that are a disaster and you are best off out in the 4 path.

Sometimes the jockeys are keeping the horses well out on the track in the backstretch, but you have to be on the rail on the turn or you can't make up any ground.

Sometimes the rail is clearly golden on the turn, but you can swing out in the stretch and you are fine.

Sometimes the track looks honest except in the stretch where horses are dying on the rail and then re-rallying f they come off and go outside.

I've seen a few sloppy tracks over the years where I was fairly sure the best riders were aiming for a specific tire track that had the firmest ground.

I saw one recently at a small track that blew my mind. All the riders were aggressively moving to the rail in the backstretch, but as soon as they got to the turn they purposely went out into the 3 or 4 path to avoid the rail. Then they they were willing to drift back in during the stretch drive. No one was rallying inside on the turn.

It's a very tough subject, which makes it both good and bad. It's good because there are constant disagreements, which in turn means if your opinion is good you can find value. It's bad because it's tough to figure out what, if anything, was going on a lot of the time. They card so many turf races these days, you don't get much of a sample of races to evaluate. Brad Thomas is a pretty good guy to read on Twitter or listen to at Monmouth.

[Tom]

Who ran well that wide around the first turn?

[SandyW]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

You are downplaying a lot of things there. Listen to Mike Smith after the race, he's been around a while and he knew exactly what was going on. Sky kingdom was out there on a kamikaze mission.

Are you talking about the cry baby Mike Smith who has been known to pull a few tricks in a race himself.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

IMO track bias is way more nuanced subject than just "good rail" or "bad rail" as described in the early books on the subject.

There are rails that dictate results, rails that move horses up/down, and rails that are just very subtly different than the outside paths.

Sometimes it's 2 paths that are golden, but if you are outside that it's a disaster. Sometimes it's 2 or even 3 paths along the rail that are a disaster and you are best off out in the 4 path.

Sometimes the jockeys are keeping the horses well out on the track in the backstretch, but you have to be on the rail on the turn or you can't make up any ground.

Sometimes the rail is clearly golden on the turn, but you can swing out in the stretch and you are fine.

Sometimes the track looks honest except in the stretch where horses are dying on the rail and then re-rallying f they come off and go outside.

I've seen a few sloppy tracks over the years where I was fairly sure the best riders were aiming for a specific tire track that had the firmest ground.

I saw one recently at a small track that blew my mind. All the riders were aggressively moving to the rail in the backstretch, but as soon as they got to the turn they purposely went out into the 3 or 4 path to avoid the rail. Then they they were willing to drift back in during the stretch drive. No one was rallying inside on the turn.

It's a very tough subject, which makes it both good and bad. It's good because there are constant disagreements, which in turn means if your opinion is good you can find value. It's bad because it's tough to figure out what, if anything, was going on a lot of the time. They card so many turf races these days, you don't get much of a sample of races to evaluate. Brad Thomas is a pretty good guy to read on Twitter or listen to at Monmouth.

If you see something there, maybe you have an edge.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

Who ran well that wide around the first turn?

Beholder ran 49 feet further than the place horse stalking a lively pace but still ran a Beyer figure similar to her other recent efforts this year.

Calculator ran 50 feet further than American Pharoah running relatively close to the pace yet ran a 5 point new top in a very fast race and lost by less this time than last time. Last he didn't lose nearly as much ground.

Shared Belief ran 66 feet further........

Majestic Presence ran 70 feet further than Angela Renee yet ran a 4 point Beyer top relative to her last where she mostly saved ground.

Other horses on the day also ran well outside, but with less extreme ground loss.

Trips like these are generally a huge disadvantage, yet all these horses ran well in terms of expectations and Beyer figures. If you want, you can explain it all away as Beholder running to her peak form, the 2 years old horses moving up sharply on dirt or just developing, and other horses that were just best.

The other possibility is that being wide was not as bad as usual. Those paths may have been a little better. So maybe split the difference????

Shared Belief's trip was the worst of the batch. So no matter how you slice it he ran well and should have won by open lengths. I am simply suggesting it may hot have been quite as impressive as the first glance.

Impressive? Yes.

Heroic? Maybe not.

[Tom]

True, but that wide on the first turn?

[Rex Phinney]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Beholder ran 49 feet further than the place horse stalking a lively pace but still ran a Beyer figure similar to her other recent efforts this year.

Calculator ran 50 feet further than American Pharoah running relatively close to the pace yet ran a 5 point new top in a very fast race and lost by less this time than last time. Last he didn't lose nearly as much ground.

Shared Belief ran 66 feet further........

Majestic Presence ran 70 feet further than Angela Renee yet ran a 4 point Beyer top relative to her last where she mostly saved ground.

Other horses on the day also ran well outside, but with less extreme ground loss.

Trips like these are generally a huge disadvantage, yet all these horses ran well in terms of expectations and Beyer figures. If you want, you can explain it all away as Beholder running to her peak form, the 2 years old horses moving up sharply on dirt or just developing, and other horses that were just best.

The other possibility is that being wide was not as bad as usual. Those paths may have been a little better. So maybe split the difference????

Shared Belief's trip was the worst of the batch. So no matter how you slice it he ran well and should have won by open lengths. I am simply suggesting it may hot have been quite as impressive as the first glance.

Impressive? Yes.

Heroic? Maybe not.

2 of the 3 you cited lost? Not sure what that says about the outer paths. The one horse you cited that did come back to win was Beholder, and well, she is Beholder.

American Pharaoh did all the hard work in his race and still won on the inside, by open lengths.

You also have to think even those horses using the outside where left to run their own race out there, Smith spent the first 6 furlongs of the race either trying to outpace Sky Kingdom or slow down enough to let him pass. The first time they came by Smith surely wasn't riding like a guy who expected to be 5 wide on each turn, he was clearly trying to get in front of Sky Kingdom and stalk Fed Biz, so he probably used more horse than he would have liked. Just before the first turn Smith lets off the gas which Espinoza mirrors in order to move both horses outward, this is right about when Fed Biz gets away and Mystery Train moves in, after which Fed Biz was able to run the second and then the third quarter both slower than the one before.

The race wasn't pretty nor heroic, but it was a nasty trip for a horse that came back to win, I can't recall any horse this year that won with a trip like that even if they where a 1/5 favorite.

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Rex Phinney

Being there live it was pretty nasty, right out of the gate before they even got to the turn the 3 was leaning out on the 4, Smith first tried hustling SB then slowing him, the 3 mirrored Everything he did in order to block the inside

Bob Baffert trains both Sky Kingdom and Fed Biz, but told the Santa Anita publicity office he had nothing to do with the tactics employed by Espinoza.

"These guys are fierce competitors," Baffert said, alluding to Espinoza, Smith, and others in the jockey colony. "I see it happen to my horses when you have a good one. I didn't tell Victor to do that. He stayed away from my other horse, Fed Biz…Game On Dude, that's why I retired him, because he was starting to get mugged, every race. I didn't cry about it. I just retired him."

"I don't know exactly what Victor was doing," Smith said Sunday. "My horse overcame it and showed a lot of fight. He finished the race strong and he had to work for it after being taken out (wide).

Really Bob?