Did Exaggerator not like Big Sandy Surface?

[bobphilo]

I'm usually skeptical of trainers blaming the surface for their horses' poor performances but Keith D may have a point here. Looking at the photos of EX in the stretch it appears that his forelegs are sinking deeper into the Belmont surface than the other horses. He has a smaller hoof than most which usually indicates a preference for off tracks but might make him sink deeper into Big Sandy.
Just a theory. Any thoughts from the panel?
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...equence-212357

[clocker7]

I think that Exaggerator had run one too-tough of a race too many.

I also think that 9f is his best distance.

[pandy]

He didn't get the dream set up like he did in some of his prior races. He was four wide the entire mile and a half, he was pulling, and he was racing close to the pace. He ran his best races when he was allowed to relax at the back and make one run. They may have over thought the race. Everyone kept saying, you have to be close to win the Belmont. Which, of course, is not true. I doubt he would have won but Exaggerator probably would have run much better if they had let him race off the pace and make his one run.

[woodbinepmi]

Originally Posted by clocker7

I think that Exaggerator had run one too-tough of a race too many.

I also think that 9f is his best distance.

I agree with you, sometimes we forget they are animals and not machines and eventually they run out of gas.

[tanner12oz]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

I'm usually skeptical of trainers blaming the surface for their horses' poor performances but Keith D may have a point here. Looking at the photos of EX in the stretch it appears that his forelegs are sinking deeper into the Belmont surface than the other horses. He has a smaller hoof than most which usually indicates a preference for off tracks but might make him sink deeper into Big Sandy.
Just a theory. Any thoughts from the panel?
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...equence-212357

it probably always looks that way but I was looking at the track in the post parade and the nickname of big sandy can't be more true..it was like quicksand the horses hooves were sinking so deep

[pandy]

It was definitely a closer's track. Here they had a horse who is a confirmed strong closer and they put him on the pace over a closer's track. Not good strategy.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by pandy

It was definitely a closer's track. Here they had a horse who is a confirmed strong closer and they put him on the pace over a closer's track. Not good strategy.

It was a closer's race due to the pace. Kent D didn't realize that for a long 12 furlong marathon it was not wise to press a solid pace while going wide. He actually claimed they were "crawling" early. Except for Destin who ran an exceptional race, all those chasing the rabbit Gettysburg tired late. All those that think that top jockeys have "a clock in their heads" are mistaking them with exercise riders who truly do.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi

I agree with you, sometimes we forget they are animals and not machines and eventually they run out of gas.

Especially when they are ridden wide into a pace not appropriate for a 12 furlong marathon.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by pandy

He didn't get the dream set up like he did in some of his prior races. He was four wide the entire mile and a half, he was pulling, and he was racing close to the pace. He ran his best races when he was allowed to relax at the back and make one run. They may have over thought the race. Everyone kept saying, you have to be close to win the Belmont. Which, of course, is not true. I doubt he would have won but Exaggerator probably would have run much better if they had let him race off the pace and make his one run.

Cannot agree more. This idea of race specific handicapping that one has to be close to the Belmont pace is rubbish. Every race presents a unique handicapping challenge. The way Creator was ridden to a win proved that.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

It was a closer's race due to the pace. Kent D didn't realize that for a long 12 furlong marathon it was not wise to press a solid pace while going wide. He actually claimed they were "crawling" early. Except for Destin who ran an exceptional race, all those chasing the rabbit Gettysburg tired late. All those that think that top jockeys have "a clock in their heads" are mistaking them with exercise riders who truly do.

It's not that they don't have a clock in their heads, it's that they don't ride in enough 1 1/2 mile dirt races.

In the route races Kent normally rides in here in Southern California, 47 4/5 would be a slow pace. You can win a lot of them wire to wire when they let you go that slow.

But in a 1 1/2 mile race on the dirt at Belmont, that same 47 4/5 will usually kill off all the frontrunners. To really love a frontrunner's chances, you really want to see something akin to the 50 second half mile that Affirmed ran.

So I'm sure Kent thought they weren't going very fast. But they were, relative to the distance and surface.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

It's not that they don't have a clock in their heads, it's that they don't ride in enough 1 1/2 mile dirt races.

Many ride like they don't have a brain in their heads.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by pandy

He didn't get the dream set up like he did in some of his prior races. He was four wide the entire mile and a half, he was pulling, and he was racing close to the pace. He ran his best races when he was allowed to relax at the back and make one run. They may have over thought the race. Everyone kept saying, you have to be close to win the Belmont. Which, of course, is not true. I doubt he would have won but Exaggerator probably would have run much better if they had let him race off the pace and make his one run.

Did he like the track? Who knows, he raced exactly like you wrote. That trip had no chance in hell of winning the Belmont at 12f. You are dead on. I don't care if he loved it, that was bad "management". Just look at the winner, he ran the way you suggest and he won the race. If it ain't broke, don't go trying to fix it and that's what they decided to do in NY. That was bad strategy.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by Tom

Many ride like they don't have a brain in their heads.

Good one, Tom.

[chadk66]

He beat himself. He wouldn't rate early in the race and pretty much was out of contention after 3/4 of a mile. By the time they were 100 yards up the backstretch you could see it wasn't going to happen. Kent had his feet through the dash board. Never a good sign.

[CincyHorseplayer]

He looked leg weary in the Preakness. I thought Nyquist was going to re rally on him for a second. Good colt and did everything in his abilities up to that wire. He just came into a 12f race tired. Not a good recipe.