![]() |
How many races has Beyer and Moss rode in, compared to Bailey? I will take Bailey's opinion in that spot. The ride was fine, he was tired from the 3 races and got beat less then 2 lengths. I thought he ran great in defeat!!
|
If you watch his ride in the 3rd, it was the ride he would have given California Chrome. He was two wide the whole trip around and the horse faded. That could have scared him from doing the same thing with CC.
|
he flattened out. whether he was wide, inside, back , front...he still would have done it....too much for him. espinoza did a good job.
what i saw was what appeared to be a very deep track with alot of kick back. horses spinning their hooves. |
Quote:
|
Bad luck at the break.
That doesn't happen it's arguably a different outcome. If he's healthy...good luck to those who doubt him in the fall. |
Quote:
This horse's problem is breaking from the gate. In this race he got bumped hard from the outside. Its not about making the front for him just getting clean out and position. I believe if he broke out clean its a completely different finish for him. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
California Chrome can't lose unless he does...in which case I am right that he can't lose. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
That was a freaking terribly run race by everyone. I'm not sure how that is not obvious to anyone who has watched racing for any number of years. I singled out Tonalist before the race because he was the one newcomer, or relatively unknown quality coming into this race, having never faced the horses who were already running in the other TC races. Clement told a friend of mine that he liked his horses chances alot in the Belmont, but let's face it, that race he ran would not have touched CC in either the Derby or Preakness. |
Quote:
I can't tell you whether the grabbed quarter made a difference. It may have. There is no way to know for sure. That's not the point. The point was that nobody ever said Tonalist is better than CC. The only question was whether CC might be vulnerable under the specific circumstances (the distance plus the short rest) that he would be facing in the Belmont. I can't tell you for a 100% fact that those things made the difference. But I can tell you that the vast majority of the time that those factors will make a huge difference. If you expect a horse that wins the Derby and Preakness to run the same way in the Belmont, you will be in for a big disappointment the vast majority of times. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You mean Tonalist didn't have to board his time machine to change history against Chrome in the Derby and Preakness? Amazing how you and some others here like to gloss over my point in saying that. Namely that Chrome's normal performance easily beats what Tonalist ran in the Belmont. Maybe, just maybe, running the race with an injured foot cost Chrome two or more lengths. Stop being deliberately obtuse. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'd say Chrome's Preakness probably beats Tonalist's Belmont (even though the comparison is ridiculous to begin with). Tonalist's Belmont compares favorably with every other race Chrome has run. California Chrome is a nice horse who was the likeliest winner of the Belmont going in. He wasn't some layover that needed a meteor to hit him to lose. He had dead aim on the leaders in mid-stretch and didn't get it done. Period. |
Quote:
Do I think Tonalist would have won the Derby? Based on his performance in the Belmont I would say probably not. But I don't want to judge Tonalist too harshly based on how he ran going 1 1/2 miles. I doubt any of these horses will ever run 1 1/2 miles again. It's probably not an ideal distance for any of them. I wouldn't really judge any horse too harshly based on a single race going 1 1/2 miles. He ran a decent race. He didn't look like a star but he could still turn out to be a star. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.