At one point (with over $200K in the win pool), the "other Pletcher" was 8-5 while Cross Traffic was 7-1. If the Cross Traffic that ran in the Met Mile and Whitney had showed up on Saturday, he was supposed to be closer to 8-5 than 8-1. Someone knew.

Quality Road worked steadily between the Woodward and Cup but was always an ouchy type with those problematic feet. With Jerkens too.

I let it lead me to horses that are getting ignored...:$:

Don't buy it. Palace Malice -- the 'other' Pletcher -- had won at 12f over the course and was exiting a troubled 10f trip. Cross Traffic was an uncertainty that many felt was fortunate to hold off Successful Dan at 9f.

Here's the ML and PT prices of the 4 faves.
Cross Traffic (2.50 ML; 3.40 PT)
Flat Out (3.00 ML; 2.50 PT)
Palace Malice (4.00 ML; 2.75 PT)
Orb (4.50 ML; 3.50)

Especially in the subject race! :)

Cross Traffic lost all chance at the start. To use his performance as a true indication off how he is might be a bit aggressive. I won't be surprised if he bounces back or is done for a 125 return Beyer at Gulfstream or is retired.

I don't think you can honestly say though that the early wagering in the race wasn't curious. Cross Traffic figured to be lone speed on a speedy good rail and had big figures to boot with Pletcher's hot hand. To open up at something like 6-1 or 7-1 is pretty high I think. I don't know who "they" is and what they know that we don't, but his price was really high early in the betting.

how is the 116ish bsf dreaming of julia doing? War front?

orb is shug at home not to mention the winner of americas only famous race
flat out was mott at home and more importantly flat out at home
palice malice was the best horse in travers and classic winner
cross traffic was a monster 4 year ols with the hottest bsf he was 5 to 1 with 7 minutes to go.. ice city... the word was out period

OK Freddy. You're right. That makes it clear. The $1 separating the 4 top choices spells it out definitively. Word was out period.

Here's a question for those that must really be in the know... With all the smart money 'that knew', how did the winner go off at 21-1?

"They knew" yet "they" let the winner go at an obvious overlay number. I guess only 'they' that really know among the they that knew got in on the winner.

Okay, we have now flushed out the Jockey club Gold cup. We now need to figure out how to tackle the breeders cup. Obviously, we will watch the works and listen to the usual chatter associated with the horses coming up to the big days. That being said, I still have gotten little knowledge from this past weekend.

This is very stupid.

What if there were nine horses, would 8&9 both have stumbled? How about the 7 horse.....was he breaking from firm ground?

Steve, this is REALLY stupid.

Really stupid? Huh.. Mig and Steve Young didn't think so when suggesting it.

I don't care who said it, it is stupid, irresponsible, and holds up to NO intelligent scrutiny.

Just repeating things that others say is VERY dangerous.

Horses can struggle out of the gate on the AQU inner because of the consistency/nature of the surface, but it's not possible that the footing contributed to Cross Traffic's struggle?

I don't agree with ANY of this. There is no evidence whatsoever to back up your first assertion about the inner, and frankly, comments like that are irresponsible.

Going into the race I was more concerned that the connections decided to skip the Woodward with Cross Traffic. Why skip a race, over a surface you had just won at, if he was doing good?

Bad start and all, I think there is some merit to how cold he was on the board being a possible indication that he was not going to put forth his best.

What posts did Tiznow, Saint Liam, and Unbridled break from when winning their BC Classics at Belmont?

Horses break Poorly and stumble on all surfaces in all types of races. Sometimes they are relatively minor, like War Emblem's in the Belmont or Seattle Slew's in his very slow Derby win. Starts are more important for front end speed horses. Game on Dude broke a half step slow and bobbled in last years Breeders Cup Classic...that very minor poor break is far more detrimental to him than it would have been to a horse without a one dimensional running style.

The hardest thing to do in horse racing is simply say 'I don't know why'

A lot of horses open up extremely cold on the board, they don't go out and break like that, almost ever.

Palace Malice was just one stall inside of Cross Traffic, and he broke like a shot.

There's a lot of good racing stuff to talk about now, guessing as to why the start wasn't cleaner in this years JCGC is a bit of a silly exercise.

10 I believe.

They took 3 months off between an excellent Met Mile and won the Whitney, giving this particular horse time between races has worked well.

Why waste the time trying to read between the lines when the horse didn't even get a fair chance to run his best? I will be more concerned on whether he will hold up to the pace pressure he will meet in the BCC than any idea that he was over the top because the 3 year olds took more money.

Saint Liam broke from the 12.

Yeah I think Tiznow was 10, they were all double digits I believe which was Andy's point.

Of course it was.

Another one have thoughts on Cross Traffic being bred to Dreaming of Julia..lol

The time off between the Met Mile and Whitney was planned. He didn't even make it back to the track to work for almost a full month after the Met Mile. The decision to skip the Woodward was a last minute decision. There is a difference.

the 2 year old fillies in the east are slow and will be nowhere in the BC

I would wait through the weekend before making that assumption...

I'll be using Palace Malice coming out of the JCGC, noting Welsh's workout reports since he is usually a fantastic worker.

I didn't hate Authenticity's last race -- just the trip she received. The field is looking very short for the Lady's Classic.

Steve Haskin ‏@SteveHaskin
Despite getting beat 6 3/4 lengths in the JC Gold Cup, Palace Malice's time would have won the previous nine Gold Cups. #freakywinner

Those kinds of comments do more harm than good.

Care to elaborate? Not being wise, just curious....

The surface changes speed day to day, let alone year to year.

Raw times are meaningless, especially over different years, and confusing people by suggesting otherwise does no good....and harms the uninitiated that don't understand that.

In order to improve fan understanding of the game, the last thing we need to do is mislead them, and comments like that are misleading.

Would love to hear a possible explanation from Glen Kozak. More specifically, a technical discussion to help people understand the nuances of track maintenance.

You mean Monarchos wouldn't have won every Derby but Secretariat's? I'm crushed....time only matters in prison boys and girls.

I assume this was meant as a nonsequitur?

Jay Cronley's column about his handicapping on the Gold Cup was entertaining reading:

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/stor...988/we-execute

Absolutely not.

But it is one.

I saw those comments on Twitter and was literally laughing out loud. I knew it would be a topic of discussion here.

Not only that, it often changes between races, particularly when a few turf races are thrown in between. Assuming the JCGC track speed was the same as the other dirt races is a pretty big leap.