Stud they DON'T run as many miles as you would think at the highest level.
They run the Gotham(other than Easy Goer, three year olds don't approach that mark that early in the season, and yes I remember the day EAsy Goer ran his race and the track was just as fast, if not faster).
The Westchester is run each year, but thats not a grade one and doesn't draw grade one milers.
The only big mile race thats run at Aqueduct for elders is the Cigar, formerly the NYRA mile.

I'm pretty sure the Westchester is usually run at Belmont.

It used to be Aqueduct Joey, and was for a long time. I'll check but I think its still Aqueduct.
I'm not at all in any way demeaning DC's performance by stating this.
I just happen to get sick to my stomach when they make a track so fast as they did on Saturday.
It makes it so very hard to gauge performances.
I wanted to post a " this is why Nobiz got all the media hype" thread in regards to his Champagne that you and I both gushed over and said he was the better horse.
But my enthusiam about him, though still very high, was tempered by the fact that I dunno what he proved either. He loped behind moderate fractions and hit them with a burst of speed that on a track like that is gonna win you the race.
I'd have liked it a lot better had the track been honest and he had done the same thing.
I still think hes the goods, but have to wait until spring to confirm it in my mind now.

you're right on that. i stand corrected. still hung over from woodbine/maple leafs game marathon. still wish DC had gone a click faster!

Honestly? I would have wished the same thing had the track been at all near reality.
My bitterness about that track stemmed from the 3rd race.
I didn't play much Meadowlands this year because I've told you I'm not a nighttime bettor. But one Saturday night I played a big pik-3 and needed Bark Dust at 3-5 to wrap it up. It was a 5 1/2 furlong race and he was putrid, being defeated with no excuses by a Charles Town shipper, I **** you not.

To watch him go 7F in 1:21:4 wire to wire, well, that was an indication to me that the track was so incredibly fast as to be stupid.
Look at his pp's, can't beat a CT shipper at the Meadowlands with no excuses in a 5 1/2 furlong race yet he can go 7F on Saturday in 1:21:4? Please.
At that point times became irrelevant to me on that card, all you could do is base evaluation of winners on the way they accomplished the win.

Look who he's trained by...

Honestly, I think they lowballed this Beyer. I got a 129 on my figures (highest of the year.) That's about a 121 Beyer equivalent. The other races fell in line with this number, the winner/2nd/3rd was +- 2 lengths of their last at this number. In the Cigar itself, even Sharp Humor ran back dead on to his last even though he was beaten 13 lengths.

Does anybody know what they gave the Demoiselle winner? I got the figure I had in my mind going in and once again, it was terrible. This is one awful group of 2YO fillies.

The Westchester is the opening day feature at Belmont and has been for quite a few years now. Najran ( I think that's his name) set a track record in winning it a few years ago.

I think he gave the Demoiselle an 84.

You shouldnt soley look at times. Again, times are a component that are used in handicapping. To me, times, fractions, beyers, track surface etc etc all need to be used when handicapping. Only focusing on times or beyers without considereing anything else is foolish to me. When looking at a race, from an part-owner perpesctive all I care about is wins. From a handicapping point of view, I care about everything combined.

I agree 100% on your assesment of the race. The gears were incredible. And they way he reacted when shown the whip indicates he is pretty smart like you said.

I do not post to get a reaction. I am too old for that. I post because of something I feel like saying. And I dont think I waver on anything. Sure, maybe I have changed my mind after someone points something out to me that I havent thought of. But if you can find something that I have wavered on then show me. Other than that, I post what I think and feel.

Thanks, I had it a little lower (about a 79). I'm trying to figure out how they split the variant because they must have to get these numbers...

OK, reality check time, as apparently there are so few good horses these days that when a nice one comes along the whole world seems poised to declare him the second coming. Discreet Cat is a very nice horse but people are getting seriously carried away.

Here's a comparison.....Congaree was a VERY good horse, but I don't know that he was perceived with the reverance Discreet Cat seems to be receiving here, and at least one of his Cigar Mile wins was more impressive than Discreet Cat's. Now, Discreet Cat may improve, as he certainly hasn't had an extensive campaign, but who knows how ANY horse will return from Dubai.

A few days ago Bernardini was the greatest thing since sliced bred, at least according to a number of people here, despite not running faster than many of the top horses we have seen over the last quarter century. People were talking about his beautiful stride, the ease with which he won, and blah blah blah. Then, you know what happened? he faced a competitive field. Suddenly he was just another good horse who lost to another good horse.

Let the horses REALLY do the talking. Appreciate them for what they are but stop setting them up to disappoint. Discreet Cat could, and well may, lose to another good horse, should one hopefully come along. It won't diminish his actual ability, just as Invasor's BC win didn't diminish Bernardini's, only the unreal expectations and accolades placed upon him.

Watch out, in speaking with reality you are gonna get hit with a "hater" response. I sure did.
Congaree and Holy Bull are the two most underrated horses of my lifetime.
Congaree's Cigar performance was as incredible, one of the best three performances I ever saw.

We have several good horses and I think we should enjoy them without over analyzing. There were so many good performances over the weekend. Tiz Wonderful, No Biz Like Show Biz, Discreet Cat, Premium Tap, Showing Up, Deep Impact etc etc....I know I left out a couple. Anyway, it was sure fun watching these horses race and win. Sometimes it is good to be just a fan and not a gambler or owner.

Holy Bull is definatley underrated. He seems to be a forgotten horse sometimes.

When you see flashes of greatness in today's game you have to overreact because chances are you won't see that horse run again and if he does run it'll more than likely be two, maybe three races tops.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Discreet Cat's last race will be the World Cup. Seems like the Sheikhs plan is to slowly, but surely, control the breeding industry.

very good comparison....I for one loved Congaree....but not at first, it wasn't until he kept showing up and performing well that I really fell for him. I thought he was a good 3 YO who was overshadowed by his big red stablemate...but he kept running at the top level until he was 6...we never get to see that these days...Pillow is right...we have to get wound up over one great run because it may be the only one we see

See, THAT is why I prefer the Sir Tyler T's of the world. Not fast, but they show up over....and over.....and over....you get the point.

If they're too good to run at Aqueduct in February I'll pass!

Great post. I also think there is another aspect at play here -- some % of people, whether they be professionals gamblers, bloodstock agents, or whatever they may be, tend to look at horses in different ways. There's almost a type of coginitive dissonance going on here in the background. Some may look at the horse, subconciously and without knowing at all, strictly looking to "beat him" next time. Others may look at it completely differently, perhaps wanting him to be "the horse" that we've all looked for high and low for quite some time. Others, in a different way, perhaps many other ways.

I also think that many people are catching the "potential" bug and that is not only contageous but also an easy target for critisizm.

Eric

Eric I agree, and on this whole thread or any other thread I have yet to see anyone put down this horse or his performance. In fact all have praised it, in varying forms or degrees of excitement.
I was told I was "talking down" to people when I asked if I was the only one who had seen the undercard. Nonsense. I simply couldn't believe the gushing over the raw time and honestly felt like people must not have seen the undercard and realized how fast the track was playing.
That doesn't mean I didn't appreciate the effort, or the horse. But a few folks jumped the gun on the raw time in their excitement over the horse, and I think all times or races have to be viewed in the proper context.
When Bark Dust and Mister Supremo go 7F in 1:21:4 on the same card and track, any references to time, short of a shattering of a track record to me become a small issue.
Different people view races and horses in different ways, exactly as you suggest.
To me, Premium's Tap effort was just as worthy of praise. Running back on short rest off a big race he not only toyed with the field, but did so in a manner that would suggest a huge breakthrough race and that he is really in incredible shape and form. The fact that he didn't tie a track record on a track that wasn't playing that fast doesn't get him as much hype as DC's race did due to the raw time. I'm not saying it was a better effort, but certainly in the same league and was worthy of more hype than it got.
Thor's Echo's race was also awesme and will get a HUGE fig on a track that was playing pretty slow on the undercard.

Premium Tap didnt break a track record, but he did break the Stakes record. To me that was pretty good because (as you mentioned) the track was playing so so.

I really do wish DC had gone a tick quicker and set a NTR. Why not? I certainly do understand raw times are just that, raw, but still think he ran a super race and looked capable of just a bit more. Thing is, if he had beaten the mark, folks would be all over him as having set a phony track record and that's not right. I'm sure the track was fast for Easy Goer and expect it was also the day Congaree went 133 flat. I don't think DC has done enough to be called a great horse, much less a very good one and wouldn't even if he'd gone faster.

But what he has done, that's kind of getting lost, is that he has made the round-trip from US-->> Dubai-->> US very successfully. It will be very impressive if he can do it again.

What's also lost here is the great job Surroor did with him. I don't think this is the soundest horse ever seen, yet every time he shows up for a race, he looks fantastic.

I agree 100% sent to. fast track or not, what we saw was very special i think. they've done a great job with him. every time they have put him on the track he has been untouchable. he may not be great yet but it's within his grasp with a few more races.

But Thor's Echo sucks, he only raced 3 lengths off the rail in the BC. He couldn't have won otherwise! It was the rail, damn it! I demand a recount!

Yes, Phil, and don't forget that Thor's Echo actually bounced in the BC. It was only the (very wide) rail bias that, like a luge run, rocketed him to that win, overcoming not only the other "better" horses, but the inevitable bounce, too. ;>)

--Dunbar

As a fan, there are certain horses I like or follow more closely than others. Some are top stakes horses, others are the Spooky Mulders of the world. Fans tend to get very emotional, defensive and almost irrational about their favorites.
on the other hand, I work in the industry and handicap almost daily. I do everthing from $8k maiden claimers at PHA to the Classic and cannot let emotion decide where I go. Blackthroatedwind makes a lot of great points. We are so desperate for a good one to come along that we crown superstars before their time.
I was impressed with DC on Sat, he looked very good. However, I think it's fair to say that when Go Fernando Go (who??!!) wins a NYB NW1x in 1:22.22 and 2yo maidens fo 1:36.65 and Bark Dust (who indeed??!!!) goes 1:21.83 we can guess that the track is "sharp." I like Nobiz but since 1986 only 3 horses have won the Remsen in under 1:50 (Rockport Harbor and Comeonmom) so I think it's fair to assume that his final time of 1:48.82 was "assisted" by the surface condidion.

I'm a little offended here, I made those points and got accused of being a hater on Saturday night.
Bark Dust's time had me talking to myself, imagine singling him on the back end of a pik-3 against a bad field of allowance horses in a 5 1/2f race at the Meadowlands and getting beat by a Charles Town shipper and then tossing him out of pik-3's based on that dreadful no excuse performance and watching him wire a field in 1:21:4? That triggered a profanity fest that had to be heard to be truly appreciated.

I guess that since I'm widely known in cyberspace as a "hater" that it's simply redundant to call me out on it here. On any racing board, anyplace on Earth if you apply logic you are by definition a hater. Logic may be used (but only with caution) on the "handicapping/selections" page of this and other boards.;)

I've noticed the same thing, LOGIC = HATER.

Or if I express an opinion that I don't believe a certain horse is quite as good as he is being built up to be, that gets somehow translated to mean I think said horse is a "Rat" or a "Pig". Huh?

Jim I'm gonna take a guess that you are over 30.
Part of the problem I have with conversing about the context of how good a horse is or may be with anyone under 30 these days is that they lack the perspective that we have. Its certainly not their fault that they were watching Sesame Street when we were watching races in the 80's(thats as far back as I go) and early 90's.
Its just that all these very small fields in dirt gade ones most of the time have rendered "races" into the "performances" category as Steve so aptly described them.
We don't get SS-EG battles or big fields like we used to get and matchups throughout the year. Some of the younger folks in the crowd may find this hard to believe, but horses used to meet each other more than once a year at the highest level and the fields were larger and that meant traffic trouble and obstacles to overcome. I kinda laugh when I talk to some these days who tell me what an awful trip a horse had because he had to steady one time, or that "the jockey moved too soon, or too late".
I suppose with the small fields you get in the big ones now that steadying one time or a slighty premature move may indeed seem like a tragedy. But in the good ole days horses most often had to overcome trips and traffic in races and it made winning consistently at the highest level a very hard task. If you didn't get beat because one of the other good ones you met 2-4 times a year was better that day, you could get beat because of traffic.
Winning streaks used to really define a grade one horse as very good, now they play dodgeball all year and a bad trip is steadying one time or not getting the exact setup you needed during a race.
There's no way to get someone younger to get the perspective that someone older has from remembering racing as it once was. They can read about it all they want, but just reading about something rather than actually experiencing it won't ususally give someone the perspective.
And so it goes and will continue to go. The only perspective that younger fans have is that of which they know, and over recent years thats meant more long winning streaks in small fields where main rivals duck each other all year long. To older fans, its gonna be hard for most of todays proclaimed "superhorses" to come close to measuring up to the days of yesterday.
Its not gonna change, and I expect the conflict over how good these horses are to continue for quite some time. It will continue until the last of the racing fans who remembers racing before the Breeders Cup took over as the pinnacle of the racing year dies off.

Uh yeah, over thirty, BARELY. <cough, cough>:D

your comments are right on and funny. I agree, the times required the horses to have a real hard-knocking quality back then.

Thats why I respect the campaign that they have taken with Ouija Board this year. She has danced all the tough dances not ducking anyone male or female, and traveled the world the as well. To me, to some extent, she is kinda emblematic of racings past. Have they ever used an excuse for her?

Oujia Board is the greatest!! What a hard knocking gutsy mare, she dances all the dances and fights like hell, win or lose.

I've seen so many horses who were the next wonderhorse, until they got eyeballed that is!! Most people don't realize this but horses are herd animals by nature and instinct, and its the rare ones who actually wanna lead and fight.
I will never label a horse as great until he or she passes a look in the eye test and goes on.
To me that was the most impressive part of Discreet Cat's race, not the raw time.
He got eyeballed in the lane and said "yes I can" and took off.
All the really good ones became emboldened by challenges and fought like hell to get to the wire first, even when they didn't get their first they tried like hell to do so.
I can think of a few horses I've watched who posessed great talent but obviously didn't care if they got there first or not. Their talent carried them home sometimes, but they just didn't care if they passed or not.
I'd put Empire Maker in that category and I believe Bailey himself once said he had a common streak.

Formal Gold is one of the few " next wonderhorses " I remember that actually panned out though it took a little time. I think his Beyer number in his debut, as a 3YO, was one of the highest ever for a debut ( it was either close to meadowlake or beat him ). I remember him running at Belmont for his second start.

For the most part these future superstars either get injured and hardly run or fail over time.

You know, I am VERY guilty of not mentioning this horse as one of the most underrated horses ever.
I myself sometimes fall into the trap of dismissing greatness once they go t9o stud and basically fail to hit what they were expected to achieve.
That year when Formal Gold was slugging it out, and winning, vs Skip Aaway and several other very good horses(Skip Away was great), he was incredible.
He went into a 3 month form cycle where very few horses in HISTORY could have beaten him.
Hes overlooked.

I hate to say it Oracle, but you do have Ghostzapper in your avatar and sig line. He didn't exactly dance all the dances.

great, greater, greatest....

Forego runs down Honest Pleasure in the '76 Marlboro while giving him 18 pounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWeWHgHivWk

I'm guilty of forgetting about Formal Gold. I was reminded last night when somebody posted old beyers, my jaw dropped when looking at Formal Gold's numbers.

Say what? What is it you are trying to say?
He had a layoff necessitated by injury in his three year old year, then ran in allowances, the Kings Bishop, and blew away Elders in the Vosburgh.
He was unsound enough that he almost didn't run at age 4.
Once he did run, danced in 4 races in 4 months and passed the eyeball check in the Woodward, and than put on a dazzling display in the BCC that left no doubt as to what he was.
He then returned at age 5, and off a long layoff ran one of the best figure wise Met Miles ever with ease.
He wasn't ducking anyone, his physical problems necessitated that he have the layoffs he did have.
There is a big differnce between ducking horses and making sure one still has all 4 legs working.
Sorry, but his BCC, Woodward, Met Mile, and Vosburgh were all spectacular.

Too bad they were between his 3yo season and his 5yo season. My question is this: Did you or anyone else think, when he debuted at 4 in the Tom Fool that he was a HOY candidate? Or was it the stellar win over 3 allowance horses in the Iselin slop that sealed the greatness?
His "great races" were intermittant. When he was good he was very good.

Thank you.

Wait, are you over 30? I'm not sure if I can agree with that statement unless you were hanging out with Mike at the OTB while I was watching Sesame Street.