He's better than The Factor, but the point is, he hasn't really shown he can overcome much adversity in a race. At least he's proved he isn't one dimensional.

I'll take Lion Heart over The Factor any day of the week. The Factor has won a couple of merry-go-round races and been horrendous in every definitive test he's been in. Lion Heart may have been limited, but he was far from all-or-nothing.

Outside of his not handling the track, what conditions were not perfect for him yesterday?

He sat just off the lead with no real pressure, no real trouble, nor was he hemmed in at the rail, bumped, or anything.

What squeeze are you referring to? The kind of squeeze Jackson Bend put on him in the Kelso?

The kind of squeeze Boys at Toscanova put on him in the Juvie? The kind of squeeze the front runners put on him in the Juvie?

What is this mysterious squeeze you refer to in the Wood? He had things totally his own way!!!!

Oh yes, the squeeze was the 20 mile long length of the Wood. Which was at least 18 miles further than when he won the BC Juvie a few months before.

How about the squeeze he felt in his debut? Oh, that's right, he's just a sprinter, so the conditions were absolutely tailor made for him there.

So, just to make sure I understand, all three of his losses were due to being under some sort of squeeze, right?

From where I sit, the only adversity this horse has ever had to face (during a race that is), was the comeback race against Caleb's Posse. He was coming off a significant layoff following his imaginary illness and had a trip that wasn't 100% to his advantage.

He's won over four different tracks, and outside of yesterdays loss, I've never heard anyone use the excuse that he didn't handle the track. Well, except for me after the Wood, but as it turned out, something else was wrong, which I had no way of knowing.

It's amazing how people will put blinkers on themselves to prove themselves right instead of using their visual abilities to see what is right in front of them.

By the way, anyone who's been a long time reader here at Derby Trail should know the real reason Mo ran like crap.

Distance. Preparation. Pace scenario. Physical issues perhaps.

But I wasn't referring only to the BC Classic. I was also referring to the King's Bishop and the Wood Memorial.

Hah. Yeah, you don't often see a loose on the lead horse turn back the challenge of the poor horse that has the unenviable position of having to make an early run on the frontrunner lest the latter opens up an insurmountable lead.

It was a 4-horse field. While it may be the fastest, it was also the most insignificant performance of his career.

I already said he showed he wasn't one dimensional.

By the way, are we referring to the same Boys of Toscanova that was coming off a 3-month layoff and making his two-turn debut, and then within 2 months went on another 7-month layoff which culminated with an impressive non-threatening 3rd in a second condition allowance race a few weeks ago?

Yep, set a solid pace while hounded by a 30-1 longshot, fought off a couple of challenges turning for home, edged clear of the pack, then failed to hold off two closers.

Sounds like distance once again.

In the BC Juvenile, he had a target to run at, and more importantly, nothing behind him.

I didn't know maiden special weights were considered top class races. Anyways, from the King's Bishop, we know he can handle some pressure and still perform admirably at sprint distances.

Yeah, either that...or he simply didn't handle the track.

What was your excuse for his Wood Memorial again?

But you were sure from his action, stride, choppiness, etc. that he didn't handle the track at Aqueduct, just like you say now about his effort at Churchill Downs.

Apparently, what you've been witnessing are signs of an internal malady.

Pancreas this time?

You could be right. It's possible that Uncle Mo is simply the unluckiest all-time great in history. I mean, despite not handling the track surface, having a ravaged liver, and getting a non-ideal setup in his three losses, he still somehow managed to run normal for the first 1/2 of each race and unleash a bid for the lead on the far turn. He's so good, he can still uncork winning efforts despite being clearly eliminated from contention before reaching the first turn (at least to the well-trained eye). Only past the 1/8 pole have we seen the hepatitis and cuppy Churchill surface rear their ugly heads to make a martyr out the horse instead of a hero.

didn't he handle the track til the quarter pole?

If you still have the ESPN feed, watch the race again for the first 3/4's, focusing on him.

He was not handling that track at all. No doubts about it.

Uncle Motard > Zenyattatard

i don't have it, deleted it after watching.
and if i did, i wouldn't bother, because i don't care. besides, his liver was acting up, that's the excuse now.

Oh. You seemed to want to know because you asked a question, which I answered.

I don't really buy the liver thing either. Seems convenient.

Unless, of course, there's something about CD that causes his liver to get whacky.

i was being facetious when i asked if he handled it til the 1/4. i think we're all cynical when it comes to a hyped horse not performing. i remember when m smith jumped off giacomo a few years back after the preakness saying that he'd flipped his palate. the trainer quickly quashed that story. first they said the track, now it's the liver. either way, it's an excuse and he's done-which is no surprise.
maybe it's just losing that makes his liver get whacky...