Random post-Derby thoughts
 

-I think any hopes of removing the graded earnings system currently in place for determining Derby starters have died their final death. Had any different system been put in place before this year, there is little chance Mine That Bird would have made the race had more than 20 horses entered this year. In fact, his name was often brought up by folks, myself included, who thought there was a problem with the current system. I can't remember where Mine That Bird ranked ultimately among the 20 starters, but at one point just before the Derby he was #20. It seems likely he would made the Derby field only under the current system. Also, it didn't seem like he was even being pointed for the Derby until he reached #22 or #21 on the list. It reminds me of 2002 when It'sallinthechase was entered in the Derby after his owner all but admitted the race wasn't on their radar until they learned the horse had the earnings to run if they wanted.

Anyway, I can't see the rules for Derby entry being changed now.

-I understand and respect the opinions of those who took a stand against Pioneerof The Nile in the Derby. Obviously, as a bettor, you have to draw a line somewhere. And eliminating POTN from one's wagers made perfect sense. He was among the favorites and had never run a fast figure, nor had he run on dirt. He was arguably the most logical toss among the favorites. However, those who tossed him must admit that they were tossing him based on what they suspected might happen, rather than what the horse had indicated would happen. It was a toss based almost entirely on speculation (unless you were persuaded to bet against him based on his premature moves in some of his preps). And no horseplayer can fairly say that a stand against POTN was irrational. However, in reading the arguments of some who feel that his 2nd-place finish proved nothing (or even that it reinforced their position that he's "not a dirt horse"), I have to ask what POTN needs to do to show he's likely to be as good dirt as turf and synetetic. By almost every account, he handled the Churchill Downs surface beautifully all week long. Not one professional observer with whom I spoke, be they trainers or clockers, said that he showed anything other than a strong liking for the dirt. Several even said he was a standout. When you combine this (subjective) "fact" with his 2nd-place finish, why do some people continue to insist that he is not a dirt horse? And what does that mean, anyway? Does that mean he is not good enough on dirt to win a graded stakes? A Grade I? Any race? What exactly is the criterion? Is the argument a matter of whether dirt is his favorite surface? It seems like when it comes to this horse, people are arguing different questions, such as...

-Will Pioneerof The Nile handle dirt?
-Is he better on dirt than turf/synthetic?
-Is he good enough on dirt to win major races on dirt?
-Is he a turf horse?

In reading the different arguments regarding this horse, it seems like there is more agreement than some people think. For instance, maybe he IS better on turf than dirt. But does that mean he can't win a Grade I on dirt? Of course not. And if he wins a Grade I, or even a Grade III on dirt, will those who claim he's "not a dirt horse" then retract their claims? Or will they just blame the weak competition or some other factor?

I guess my questions are, what is the exact argument against POTN, and how are we measuring who is right, and who is wrong? Because my feeling is that he ran a pretty good race in the Derby, and showed that he is capable of running well enough on dirt to win major races.

-I have no reason whatsoever to believe that Mine That Bird's win was aided by any kind of illegal activity. That being said, if everything was on the up and up, then I don't see how his win can be attributed merely to a liking for the surface or a rail-skimming trip. The way that horse was moving in the final 3/8 was not the way you typically see a ground-saving mud-lover move. And I get the fact that he was way back off the pace, but for a horse to close the way he did, there has to be some genuine talent. It's not like he was just moving less slowly than everyone else. His final fractions were simply fast. So, if the win was legit, then I think Mine That Bird is probably as good as the win suggested, rather than just the beneficiary of a million different factors.

What's the over/under on number of people that will actually read that in its entirety?

0.0

Has Sumitas finally been banned?

charismatic also would have missed the derby had there been different rules. what, there would have been no derby winner that year had he been left out? or mine that bird this year? horses get left out every year. the fact that on occasion a horse wins who may have been excluded doesn't reinforce anything except the adage that every dog has its day.

and no, i didn't read it in its entirety. i have james joyces ulysses on the shelf for when i want to read long winded writing.

pretty good article.

From my own unique perspective I never doubted whether or not POTN would like dirt. He should be just as comfortable on the dirt as a synthetic. The question for me was whether or not he could get the distance and how he would fare over that added distance against better horses.
He ran a fairly solid race in the Derby. It was basically his average run. It was probably good enough for 5th, 4th or maybe even 3rd in most derbys. He was fortunate to run 2nd with the foul that Gomez committed in the stretch.

He had a great thing going in the prep season on that synthetic that he will never have again. In some ways he is a little like Colonel John - a horse who had advantages on the synthetic prep season in Ca. but could handle dirt just fine, but wasn't able to compete with the better dirt horses.

POTN should be competitive in the Preakness, he isn't capable of running a BIG race, but he can run his same kind of race and hope for a collapse.

If you didn't read it how do you know it's long-winded? Because I wrote it? Or because your idols mocked it and you desperately want to be part of their clique?

Don't be mad that I have a blog now too.

'

Yeah but is it on Twitter?

First off, I did not toss POTN from any of my tickets. But my point goes to the bolded position. I don't
think you could have gotten an accurate read on this horse based on the entirety of resume. Whether you
included or tossed, you were just doing so on speculation. He wasn't convincing in any area enough to sway
one way or another, and there in lies the issue. Since there was no basis to feel up or down on him, one can't
really gauge where he stands today.

He was off my board until IWR came up lame and the track stayed sloppy/muddy. Considering the breeding, POTN
was worth including in the mud at 6-1 or 7-1. Since the track was off, you can't yet gauge his overall effectiveness
on dirt. More than likely, he can handle it, but for now, it's still up in the air. I'd say the Derby answered some questions about him, but not all of them.

I read it.

:rolleyes:

I wouldn't be cheerleading about a horse that would have been hammered worse if QR and/or IWR was in this race. He had everything he could do to hold off the 3rd and 4th place finisher and bumped one of them quite hard in doing so. All and all I think the horse still sucks and his backers shouldn't be chest thumping over that performance or writing a thesis about it either.

What about asking serious questions about the nature of the debate? Are you as opposed to that as you are to my "cheerleading" and "chest thumping"?

O.K. Cheer all you want. I just don't think he's proved a thing. It's been debated over and over. As a safety/saver bet I used him in a few gimmicks, but I still think he has a lot to prove. If he goes and wins the Preakness he will do it without my money and then you can say you were right.

The thing is this, you clearly saw some validation of your opinion in Pioneerof the Nile running 2nd in the Derby. That's OK, you should feel good about him being your pick. However, if you think him being a distant 2nd in a race that was completely wiped out by the winner (does TFM have a trademark on that phrase?) while he ran basically the same average figure and interfered with the 3-4 finishers enough to hold 2nd is enough for the people on this board or anywhere to say they were wrong about POTN, it's not going to happen. No excessively verbose plea will ever get that to happen.

NT

While I appreciate your non-confrontational response, I must remind you that I never said anyone was wrong or that I was right. I merely asked those who are anti-POTN to state, for the record, exactly what they think about the horse AND what has to happen for them to change their minds.

When I asked "What does POTN have to do...", I legitimately wanted to know what they feel he has to do.

insecure

prima donna

petulant child

He has to run at least one race that isn't below average for a supposed good horse. You can call this obstinacy on my part, but it really isn't, it's merely realism. His synthetic races are mediocre and his dirt race was no better. I am surprised that he even ran roughly as well on dirt, be it a sloppy track, as he did on the synthetics, but he surely didn't improve as many claimed he would.

Andy, I respect your opinions. But this has to be the most vague answer to a specific question that I have ever seen on DT.

Fair enough, but think of it historically. People talked about him as a TC kind of horse and he isn't even as fast as Giacomo.

First confrontational, now vague. I guess until you hear want you want to hear, no answer will be good enough for you.

Based on what? Beyer Speed Figures? Thoro-graph?

Here. I'll give you a few suggestions for the "POTN Standard".....

-Pioneerof The Nile must run a Beyer Speed Figure of 105 or higher on dirt in order for me to admit he is a "dirt horse."

-Pioneerof The Nile must win a Grade I on dirt.....

-Pioneerof The Nile must win any graded stakes race on dirt while earning a Beyer Speed Figure of 100 or higher...

Um, I called your response "non-confrontational", and Andy admitted he was being vague.

Jesus. Can anyone on this website understand that not everyone is being a sarcastic a-hole? Can anyone read?

Speed figures certainly help. But it's also a matter of reasonable judgement of talent. Call this vague if you want but it's not necessarily definable.

Wow man. Relax. You seem like a good guy. It's just you asked a question and people are responding. Good luck in the Preakness!

OK. That's fine. But it also means you will never have to admit you are wrong about POTN. Right?

Thus, this debate will always continue. Which is fine. I'm just sayin'.

I'm not a good guy. I'm a very, very bad and dangerous man.

Can you honestly say that while watching him down the stretch in the Derby you felt like you were watching a good horse?

is anyone really anti-POTN? wanting to see success on dirt to answer if a horse has dirt form doesn't make one anti-anything-execpt maybe anti-speculation based on breeding alone. i'm a person who has to see something to believe it can happen-just like most of us had to see mine that bird actually win that thing to think he had a shot at the derby.

i think POTN needs to win a top race on a fast dirt surface, while facing top horses. it's a shame that the field fell apart, and what looked like one of the better derby renewals we've had in a while turned into a scratch filled slopfest. imo the derby is a toss, the results aren't meaningful, since many of the better thought of horses left in the field failed to run their race. or, i think they did. maybe some horses were under-, and others, over-rated. that's why i'm hoping the preakness has better weather and a fast track.

POTN was a terrible bet for the Derby.
He was probably one of the top 5 contenders, and possibly worse. He was bet to 6-1. He had little potential to run a big race.

We had a very odd Derby where 2 more talented horses had nightmare trips (FF, Dunkirk).

POTN finished 2nd in slow time, and needed a foul by his jockey to hold 2nd.

The people who said that Pioneer of the Nile had no value were correct. The result doesn't change that.

Nick and Andy both nailed it, and you've got it backwards. POTN was relatively slow before the Derby. People who hammered him to 6-1 were the ones making the assumption - that he'd improve on dirt. He had to in order to contend for the win. People who tossed him were simply saying that if he doesn't improve on dirt, which he didn't, he won't win. I don't call that "pure speculation."

And he's still relatively slow. He ran OK in the Derby and anyone who thinks he ran better has some explaining to do, not us. He was stomped by the winner, drifted out badly and should've been DQ'ed from 2nd.

The argument wasn't "he's going to suck on dirt" or "he won't be a dirt horse," it was "he'll have to be faster on dirt than he was on synthetic to win big dirt races." He still isn't. He's still an average three-year-old. Maybe that'll change in Pimlico, but he's still average, and how you think otherwise is puzzling.

Certainly you realize I couldn't care less about admitting whether I am right or not.......right? I do it all the time....it's basically a given considering my job. If Pioneer of the Nile excedes my opinion of him I will certainly let you know.

I get it, I have a big ego, but it's so big that it allows me to readily admit when I am wrong.

I think the jury is still out, which is part of the reason for my post.

I thought he ran a pretty nice race in the Derby. He was up close early, put away the front-runners (who were of questionable ablity, I agree), and then held off two pretty good horses (while possibly interfering) for 2nd. On a track that he had every right (as did everyone) to dislike, I feel like it was a pretty solid effort.

I think Pioneerof The Nile will win a Grade I on dirt someday. Does that make him "good"? No. Frost Giant is a Grade I winner. But POTN has faced 47 opponents in his last 5 races, and he's beaten 46 of them. And he's won two Grade Is in the process, and finished 2nd in another Grade I on dirt.

Well, wait a minute Andy. I don't think you're being fair here. You and others have been calling those of us who think POTN is good "wrong" for a while. And you are entitled to your opinion. I'm less interested in hearing you admit you are wrong (which I have heard you do before) and more interested in what the standard is for this one particular horse. That's all.

This is a debate. And I like debates about racing. But I don't see anything wrong with agreeing on what the actual debate is, so to speak.

Ok. And if speed figures are the measure, and if they are accurate, then you are correct.

Although, I have to point out that a number of people (maybe not you) said he was a turf horse because he started his career on turf and Mott felt dirt was his 3rd-best surface.

Pioneerof The Nile was 6-1 in the Derby. In a manner of speaking, this represents a less-than-15% chance of winning.

Now, let's say you were planning to bet against POTN, yet you would have admitted before the race that if he DID handle the dirt, he was among the most likely winners. By betting against POTN, you are essentially saying "I think there is less than a 15% chance that POTN will handle dirt." (I know, I'm simplifying this for effect, but for the sake of argument...)

To put it another way, if you thought that POTN was a potential winner IF he handled dirt, AND if you felt the likelihood of him handling dirt was higher than 15%, then it is easily arguable that he DID offer value.

Justin - i would love to see POTN run against Quality Road

Maybe after the TC BB can keep him here in NY and run in the Jim Dandy and then the Travers stakes

If he can win those types of races my guess is that people's opinion of him will chage

Well, in this case my record of disagreeing with you has some relevance.....and I think you know that it's been pretty strong overall.

No, that doesn't necessarily make me correct this time, but it surely gives my opinion the necessary credibility in this case.

I disagree with this entire post.

And Zanjero came within half a length of winning a Grade I. We'll call that one a tie.

And Bittel Road has yet to appear in a claiming race. Score one for me.

I'll concede that Nobiz Like Shobiz was NOT the best of his generation.

Justin: 1
Andy: 1
Tie: 1