Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hockey2315
I realize that the tone of your post is basically "you're an idiot - the horse has not shot," so I guess I might as well state my case.
First off, this horse's Euro form was obviously very, very good and she clearly showed A LOT of promise for Rouget - I'm sure you wouldn't debate that her last race in France almost certainly was better than anything any of these horses have ever run (on turf). She was also 3-for-3 at 6F in Europe. Now, we can't bank on her being the same horse she was in 2007 for various/obvious reasons, but we may be able to explain away some of her disappointments since then to the point where we can give her another chance at a very big price.
9/8/07 - G1 Garden City - a very tough spot - she ran only borderline credibly - we can excuse her because of the distance and because it was her first start in N.A.
10/14/08 - Listed stakes in CA - first for Canani - she was off slow and never in contention - placed on the bench for a while after that so it's safe to assume something went wrong
5/9/08 - turf sprint stakes in CA - first off the lay-off, she once again gets left at the gate, but then closes to get third into what I'm assuming was a very slow pace without knowing how the turf was playing that day (:23 3/5 and :46 2/5)
6/28/09 - she's then entered in a somewhat ambitious spot in the G2 A Gleam on synth against the likes of Dearest Trickski and Magnificience on the polytrack. If this is the race I'm thinking of, DT controlled the pace and even Magnificience (granted, a much worse horse on poly) couldn't get to her. Missvinski had a rough trip and never ran a step. We can chalk her non-effort up to that, the surface, or maybe another injury.
4/11/09 - First for Mott, won by front-runner Raw Silk. I don't have the chart for the race and can't remember anything about it, but from the looks of things Missvinski got a little too close to the pace. It was her first off the lay-off and first with Mott so while it's a slightly less easily excusable performance, I think we can still give her a bit of a break.
After the South Beach, her works signal improvement. She had three very fast works back-to-back before a slower final work before her effort on Saturday, and looked to be coming into the race pretty tuned up but also perhaps a little too keen. She came out a little too sharp in a race beyond her best distance, and spit the bit after setting a good pace.
The fact that Mott's running her back so quickly to me shows that he saw something in her works that makes him think she's better than that last performance and perhaps he realized that he mis-spotted her a bit. She's turning back - obviously good for her - and as long as she came out of the race on Saturday in good order probably gained a lot of fitness from the effort. Notice that all the works in her PPs have been at 4F - she may not have been fit enough off of those. Taking off the blinkers certainly can't hurt either. . .
|
"You're an idiot, the horse has no shot" is not my style and I'd rarely, if ever, say that here or anywhere. In fact, I hoped that you would mention what you liked about her. I made a sizable wager on her in the Garden City based on her Euro form. I thought she ran well that afternoon but the winner was just a superior horse that afternoon.
I agree that she's had a variety of things go wrong since and there are excuses for some of them. I'm mostly baffled by the quick comeback given that that's never been Mott's thing. She is definitely way off form but there is some merit to considering what she can do if they lay back and make one run. That was her preferred style in Europe, so it would definitely make a difference.
I really thought she stopped like a horse who bled last time out and maybe the time before. I've hardly looked at the field but she's certainly going to be a large price and undoubtedly faces a softer group than she has in her last two starts.
NT