Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
What was so interesting about his ride?
He was loose on an unpressured lead through moderate fractions and he was unable to make good of the tactical advantage.
Flat Bold was dead last early - just a few lengths back - and was practically pulling Dominguez out of the saddle.
Is Ian Wilkes supposed to be some great handicapper or future wager expert or something? His horse will have to run significantly better to win the Travers.
|
No question he will have to run better to win the Travers....however, some trainers take their time and develop horses with very specific goals in mind....Ian never had any intention of winning the Jim Dandy or the Dwyer for that matter...they were learning experiences for his colt. WR will be , as Indian Charlie says "further back than nuts on a cat" in the Travers and will finish with a flourish. Putting him into the race last out merely served as a foundation builder for the Travers...
AND its a ridiculous comment for you to call a trainer "some future wager expert" when he is only signifying belief in his colt and executing a plan to get there.....same as Carl did with countless horses. Did you think Unshaded would win the Travers? Lady Joanne the Alabama? Street Sense the BC Juvenile? or Ian's Court Folly destroying Songster at 2/5 in the Amsterdam? etc, etc, etc............