Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
That is exactly my point, that The Tin Man showed that he has a better burst of speed than Cacique. I think that the horse with the better burst of speed is the better horse. If you've got a front-runner who has a better burst of speed than any of the come-from-behinders, he's going to beat them every time, unless he goes way too fast early on. If it's an average pace, the front-runner will win if he has the biggest burst of speed.
|
What you are either neglecting to mention, or don't understand ( though I tend to doubt this ), is that while the Tin Man was racing to his strength ( setting the pace, that is ) Cacique was taken mildly out of his game and forced to be closer than he would prefer on the slow pace. The simple fact is the race set up better for Tin Man's running style than Cacique's. Not that Cacique is a world beater and probably is not a better horse than the Tin Man ( they are close...it's sort of splitting hairs ). but, in terms of race dynamics, in the Arlington Million the Tin Man had the best of it versus really anyone else in the field and unsurprisingly that worked to his advantage...especially versus this year's dramatically subpar field.
Please don't cite the Manhattan as an example of Cacique being good on the lead, as I would guess you understand that was a circumstantial paceless race, and you fully understand the previous concept.