Quote:
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
It's proof enough that the Lookin At Lucky's who won the Haskell wouldn't have smoked the Lost Mountain who won the Haskell.
They simply determine how fast a horse ran in said race in relation to the speed of the race track. Sinister Minister was never a good horse - but he would have beat the ever loving piss out of Lookin At Lucky if LAL faced him in his 13 length Grade 1 Blue Grass win over an extreme inside speed track.
Bluegrass Cat was beaten 21+ lengths in that Blue Grass - and he ran 2nd in the Derby and Belmont in his next two starts, before winning the Haskell by 7 lengths and ending his career with a 2nd in the Travers.
Strong Contender was beaten 17+ lengths in that Blue Grass - and he came back and later took the Dwyer by 8 and beat Lawyer Ron in the Super Derby.
Wild Syn - who was pathetic beyond belief - went wire-to-wire from the rail in a different edition of the Blue Grass and two well beaten horses came back and ran 1st and 2nd in the Ky Derby three weeks later. That's Keeneland.
Bellamy Road's 17.5 length Grade 1 win Wood number wasn't wrong either - and unlike Sinister Minister his performance wasn't a fluke caused by a crazy bias. Scrappy T. was 3rd by 18+ and took a Grade 3 at 7/1 next out followed by a 2nd place finish in the Preakness.
If you think Lookin at Lucky wins that Wood Memorial if he was entered that day - you're a total clown.
Resumes that are put together against real nice N1X alw horses like First Dude, or the 0-for-forever Jackson Bend, or tough luck Trappe Shot in his Graded Stakes debut would look a lot better if the figures weren't so weak.
Freaking Milwaukee Brew ran a 110 Beyer when he was 3rd in the Haskell - and he was what - like the 37th best 3yo to race that year?
|
Ok so back to the list in question. If Phil ranked LAL last on that list and did so along the lines of what you are saying, using the beyer number for that given race as the determining factor of how a horse would "rank" among others, not so much how a horse would rank historically among those same horses, then I have no argument.
Simply place the number next to each horse and leave it at that. Don't bother explaining who ran behind LAL because the number is the determining factor.