Quote:
Originally Posted by moses
Highly Motivated controlled a fairly modest pace in the Blue Grass, tired down the stretch, and was finished off by Essential Quality. Normally, you could make the case that he's eligible to improve in his 3rd off the layoff but I feel like Chad Brown normally has his horses ready to run regardless of a layoff and, based on that race and his pedigree, I'm just not sure he can "get the distance."
|
He didn't exactly "control" a fairly modest pace. He actually set it with the favorite, and eventual winner, sitting right outside of him. He didn't exactly "tire" down the stretch...he just finished slightly less well than the horse that is highly likely to be favored in the Derby, and about one third of the price that he will be in that race. Is it possible that Chad Brown considers him a better horse when rating, and only went to the lead in the Blue Grass because if he didn't, Essential Quality would have waltzed on the lead, making him essentially unbeatable?
Good Magic ran third in his 3YO debut, ran a similar race to Highly Motivated in the Blue Grass ( he won but he hardly beat much and if I recall correctly ran a very similar figure ), and then gave Justify a run for his money in the Derby ( and Preakness ). Isn't Highly Motivated following a similar pattern to Chad Brown's most successful Derby runner? How about Normandy Invasion? He was a mediocre second in the Wood, and then ran arguably the best race in the Derby. Isn't a better argument that Chad Brown has demonstrated a good plan for getting his Derby contenders to peak on the first Saturday in May?
I'm not trying to sing the praises of Highly Motivated, who agreeably has some real distance questions, more poking realistic holes in the argument that you made.