Is Grasshopper a walk over?

[Slewbopper]

[quote=King Glorious]

For some stupid reason, it was decided to move the race down to 9f in 2002, with the exception of the 2005 running which was back at 10f. The race has totally lost it's significance since then.

QUOTE]

The BC and the fragile horses of today has caused a lot of classic races to be shortened in distance. Woodward, JCGC, Vosburgh,Brooklyn...to name a few.

[Danzig]

[quote=Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

For some stupid reason, it was decided to move the race down to 9f in 2002, with the exception of the 2005 running which was back at 10f. The race has totally lost it's significance since then.

QUOTE]

The BC and the fragile horses of today has caused a lot of classic races to be shortened in distance. Woodward, JCGC, Vosburgh,Brooklyn...to name a few.

i think races have beenshortened because the emphasis has been placed on speed, rather than stamina. can't showcase fast, fast horses in a 2 mile race.
it's a shame that now versatility is the ability to run at a couple of tracks, and ship--rather than in earlier times, when a horse might sprint one week, and then run a two miler the next. they just showcased forego recently in bloodhorse, and he did both of those within days, winning both.

[King Glorious]

[quote=Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

For some stupid reason, it was decided to move the race down to 9f in 2002, with the exception of the 2005 running which was back at 10f. The race has totally lost it's significance since then.

QUOTE]

The BC and the fragile horses of today has caused a lot of classic races to be shortened in distance. Woodward, JCGC, Vosburgh,Brooklyn...to name a few.

I've understood and agreed wth the shortening of those other races though. They are run closer to the BC and they were having horrible success as preps for the BC races. The Vosburgh and JCGC especially were routinely sending their winners to the BC to get pounded at low odds. I don't think it's the fragile horses that have caused that though. I feel it was because of the timing and the toughness of those races. For a long time, those races were THE races to point for in their respective divisions and sort of like the Arc de Triomphe, it's hard to have a horse at his peak for a race.....and then ask them to repeat it. The Super Derby didn't have that problem though. It was far enough in advance of the BC that there was time to recover from the 10f distance and it wasn't such a tough race depth wise that a horse had to extend himself to win. It was a top race but since the BC started, it was clearly a prep race while the NY races were more objective races than preps.

[miraja2]

After looking at the PP (http://www.brisnet.com/bris_link/pdfs/darley_88232.pdf) I think it might be worth a shot - depending on how the odds end up of course - at trying to beat Grasshopper in this race with either Forty Acres and/or Going Ballistic.
Grasshopper is clearly the most likey winner, but his last two performances came with him on the lead going :48 for the half, and 1:12&2 for 6f. With Forty Acres in this race, those kind of fractions are unlikely.
Forty Acres has won three in a row over this course impressively, has posted two solid works leading up to this, and could get an easy lead here. If he does, he might be dangerous.
Going Ballistic's last win on the dirt came last October, so he clearly would be a bit of a price here, but he has closed very well in his last three. If Grasshopper, Forty Acres, and perhaps one of the others gets locked in a battle early, it could set up for Going Ballistic late.
I'm just not totally sold on Grasshopper. He towers over this field in terms of speed figures, but if he goes off at some ridiculous price, I think trying to beat him makes sense.

[Bobby Fischer]

Past the Point is a little bit interesting

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

Past the Point is a little bit interesting

normally i'd have to agree with you, just because he's one of the best bred horses on the planet, but man, he's trained by harty!!

[jballscalls]

Good luck on Saturday with the Super Derby Travis!!

[Bobby Fischer]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

normally i'd have to agree with you, just because he's one of the best bred horses on the planet, but man, he's trained by harty!!

Whats your book on Harty Eoin?

I don't know a whole lot about him, other than he seems to get some decent Darley horses now and then. I haven't noticed him developing that many stakes horses.

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

Whats your book on Harty Eoin?

I don't know a whole lot about him, other than he seems to get some decent Darley horses now and then. I haven't noticed him developing that many stakes horses.

He's the dubya of horse training.

[Slewbopper]

[quote=King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Slewbopper

I've understood and agreed wth the shortening of those other races though. They are run closer to the BC and they were having horrible success as preps for the BC races. The Vosburgh and JCGC especially were routinely sending their winners to the BC to get pounded at low odds. I don't think it's the fragile horses that have caused that though. I feel it was because of the timing and the toughness of those races. For a long time, those races were THE races to point for in their respective divisions and sort of like the Arc de Triomphe, it's hard to have a horse at his peak for a race.....and then ask them to repeat it. The Super Derby didn't have that problem though. It was far enough in advance of the BC that there was time to recover from the 10f distance and it wasn't such a tough race depth wise that a horse had to extend himself to win. It was a top race but since the BC started, it was clearly a prep race while the NY races were more objective races than preps.

Flashback 1980. A horse named Temperance Hill won the Belmont at 53/1. He also won the Travers, the initial running of the 1 1/4 mile Super Derby and the Jockey Club Gold Cup. 2 1 1/4 mile races and 2 1 1/2 mile races...on the dirt. Not a bad season. There was another horse running that year that he never faced though that took away the big honor...HOY, although he never won at 1 1/2

[blackthroatedwind]

There are at least two races being run in this Super Derby and Grasshopper is the lone horse in his. The rest may or may not be competitive with each other but Grasshopper towers over them.

I know it's obvious but why are others even talking about hopelessly overmatched horses?

[Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There are at least two races being run in this Super Derby and Grasshopper is the lone horse in his. The rest may or may not be competitive with each other but Grasshopper towers over them.

I know it's obvious but why are others even talking about hopelessly overmatched horses?

He has beaten CPWest and that Phipps horse

[letswastemoney]

Past the Point has a shot

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

Past the Point has a shot

Not in a fairly run race he doesn't.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

Past the Point has a shot

i'm quite probably the biggest fan of indian charlie (the horse) in the entire world, and i say unless grasshopper falls down, past the point has no shot.

[rgustafson]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There are at least two races being run in this Super Derby and Grasshopper is the lone horse in his. The rest may or may not be competitive with each other but Grasshopper towers over them.

I know it's obvious but why are others even talking about hopelessly overmatched horses?

If the pinheads are idiots(on occaision this happens) and they all go out to beat Hell from the start, Going Ballistic might nail Grasshopper on the wire.

[blackthroatedwind]

Grasshopper rates just fine and is in a completely different world that the decidedly mediocre Going Ballistic. He can only be second, and may be, if two many others move too soon. But, without an incident, he can't beat Grasshopper.

I think Grasshopper's talent is being massively undervalued by some here. he's VERY good.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Grasshopper rates just fine and is in a completely different world that the decidedly mediocre Going Ballistic. He can only be second, and may be, if two many others move too soon. But, without an incident, he can't beat Grasshopper.

I think Grasshopper's talent is being massively undervalued by some here. he's VERY good.

there are a few of us here that are very high on him. i bet him to win the travers cause i thought that highly of him.

[blackthroatedwind]

Not only do I think Grasshopper is very good, I also think his competition in the Super Derby is extraordinarily weak, and just don't see him losing.

I guess he's another horse who people think may bounce.....you know like Lawyer Ron in the Woodward.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

there are a few of us here that are very high on him. i bet him to win the travers cause i thought that highly of him.

As I said at the time, I believe Street Sense was actually a good play in the Travers, even at those low odds. I probably underestimated Grasshopper that day, and I may be doing it again in this one, but trying to beat him here makes a lot more sense to me than trying to beat Street Sense in the Travers. I felt I was almost sure that I knew how Street Sense would perform going into that race based on his previous performances at that track and at that distance. I have a lot more questions about how Grasshopper will perform on Saturday. How will he fare in a two-turn race with semi-fast early fractions? Will he be able to repeat his Saratoga performances on another track? The answers are probably yes, but at odds-on I think I'll take a shot.