Early Top Twenty Derby Hopefuls

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Saying that a wire-to-wire win over a sloppy track when so many of her foes didn't fire and she shortened stride during slow final fractions is a powerful enough performance to be considered one of four Derby prospects is dicey in my opinion. It is, of course, your list.

At least you had Colonel John on your list who looks like he might be able to get 10 furlongs. I'm highly skeptical of your other three.

NT

It's often a convenient excuse to say that so many foes didn't fire because of the sloppy track. They said the same thing about War Pass. They said the same thing about Smarty Jones in his Derby. How come it's only the good horses that fire under those circumstances? I could see if she dramatically outran her form due to the slop but she didn't. The race played out EXACTLY like it was predicted to had the race been on dry land. Same thing with the Juvenile. Neither race was won oddly. This wasn't like Easy Goer thrashing Is It True a few times and then Is It True turning the tables on the off track in the Juvenile.

[whodey17]

War Pass winning the Derby is almost as bad as saying Indian Blessing is going to win the Derby.

Here are my top 5

1) Etched
2) Colonel John
3) Check It Twice
4) Court Vision
5) Pyro

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

It's often a convenient excuse to say that so many foes didn't fire because of the sloppy track.

All of her foes in that race weren't much to start with.

I'm not someone who has any doubt of her raw talent - go watch her debut (at 5.5fs) and than go watch Seattle Slew's first two career races.

She isn't exactly a female Seattle Slew to say the least - her tremendous raw speed has allowed her to win a pair of weak Grade 1 routes inspite of her staggering home late in both races.

Her dam was a confirmed sprinter...and there isn't exactly anything you can pull out of the pedigree in a desperate attempt to make her look like she will stay 10 furlongs inspite of her clearly showing she can't on her 2yo form.

She probably has a much better shot of winning next years F&M Sprint than the Ky Oaks - let alone the Derby.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

All of her foes in that race weren't much to start with.

I'm not someone who has any doubt of her raw talent - go watch her debut (at 5.5fs) and than go watch Seattle Slew's first two career races.

She isn't exactly a female Seattle Slew to say the least - her tremendous raw speed has allowed her to win a pair of weak Grade 1 routes inspite of her staggering home late in both races.

Her dam was a confirmed sprinter...and there isn't exactly anything you can pull out of the pedigree in a desperate attempt to make her look like she will stay 10 furlongs inspite of her clearly showing she can't on her 2yo form.

She probably has a much better shot of winning next years F&M Sprint than the Ky Oaks - let alone the Derby.

None of the horses in her pedigree are running in the race so they don't matter. She is. Would you believe an Elusive Quality and Tale of the Cat offspring exacta in a race in which some of the other fancied horses were by Gulch and Pulpit? Pedigree is not as important these days as it used to be.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I don't care if she was by Dynaformer out of an A.P. Indy mare - I've seen enough of her to know she's not seeing out 10 furlongs in a race like the Derby - and further I think she is better suited to sprint races.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

None of the horses in her pedigree are running in the race so they don't matter. She is.

Come on KG, you are better than that. You know nobody is saying she can't win because of her pedigree, or that a horse with a less than impressive 10f pedigree can't win the Kentucky Derby.
Her pedigree is just one of the many knocks against her. In this case, it also seems to be confirmed by what we have seen from her on the track. She appears to have definite distance limitations.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Come on KG, you are better than that. You know nobody is saying she can't win because of her pedigree, or that a horse with a less than impressive 10f pedigree can't win the Kentucky Derby.
Her pedigree is just one of the many knocks against her. In this case, it also seems to be confirmed by what we have seen from her on the track. She appears to have definite distance limitations.

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

I know you didn't start watching the game last week, which is why I think it is a bit unusual that you don't think she is probably limited in terms of her ability to get 10f effectively. Look at her Frizette and BCJF races. Did she win them both impressively? Yes, but she sure looked like she was dead spent at the end of both. Now, we all know that this fact in and of itself is not enough to dismiss a horse's chances when stretched out, but when you couple the way she has looked on the track with her pedigree, there is really no logical reason to think she CAN do it effectively enough to win a race like the Kentucky Derby.
What is it about her that makes you think she WILL be effective at 10f? You seem to be taking the position that we should assume she will be able to do it, because she hasn't proven otherwise. I don't think that makes good handicapping sense.

Oh and by the way, I hate making predictions this far away from the race, but if I HAD to make a selection now I would probably put Anak Nakal at #1.....despite the fact that he only ran an 86 BSF in his last.

[Linny]

My list starts out
1. Anak Nakal
2. Colonel John
3. Into Mischief
4. War Pass
5. Pyro

On the "3yo's to watch" side I would look for include:

Cassoulet ~ Graham Motion trainee won a Laurel allowance in style, training at Palm Meadows.
Denis of Cork ~David Carroll colt was an impressive maiden winner at Churchill Downs. He’s at the Fair Grounds for the winter.
Imaginary Sailor ~Jerry Hollendorfer always has a good one or two at his NorCal base
Mad Flatter ~ Jeff Thornbury colt won a CD maiden then a Fair Grounds allowance in style. Entered in the Lecompte
Riley Tucker ~ Hasn’t run since a 2nd in the Arlington Futurity, may turn up at Mott’s FL base.
Globetrotter ~ Son of Street Cry won the G3 Grey BC last fall for Graham Motion.
Legacy Thief ~ Won a fast allowance at Gulfstream on Saturday for Wayne Lukas

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I know you didn't start watching the game last week, which is why I think it is a bit unusual that you don't think she is probably limited in terms of her ability to get 10f effectively. Look at her Frizette and BCJF races. Did she win them both impressively? Yes, but she sure looked like she was dead spent at the end of both. Now, we all know that this fact in and of itself is not enough to dismiss a horse's chances when stretched out, but when you couple the way she has looked on the track with her pedigree, there is really no logical reason to think she CAN do it effectively enough to win a race like the Kentucky Derby.
What is it about her that makes you think she WILL be effective at 10f? You seem to be taking the position that we should assume she will be able to do it, because she hasn't proven otherwise. I don't think that makes good handicapping sense.

Oh and by the way, I hate making predictions this far away from the race, but if I HAD to make a selection now I would probably put Anak Nakal at #1.....despite the fact that he only ran an 86 BSF in his last.

I don't take the position that she will be great at 10f. That's not how I evaluate things. I don't think Groovy would be a great 10f runner either. However, if his competition was Meafara, Safely Kept, Very Subtle, and Pine Tree Lane, I'd increase his chances of winning at 10f. For me, it's about the competition that they will face more than their ability to handle a certain distance or surface. If she were facing true 10f horses, I might look at things different. But I don't see any horses that I think are true 10f horses in the entire crop. Well, let me ammend that. I see some but I think they are too slow. I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her. I'm not sure what is the best way to try to handicap things. If she was trying to do something against horses that had already proven they could do it, that would be different. But at this point, she's gone as far as any of them have and looked better, at least to me, than most of them have. I have never fallen into the camp that says that the way a horse finishes a race at one distance is a sure sign as to how they'll finish at another. I've seen 100's of late running sprinters that people think will relish the stretchout to 7f or a mile and they fail. I've seen many that finish well at 9f and people think that they are crying out for the 10th furlong of the Derby and they fail. I think that what we've seen is a horse that was trained and raced at 8.5f and she ran that distance.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't start watching this game last week. I'd hope that in 20+ years, I've picked up a little something and I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

Well maybe out of those 20+ years you can point us to a horse that tries to run off every step of the way, as Indian Blessing does, relaxing enough to win the KY Derby.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I just don't see these same limitations that you all see. Maybe it will become clearer to me later but at this point, I don't see them.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I didn't see a tired horse in her races. I saw a horse that I thought if they went around again, they still wouldn't have caught her.

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Still no?

Another three-eighths would have been a piece of cake this weekend, eh?

When Smarty Jones was walking home at the finish of the Southwest Stakes at Oaklawn and the closers were gaining ground fast, everyone pointed to that race and said "see, he's got distance limitations." When he ran off and hid from them in every other race after that, I didn't hear that anymore. Don't take what happens in a shorter race that is a prep and automatically apply it to what will happen in a longer race. Races of different distances are run in different ways. The timing of when a rider asks a horse to make it's moves, the speed and pace a horse will be asked to run....these things are different and aren't always a proper indicator. What if the horse that just ran second to her comes back and faces her again next out with the same rider? It's not illogical thinking to see how the rider could be thinking that with a little more ground, he can beat Indian Blessing. He could be thinking that IB can't run any further so if he just rides the same kind of race, he can get her late. But what happens if there is no other speed to challenge IB in the next one? What happens if she's allowed to run along at a slower pace and isn't pressed at all around that last turn. Maybe that other rider realizes that he better go after her earlier because she could get away from them and then he takes away some of the late kick of his own mount. Maybe he figures that she'll stop on her own and doesn't go after her and after setting a more leisurely pace, IB doesn't stop. One race doesn't not dictate how another will be run.