Blue Grass field

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

So what is your conclusion? That Time Squared could have run a race comparable to Rathor's if he just would have had the pace to run into?
I don't care what the pace is you're not going to move the final time up four seconds.

Its impressive to close into a slow pace and end up with a reasonably fast overall time. But if you close into a slow pace and its won in a slow time its just a slow race.

Not necessarily, horses can go out awfully slow and still be impressive if they finish strongly. Saving time on the front end does not translate into an equally fast finish.

A good example: The 1978 Belmont Stakes.

How many lengths did this horse make up in the final 2 1/2 furloughs??

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by easy goer

Not necessarily, horses can go out awfully slow and still be impressive if they finish strongly. Saving time on the front end does not translate into an equally fast finish.

A good example: The 1978 Belmont Stakes.

How many lengths did this horse make up in the final 2 1/2 furloughs??

Horses can go out slow and finish strongly and look impressive, yes. But how impressive they look depends in large part on who they are running against.

We were talking specifically about Time Squared and how his 8.5 furlong winning time was the slowest of three run at the distance last friday. Not only did the allowance horses run nearly four seconds faster, another group of maidens ran about 1.5 seconds faster.

However everyone seems most excited about Time Squared's race because he closed ground. I just feel that this horse will have no solution when facing horses that have proven that they can run fast early, middle, and late.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Horses can go out slow and finish strongly and look impressive, yes. But how impressive they look depends in large part on who they are running against.

We were talking specifically about Time Squared and how his 8.5 furlong winning time was the slowest of three run at the distance last friday. Not only did the allowance horses run nearly four seconds faster, another group of maidens ran about 1.5 seconds faster.

However everyone seems most excited about Time Squared's race because he closed ground. I just feel that this horse will have no solution when facing horses that have proven that they can run fast early, middle, and late.

Wonder if he could do the same on a real dirt surface against the same bunch?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Wonder if he could do the same on a real dirt surface against the same bunch?

With his running style my guess is that his best form will be on poly.
I also think that this factored in to the decision to run him in the Blue Grass. That and the wicked success that Biancone/Leparoux have on the poly.
With all the winners they have out there they probably feel really confident about now with whatever they send out.

What a horrible betting race. So sick of these cowards ducking and dodging every race. Props to Biancone for actually running his horse off a short rest.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

What a horrible betting race. So sick of these cowards ducking and dodging every race. Props to Biancone for actually running his horse off a short rest.

That's one thing you can always count on Biancone for. Dude's got guts.

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

What a horrible betting race. So sick of these cowards ducking and dodging every race. Props to Biancone for actually running his horse off a short rest.

So dont bet it. Why do people feel the need to bet Derby preps? Especially when it is not necessarily clear what a trainer's intent is for a particular prep, and how fit a horse may acutally be when the plan has been built for a future race.

I think its pretty clear these races are not built to cater to the betting public. I like watching them. That being said the Arkansas Derby should represent some opportunity, especially if the track is a little off.

Originally Posted by pgardn

So dont bet it. Why do people feel the need to bet Derby preps? Especially when it is not necessarily clear what a trainer's intent is for a particular prep, and how fit a horse may acutally be when the plan has been built for a future race.

I think its pretty clear these races are not built to cater to the betting public. I like watching them. That being said the Arkansas Derby should represent some opportunity, especially if the track is a little off.

Quit putting words in my mouth so you can have license to make a point that doesn't need to be made. I'm not betting it, didn't say I was betting it, gfy.

[POINTGIVEN1985]

Originally Posted by easy goer

Not necessarily, horses can go out awfully slow and still be impressive if they finish strongly. Saving time on the front end does not translate into an equally fast finish.

A good example: The 1978 Belmont Stakes.

How many lengths did this horse make up in the final 2 1/2 furloughs??

DONT BOTHER HE IS ALWAYS CORRECT....ALWAYS

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by POINTGIVEN1985

DONT BOTHER HE IS ALWAYS CORRECT....ALWAYS

You're finally catching on. good