WOW

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

After numerous replays, I still haven't seen any " let up" on Borail's part. It seems as if others have a different take on it. I've talked to people who wouldnt know their poo shoot from a hole in the ground, so their opinions were taken with a grain of salt. On the way home from the shore today, sports talk radio had a few "horsemen" who disagreed with Borel's peeking over his shoulder midstretch. I didn't see it as a problem, but given the margin of victory, every move will be heavily scrutinized. In summation, it was not a viewpoint that I shared, but for players and non players alike to have noticed it, I think its mention worthy. Your take?

Not only is it a non issue but there is zero % chance that Calvin will be replaced. The horse got tired in the last 1/16th. It is as simple as that.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Not only is it a non issue but there is zero % chance that Calvin will be replaced. The horse got tired in the last 1/16th. It is as simple as that.

People try to read too deep into things. Like you said, to make issues where there are none.

If they raced all of the triple crown races at the same track and the Preakness was at CD, does the outcome change if and when Borail takes his horse inside and scrapes paint? Excuse me for the left field question, my buddy that is here with me wants to know ... In other words, is SS a by-product of Churchill Downs "golden rail"??

[blackthroatedwind]

Nobody is actually suggesting that Street Sense likes dirt better at Churchill than he does at Pimlico.....are they?

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Nobody is actually suggesting that Street Sense likes dirt better at Churchill than he does at Pimlico.....are they?

No, but while teaching my friend on how to read a program, the novice that he is picked up on SS's CD record and that of other tracks. I just replayed most of his races for him to disprove some statements that he bought into today. We are from Philly so they handfeed us some tidbits on Hard Spun, and this week Pino was talking of a possible advantage with this race being in PIM instead of CD. I tried to steer him from trainer/jock speak to no avail. Larry Jones was hoping for a slight regression from SS because of the track change, and my buddy wanted to know the deal with that..Simple as that.. I didnt want to get too deep into it with him tonite, but I pointed out some things to look for when we head to B-More next week for a trip to the aquarium and PIM. Aren't there suggestions as to the sharpness of the turns being quite different?

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by declansharbor

No, but while teaching my friend on how to read a program, the novice that he is picked up on SS's CD record and that of other tracks. I just replayed most of his races for him to disprove some statements that he bought into today. We are from Philly so they handfeed us some tidbits on Hard Spun, and this week Pino was talking of a possible advantage with this race being in PIM instead of CD. I tried to steer him from trainer/jock speak to no avail. Larry Jones was hoping for a slight regression from SS because of the track change, and my buddy wanted to know the deal with that..Simple as that.. I didnt want to get too deep into it with him tonite, but I pointed out some things to look for when we head to B-More next week for a trip to the aquarium and PIM. Aren't there suggestions as to the sharpness of the turns being quite different?

I think the suggestions about Pimlico being significantly different than Churchill are pretty incorrect. But, I am not one to get too caught up in horses preferring one track to another, for better or worse. Belmont, however, is a very different track than most, but that's pretty obvious. However, what makes it different also makes it fairer.

The funny thing about Belmont is that while many tracks seem to get souped up for big days Belmont sometimes seems to get a dead rail....like BC day in 2001. Of course, in the old days, Belmont's rail was almost always dead.

[declansharbor]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I think the suggestions about Pimlico being significantly different than Churchill are pretty incorrect. But, I am not one to get too caught up in horses preferring one track to another, for better or worse. Belmont, however, is a very different track than most, but that's pretty obvious. However, what makes it different also makes it fairer.

The funny thing about Belmont is that while many tracks seem to get souped up for big days Belmont sometimes seems to get a dead rail....like BC day in 2001. Of course, in the old days, Belmont's rail was almost always dead.

Is there a specific reason for that? The dead rail that is.. or is it just the layout of the track?

[blackthroatedwind]

I really have no idea. The old " balcony Belmont " has been pretty much gone for years.

One factor is the sweeping turns mitigate ground loss and thus exagerate the natural outside flow of racing.