134th Preakness Field Close to Set

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by gales0678

Steve - you bring up a good point here , things like this happens a lot in racing , the trainer knows he has the goods sometimes and doesn't want to show them off until a later race (this is not cheating imo, some others may disagree), what's more perfect than the KY Derby (big pools)

As people pointed out the horse should have been 200/1 or more , yet he was only 50/1 (this should have set off alarm bells as the tote-board don't lie)

I 100% disagree with this though... Its crazy to think they were hiding his potential to get in the Derby.

Wooley to jock in NM "Hey make sure you stiff this ride because we're going to pay 100 bucks in the Derby... eventhough there is a good chance he wont get in the derby with his earnings.. lots of horses have to drop out... still.. make sure you ride for 4th at best."

[Gander]

I also think its very possible the connections had a good amount of money on their $100 horse, but my guess is to make this horse 51/1 required more money than they bet. You dont honestly think these guys accounted for more than 2 or 3 percent of the win pool do you?

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I 100% disagree with this though... Its crazy to think they were hiding his potential to get in the Derby.

Wooley to jock in NM "Hey make sure you stiff this ride because we're going to pay 100 bucks in the Derby... eventhough there is a good chance he wont get in the derby with his earnings.. lots of horses have to drop out... still.. make sure you ride for 4th at best."

didn't he have the $ already because of the 2 yr old races?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by gales0678

didn't he have the $ already because of the 2 yr old races?

hell no he didnt.

you really should give up the "didnt try in New Mexico" angle. Its pretty crazy, even for you lately Marty..

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

He actually did have the earnings based on his win in the Grey at Woodbine. After all of the defections he was like 15th or 16th in earnings. Not to mention he wouldn't have gotten any graded earnings for the Sunland races anyway, as they aren't graded...yet.

Doesn't make the ridiculous theory any more believable, but he had the earnings.

I thought he was like 24th or 25th on the list before like 10 horses dropped out or skipped...

Edit: I realize the only earnings he had to get in were from his 2 year old year... but a few weeks ago it really didnt look like he was going to race correct?? I mean I was worried about Dunkirk and he had like 40k more earnings or something than Mine That Bird. Then horses started getting injured or passing on the race... it went from being a really exciting race to being an okay Derby... not even more impressive than the horses in it last year IMO.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Key thing there is a few weeks ago. I think after the Lexington he had enough to go. He was definitely one of the last horses to commit though.

I imagine before the Sunland Derby they probably expected not have the earnings to get into the Derby...

Instead of being like "well we're definately getting in on our 108K or whatever and lets fix this race so we get good odds and stun all those rich folk in Kentucky"

Marty is getting crazier by the day (no offense buddy).

[Danzig]

musket man is now confirmed after a gallop this morning at monmouth. he'll ship to pimlico next friday.